Retail Statement (Addendum) - Proposed Replacement Lidl Store at 390 Shirley Road, Southampton - Proposed Replacement Lidl ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Retail Statement (Addendum)
Proposed Replacement Lidl Store at 390 Shirley Road, Southampton
Prepared on Behalf of Lidl UK
Date: November 2017
Our Ref: JPW0910
RPS
Park House
Greyfriars Road
Cardiff
CF10 3AF
Tel: (0)2920 668 662
Fax: (0)0920 668 622
Email:
rpsca@rpsgroup.com
rpsgroup.com/uk
Quality Management
Prepared by: Chris Tookey
Authorised by: Ross Bowen
Date: 8th November 2017
Revision: v2
Project Number: JPW0910
Document Reference: 171108 R JPW0910 CT Addendum Retail Statement v2
O:\04 JOBS\01 OPEN JOBS\JPW09 xx\JPW0910 - LIDL, SHIRLEY ROAD,
Document File Path: SOUTHAMPTON\5. Reports\2. Final Report\171108 R JPW0910 CT
Addendum Retail Statement v2.docx
COPYRIGHT © RPS
The material presented in this report is confidential. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Lidl UK and shall not be
distributed or made available to any other company or person without the knowledge and written consent of RPS.
This document is Printed on FSC certified, 100% post-consumer recycled paper, bleached using an elemental chlorine- free process.
i rpsgroup.com/uk
Amendment Record
Revision No. Date Reason for Change Authors Initials
ii rpsgroup.com/ukContents
Quality Management..................................................................................................................... i
Amendment Record ..................................................................................................................... ii
Contents ...................................................................................................................................... ii
1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1
Scope and Purpose .............................................................................................................1
2 The Application Site and the Proposed Development .........................................................2
Site Description ....................................................................................................................2
The Existing Lidl Store .........................................................................................................2
The Proposed Development ................................................................................................3
Lidl’s Business Model ..........................................................................................................3
3 Planning Policy Context .......................................................................................................7
Southampton Core Strategy ................................................................................................7
Southampton Local Plan Review .........................................................................................8
National Planning Policy Framework ...................................................................................8
National Planning Practice Guidance ..................................................................................9
4 Evaluation of Compliance with Retail.................................................................................11
The Sequential Approach to Site Selection .......................................................................11
Impact on Existing, Committed and Planned Public and Private
Investment in Centres Within the catchment Area.............................................................12
Impact on Town Centre Vitality and Viability, Including Local Consumer
Choice and Trade in the Town Centre and Wider Area .....................................................12
5 Summary and Conclusions ................................................................................................14
Appendices
1. Statistical Tables
2. Study Area Plan
ii rpsgroup.com/uk1 Introduction
Scope and Purpose
1.1 This Retail Statement has been prepared by RPS Planning & Development on behalf of Lidl UK
to accompany a planning application ref. 17/01206/FUL that seeks permission for the
development of land at 390 Shirley Road, Southampton to provide a new Lidl foodstore with
dedicated surface level parking: the new store will replace an existing Lidl store currently trading
at 355 Shirley Road. It is an addendum to the Retail Statement (July 2017) that was originally
submitted with the planning application, and it has been produced to take account of changes
that have been made to the development scheme post-submission.
1.2 This report focuses on the retail policy issues associated with the proposed development. It is
intended to assist Southampton City Council in its determination of the application and has been
prepared in accordance with the requirements set out in the National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF). It seeks to evaluate the proposal against national and local retail planning
policies and considers the retail justification and implications of the proposed development.
1.3 This report is structured as follows:
• Section 2 describes the application site and its context, and the proposed development.
• Section 3 reviews the relevant retail policy background, including national and local
planning policy.
• Section 4 provides an assessment of the proposed development against the key retail
tests ie the sequential approach to site selection and impact on defined centres.
• Section 5 summarises the key considerations in relation to retail policy matters and
presents our overall conclusions.
1 rpsgroup.com/uk2 The Application Site and the Proposed Development
Site Description
2.1 The application site extends to 0.83ha and is bounded to the east by Shirley Road; to the south
by Villiers Road; to the west by the rear of residential properties fronting Heysham Road; and to
the north by the rear of residential properties fronting Mayflower Road and several commercial
units fronting Shirley Road.
2.2 The site essentially comprises three elements:
the eastern part of the site comprises a former Police Station, made up of a detached
three-storey building with single storey elements on its front (east) and southern
sides, and an area of hardstanding to the rear that was previously used for car
parking;
the western part (to the rear of the former police station) comprises a Council depot
that contains a range of buildings of varying size, used for storage, offices and
workshops, as well as areas of open storage and car parking;
the northern part comprises No. 392 Shirley Road (including the property to the rear,
formerly No. 392b), which contains two Class A1 retail units and a Class A3/A5
café/take-away.
2.3 The north and eastern elements of the site lie within Shirley Town Centre, and the north element
is also designated as a secondary shopping area. Accordingly, given the proposed store will be
located on the north-eastern part of the site, with the customer entrance fronting on to Shirley
Road, in practical terms it will constitute a town centre store for the purposes of the sequential
approach to site selection.
The Existing Lidl Store
2.4 The existing Lidl is located at 355 Shirley Road, to the south of the application site. It is within
the boundary of the town centre and the store building is designated as a secondary shopping
area, however it is actually a back land site that fronts on to Church End, to the rear of
properties along Shirley Road (including McDonalds and Tesco Express).
2.5 The store opened in November 1994 (under planning permission 931196/W) and was one of
the first Lidl stores in the UK. Originally it provided 790sq m net sales space but in 2006
planning permission was granted (under 06/00198/FUL) for an extension that increased the
sales area to 991sq m net. It currently provides customer parking for 75 cars including two
disabled spaces.
2.6 As a first generation store the existing building is smaller than Lidl’s current format and so is
unable to provide the offer and quality of shopping experience now delivered by the larger more
modern designs. Lidl wish to allow shoppers in Shirley the opportunity to access the same
quality of shopping as they provide elsewhere in the UK, but given the constricted nature of their
existing site this can only be accommodated through a relocation to a larger store elsewhere.
The purchase of the application site now provides the opportunity for that relocation, to a new
larger store that will be built to Lidl’s latest sustainable design. As well as a quantitative and
qualitative improvement to Lidl’s offer the new store will also front on to the high street which will
increase the potential for linked shopping trips to other shops in the town centre.
2 rpsgroup.com/ukThe Proposed Development
2.7 The development will involve the demolition of all the existing buildings and structures, and the
construction of a larger replacement Lidl store of 2,207sq m gross internal area with a sales
area of 1,401sq m and parking for 118 cars including 6 disabled spaces and 8 for parent/child.
A singular vehicular access will be taken off Villiers Road, replacing the three accesses
currently in place for the depot and police station.
2.8 The replacement Lidl will be built to Lidl’s latest store specification/design. It will incorporate
more glazing than the existing older format store, and will be more energy efficient and
sustainable. The existing store is a popular shopping destination and as acknowledged in the
Southampton and Eastleigh Retail Study it is trading above its benchmark level. The larger
replacement store is intended to provide qualitative improvements to the shopping environment,
as well as an improved retail offer.
2.9 At the time that the planning application (ref. 17/01206/FUL) was submitted the proposed
development comprised a store of 2480sq m gross and 1,655sq m net sales, with parking for
125 cars. However, the design of the scheme has now been amended to reduce the store
down to 2,207sq m gross, which has allowed the building to be set slightly further back from the
boundary with Shirley Road and the TPO tree on the frontage to be retained. These changes
have been incorporated in order to address comments made on the planning application.
Lidl’s Business Model
2.10 Lidl, along with Aldi, are classed as Limited Assortment Discounters (LADs), a category of
retailer distinct from the mainstream operators. Lidl’s strategy is the provision of smaller stores
at convenient locations within or close to residential areas, which are capable of serving both
the day-to-day top up and main food shopping needs of local residents.
2.11 The company’s operation is based upon a traditional supermarket with very attractive prices.
The range of goods sold is limited and around 80% of all products are Lidl’s own brand. This
retail operation can be achieved by:
Bulk purchasing across the UK and Europe;
Ensuring that distribution costs are kept to a minimum; and
Controlling property and operation costs prudently.
2.12 The Lidl format is a well-established shopping experience in Europe with almost 10,000 stores
across the continent, and their store at Shirley is a popular shopping destination for local
residents.
Product Range and Pricing Structure
2.13 Lidl’s offer is based on providing a limited range of high quality products at very attractive prices.
The limited number of lines, which are significantly less than other mainstream retailers, is to
ensure the lowest possible operating costs. It includes:
A quality range of fresh and frozen pre-packaged meat;
Own-brand dry groceries & frozen foods;
Tertiary branded wines and spirits;
A quality range of loose and pre-packed fruit and vegetable lines; and
3 rpsgroup.com/uk A basic range of non-food household items and twice-weekly (non-food) specials
occupying about 20% of the sales area, such as a limited range of electrical and
gardening products.
2.14 Of more relevance is the range of goods and services that Lidl do not sell. Lidl’s retail offer is
distinct from the large retailers and small convenience stores by not offering the following:
Butchers counter;
Fishmonger;
Dispensing pharmacy;
Dry-cleaning service;
Post office service;
Financial products;
Photography processing;
Café / restaurant; and
Cigarettes and tobacco products
2.15 The above product ranges and services are not offered in Lidl stores as they do not fit with the
core retail concept. This is one way in which Lidl differs from mainstream retailers. The larger
food retailers have all been through a considerable process of diversification over the past
decade. Many offer all of the above services as a ‘one stop’ destination for their customers.
2.16 Large and small retailers alike continue to trade successfully alongside Lidl stores all over the
UK. The format and style that Lidl operate differs significantly from that of other supermarket
traders (only Aldi have a similar business model). This is achieved primarily through the heavily
discounted pricing structure and the strictly limited range of goods. A Lidl store typically stocks
around 1,800 items and the range of goods is significantly smaller than that offered by other
retailers. From our experience we are aware that the major operators, such as Morrison, Tesco,
Asda and Sainsbury, can retail over 35,000 lines, while a Lidl store will provide around 5% of
that. In addition to the limited product range, unlike its counterparts in the retail industry Lidl do
not stock multiple lines of the same product.
2.17 For the above reasons, Lidl stores successfully trade immediately adjacent to larger superstores
and smaller convenience stores in numerous locations across the UK. In Shirley the existing
store sits adjacent to a Tesco Express.
2.18 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 do not present potential for sustained impact on existing
centres that may be the case with typical superstore comparison elements which are focused on
clothing and CD/DVD sales.
2.19 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.
2.20 Independent research by the Competition Commission confirmed that the national deep
discounters, Lidl, Aldi and Netto provide a distinct retail offer from the mainstream food retailers
4 rpsgroup.com/uk(although it must be noted that sometime after this research was published Netto ceased
operations in the UK, selling their store portfolio to Asda – they briefly returned in 2014 in a joint
venture with Sainsbury, but that ended in 2016). Prices within the sector are acknowledged to
be “well below the prices of the market leaders, and have a considerably smaller range of
goods” (Competition Commission Report on Supermarkets 2000). It is notable that the former
Netto stores that Asda have converted to their new small supermarket format typically retail
10,000 grocery products, substantially more than the previous deep discount format they
replaced.
2.21 Previous Verdict reports have stated that Lidl and Aldi retail products at prices of 30% lower
than the large retailers.
2.22 In terms of public awareness and perception, Lidl stores are very popular, not only with those on
a limited income but also increasingly with the higher social groupings. Market research
undertaken by Verdict Research shows that the most significant increase in penetration over the
period 2005-2012 has been among more affluent shoppers, with those in the AB social grade
actually having moved from the lowest to the highest visitor share (Verdict’s ‘How Britain Shops
2012’). This is a reflection of the economic downturn where the number of people visiting Lidl
rose as consumers sought to minimise food spending due to reduced levels of disposable
income. More affluent shoppers have realised that the quality of offer available is superior in
many cases to the larger grocery retailers and much cheaper. However Lidl’s existing store at
Shirley is dated and cannot offer the shopping experience provided in their larger current format.
2.23 Lidl operate on far lower profit margins than the major food store operators and can therefore
pass on the savings to their customers, which instils loyalty and a return to store mind set.
2.24 The Lidl business model inevitably has consequences for the design and layout of stores. The
size and configuration must be compatible with Lidl’s efficient delivery and stock handling and
ability to stock the standard product lines in sufficient depth to meet customer needs and
minimise costs. This inevitably places restrictions on the ability of the business model to be
‘flexible’ in terms of the store format. This has implications in terms of the application of the
sequential approach – a fact that has been widely accepted by Local Planning Authorities,
Planning Inspectors and the Secretary of State in application and appeal decisions across
England. Fortunately, in Shirley the application site provides an opportunity to develop a new
larger store at a location fronting the high street that will be sequentially preferable to their
existing back land site.
Opening hours
2.25 The new store’s opening hours are proposed to be 0800-2000 hours Monday to Saturday and
Bank Holidays, and 1000-1600 on Sundays.
Servicing
2.26 Mindful of the need to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring landowners, each Lidl store
has only 2 or 3 deliveries a day for all its products, including; ambient, fresh, frozen and chilled
goods. Total unloading time is generally only around 45 minutes and vehicle noise is minimised
due to a recessed loading bay, a manual bridging plate and a dock shelter: a close-boarded
timber fence will also be provided along the loading bay to provide acoustic attenuation. The
regime for the proposed new store will essentially be almost identical to the existing store that it
5 rpsgroup.com/ukwill replace and the proximity of the service bay to residential properties will be not dissimilar to
the existing store (which is surrounded on three sides by housing).
2.27 On the issue of waste, Lidl recycle their packaging material, with their merchandising and
display formats being designed to facilitate this. All stores are equipped with either a cardboard
compactor or baler: cardboard waste is compressed to provide a decrease in volume of 400%,
which helps to lower carbon emissions as more cardboard can be transported back to the
Regional Distribution Centres on each lorry. This also results in a reduction in both noise
pollution and congestion. Compacted cardboard is stored on site for daily collection by the
returning HGV, along with all plastic, food waste, wood and all non-recyclable refuse.
2.28 During 2016/17 Lidl recycled over 10,300 tonnes of cardboard and paper, overt 450 tonnes of
plastic and 370 tonnes of metal. The intention is to increase the volume of recycled material
year-on-year. A combination of initiatives enabled the Regional Distribution Centre in Weston-
Super-Mare to recycle 95% of all waste in 2016/17. Total recycling for the UK in 2016/17 was
92% and the company target for 2017/18 is 93%.
2.29 Principles of sustainability are engrained in Lidl’s operation from the efficient construction and
standardised fit-out elements enabling 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
2.30 Staffing levels have yet to be finalised, however the larger store is likely to give rise to a need
for additional staff in-store. Lidl always seek to source labour locally and provide management
opportunities for staff, the company’s 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.
6 rpsgroup.com/uk3 Planning Policy Context
3.1 This section of the report briefly considers the national and local planning policies of relevance
to the proposed retail development.
3.2 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that planning
applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material
considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance the development plan consists of the Core
Strategy (incorporating a partial review) 2015 and the Local Plan Review 2015. There is also
the City Centre Action Plan 2015 and the Bassett Neighbourhood Plan 2016, however neither of
those two development plan documents is relevant to Lidl’s application in Shirley. Other
material considerations include national policies set out in the National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF) and the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG). In 2015 work
commenced on a new Local Plan, however that is currently in abeyance.
Southampton Core Strategy
3.3 The Core Strategy was originally adopted in 2010 with a Partial Review in 2015, and is intended
to guide the development of Southampton up to 2026.
3.4 Section 4.3 sets out the spatial strategy for future development, which includes, inter alia,
supporting the continued vitality and viability of the City Centre, which is to be the focus for
significant new offices, retail, hotel, leisure and residential development. Outside the City
Centre smaller scale retail facilities for residents will be supported and enhanced in Shirley
Town Centre and in the designated district centres.
3.5 The city is divided into five suburban neighbourhoods, of which the West area includes Shirley,
Millbrook, Redbridge and Coxford. Paragraph 4.3.1 states that within this area an additional
1500 homes are planned and it is noteworthy that assuming an average household size of 2.4
(figure for Southampton calculated from the 2011 Census) and a notional per capita
convenience spend of £1950 at 2026 (the average of the figures for Zones 5 & 6 in the
Southampton and Eastleigh Retail Study), this new housing will potentially generate circa £7m
of additional convenience goods expenditure.
3.6 Paragraph 4.3.2 of the Strategy states that the Council will take a positive approach to new
development, reflecting the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the
NPPF. Paragraph 4.3.3 says that planning applications that accord with the policies in the
development plan will approved without delay, unless material considerations indicate
otherwise. Paragraph 4.3.4 then goes on to say that where there are no policies relevant to the
application, or they are out of date, the Council will grant permission unless material
considerations indicate otherwise, taking account whether, inter alia, any adverse impacts of
granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed
against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole [our emphasis].
3.7 Policy CS3 covers the town, district and local centres – Shirley is the sole second tier Town
Centre, under the City Centre and above four District Centres and 16 Local Centres. The policy
says that the Council will support the role of the town and district centres in providing shops and
local services in safe, accessible locations. New development should make a positive
contribution to the centre’s viability and vitality and enhance its attractiveness. The aims for,
inter alia, Shirley are to maintain the health of the centre, improve the street scene and
7 rpsgroup.com/uksuccessfully integrate local facilities. The proposed Lidl development accords with this policy in
as much as the new store will be better integrated into the centre, having moved from a back-
land site to one fronting the high street.
Southampton Local Plan Review
3.8 The Local Plan Review was adopted in March 2006; a revised version was produced in 2010
following the adoption of the Core Strategy (which detailed the policies ‘saved’ by Direction of
the Secretary of State), and a further updated version in 2015 after the adoption of the City
Centre Action Plan and the partial review of the Core Strategy.
3.9 On the Proposals Map the northern and eastern parts of the application site lie within the
defined boundary of Shirley Town Centre - the western Council depot site was not included in
the centre boundary, presumably because at the time the Plan was prepared it was not a ‘town
centre use’. However it is noteworthy that adjoining the site on the southern side of Villiers
Road the centre boundary does extend as far back from the high street as the western end of
the application site, taking in the car park serving the Royal Mail delivery office and easyGym.
3.10 The northern part of the site is also designated as a secondary shopping area, as is the existing
Lidl store off Church End. It is clear that given the new store building will lie within the town
centre boundary, and a designated shopping area, it will function as a town centre store and
satisfies the sequential approach to site selection.
3.11 Paragraph 1.20 of the Local Plan recognises that it must make adequate provision for the
conduct of business in the 21st Century, including being flexible to accommodate the changing
nature of business. In that respect the reason behind the proposed development is to enable
Lidl to upgrade their offer in Shirley to take on board changes and improvements that have been
made to their store designs over the last 22 years.
National Planning Policy Framework
3.12 NPPF Paragraph 7 advises that there are three dimensions to sustainable development:
• 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;
• 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
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
• 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.
3.13 NPPF 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
8 rpsgroup.com/ukrunning 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:
• 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”.
3.14 Paragraph 17 of the NPPF 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; and promote mixed-use
development, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas.
3.15 Paragraphs 18 and 19 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.
3.16 Paragraph 24 states a sequential approach to selecting sites for main town centre uses (which
include retail development, hotels, restaurants and bars) should be applied where they are not
in an existing centre or in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan. If no suitable sites are
available within a town centre, edge of centre sites should be considered. If no suitable edge of
centre sites cannot be identified then out-of-centre sites at accessible locations should be
considered. Sites must be suitable and available, and both developers and LPAs should
demonstrate flexibility on issues such as format and scale.
3.17 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 that 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.
3.18 Paragraph 27 confirms that where an application satisfies the sequential test and is unlikely to
have significant adverse impact it should be approved.
National Planning Practice Guidance
3.19 The National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) supports the NPPF and its section ‘Ensuring
the vitality of town centres’ replaces the guidance previously contained within ‘Planning for
Town Centres: Practice Guidance on Need, Impact and the Sequential Approach’ issued in
December 2009.
9 rpsgroup.com/uk3.20 The NPPG states that local planning authorities should plan positively to support town centres in
order to generate local employment and promote beneficial competition.
3.21 Paragraph 008 (in the ‘ensuring the vitality of town centres’ section) summarises the sequential
test, where the first preference is to be town centre locations, followed by edge-of-centre
locations and only then out-of-centre locations with a preference for accessible sites that are
well connected to a town centre. The application site lies partly within the boundary of Shirley
Town Centre and part is designated as an existing secondary shopping area. Half of the
proposed store building will lie within the centre and half immediately outside, however that is a
result of the existing centre boundary having been drawn to exclude the Council depot. In
practice the replacement Lidl will function as a town centre store, with the customer entrance
accessible off the high street; following the completion of the development the boundary of the
town centre can be amended as part of the review of the Local Plan, to include the rear of the
site within the centre boundary.
3.22 Paragraph 010 provides guidance in relation to the application of the sequential test when
determining planning applications. The application of the test should be proportionate and
appropriate for the proposed development, with sites assessed as to their suitability and
availability. In assessing sites regard should be had to the requirement to demonstrate
flexibility, and the local planning authority should support the applicant and share any relevant
information they may have. In considering flexibility it is not necessary to demonstrate that a
potential town centre or edge-of-centre site can accommodate precisely the scale and form of
development being proposed, but rather to consider what contribution more central sites are
able to make individually to accommodate the proposal. If there are no sequentially preferable
locations the test is passed.
3.23 This requirement to show flexibility has been taken by some to constitute a need to consider the
disaggregation of development schemes, where units in a scheme may be split up onto one or
more sequentially preferable sites. However the judgement of the Supreme Court in Tesco v
Dundee City Council (November 2012) and recent decisions by the Secretary of State (most
notably the call-in decision at Rushden Lakes in 2014) have clarified the application of the
sequential test in development management, and made clear that there is no requirement for an
applicant to consider the disaggregation of their scheme when undertaking a sequential
assessment. In any event, as already detailed above the application site is considered to be a
town centre site and the proposed store will have superior linkage to the high street than the
existing store off Church End.
10 rpsgroup.com/uk4 Evaluation of Compliance with Retail
4.1 Section 2 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 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 Impact on existing, committed and planned public and private investment
in centres within the catchment area.
o Impact on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer
choice and trade in the town centre and wider area.
4.2 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.
The Sequential Approach to Site Selection
4.3 It is important to note that this application relates to the replacement of Lidl’s existing store,
which is a popular destination for grocery shopping within Shirley - the household survey
conducted for the Southampton and Eastleigh Retail Study 2011 indicates that it trades above
the company’s benchmark level. The store was developed over 20 years ago and is smaller
than Lidl’s current format and cannot provide the same breadth or quality of retail offer to its
customers. Lidl wish to provide quantitative and qualitative improvements to their store,
including an uplift in both floorspace and parking provision - a larger building will allow
qualitative improvements to the retail offer including increased aisle widths and circulation
space; and increased natural light (which provides an opportunity to reduce power
consumption). This is geared to providing a more efficient store operation and an improved
shopping environment and offer for existing customers: it is not expected that the additional
floorspace will result in any significant increase in customer traffic.
4.4 The constrained nature of their site means that an extension of the existing building is not
practical, however an opportunity presented itself for Lidl to acquire the former Police Station
and Council Depot, which were marketed in 2016 as a single site with re-development potential.
Subsequent to that contracts have also been exchanged on the adjoining 392 Shirley Road –
together this results in a larger and more rectangular development site with improved frontage
on to the high street, and provides the space necessary to accommodate the larger store and
car park.
4.5 In terms of the sequential approach to site selection the first preference has to be sites within or
adjoining a defined centre. The application site fully accords with this, since half the site lies
within the defined town centre and partly within a designated secondary shopping area. The
new store will therefore function as a town centre shop with better linkage on to the high street
than the existing Lidl.
4.6 The larger replacement store will provide Lidl with an additional 410sq m of sales space, the
primary purpose of which is to enable them to improve their existing retail offer, to better meet
their customers’ needs: providing the additional floorspace elsewhere would therefore not
address this objective. Their requirement is for a store of 2,207sq m gross area with a 1,401sq
m sales floor.
11 rpsgroup.com/ukImpact on Existing, Committed and Planned Public and Private
Investment in Centres Within the catchment Area
4.7 While the rear of the application site falls outside the defined town centre boundary that is solely
because when the boundary was drawn it excluded the Council Depot as a non-town centre
use. The proposed Lidl will clearly function as a town centre store, with the customer entrance
directly off Shirley Road. Accordingly it will constitute a significant investment in the centre and
any impact will be positive.
4.8 We are not aware of any other committed or planned foodstore developments within Shirley
Town Centre, but in any case the impact of a town centre development on other proposed town
centre developments would amount to valid commercial competition, and one of the roles of the
planning system is to contribute towards a competitive economy (NPPF paragraph 7).
4.9 Notwithstanding the above, in terms of the financial impact of the proposed development the
additional turnover that will be generated will modest. The impact assessment set out later in
this report is based around benchmark turnovers, since we have no detailed information on the
actual turnover of existing stores in Shirley (the detailed results of the household survey having
been omitted from the Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study) – the notional increase in
turnover from the larger store will be in the order of £1.3m for convenience goods and £0.2m for
comparison. However in practice the existing store is known to be trading above its benchmark
level, as referenced in the text of the Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study (paragraph 9.13).
The replacement store will address this and bring the store turnover down to around the
company average, with the additional floor area providing qualitative improvements such as
improved circulation space. Lidl’s existing customers are expected to switch to the new store
and while the improvements may attract some new shoppers that trade diversion is expected to
be minimal. The development will largely be geared towards providing an improved shopping
experience for Lidl’s existing customers.
Impact on Town Centre Vitality and Viability, Including Local
Consumer Choice and Trade in the Town Centre and Wider Area
4.10 As a starting point it should be acknowledged that as the proposed Lidl will in practical terms be
a town centre store, the requirement to assess its impact is not mandatory. Paragraph 26 of the
NPPF is clear in saying that an impact assessment is required “when assessing applications for
retail, leisure and office development outside of town centres…” [our emphasis]. The proposed
development comprises the relocation of an existing town centre store to another town centre
site, which will actually have a better linkage to the high street.
4.11 Notwithstanding the above, we have undertaken a broadbrush impact assessment, using data
taken from the Council’s ‘Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study 2011’. This analysis is
provided in the statistical tables included as Appendix 1 of this report.
4.12 The price base adopted for our analysis is 2009, as in the ‘Southampton & Eastleigh Retail
Study’. The design year is 2022, five years ahead being the standard period for impact
assessments.
4.13 Table 1 sets out the benchmark turnover of both the existing and proposed Lidl stores. The
existing store has 991sq m net sales space and assuming Lidl’s company average sales density
(derived from Global Data/Verdict), it’s notional turnover at 2022 is £3.7m, of which £3.2m would
be from convenience goods and £0.5m from comparison. The proposed replacement store will
be 1,401sq m net and will turnover £5.2m at 2022, £4.5m from convenience goods and £0.7m
12 rpsgroup.com/ukfrom comparison. The notional uplift in turnover will therefore be £1.3m for convenience goods
and £0.2m for comparison.
4.14 Table 2 sets out the available convenience goods expenditure across the study area utilised in
the Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study – this is an area broken down into 28 zones, with
Shirley Town Centre being located within Zone 3. A plan detailing the extent of the study area
is included as Appendix 2.
4.15 Available convenience goods expenditure in each zone for the years 2011, 2016, 2021 and
2026 are taken directly from Table 3 in Appendix 3 of the Southampton & Eastleigh Retail
Study. The figures for 2017 and 2022 have been interpolated by RPS. It can be seen that the
forecast growth within Shirley’s home zone (Zone 3) is £4.3m over the next five years, which will
be well in excess of the £1.3m additional turnover in the larger Lidl.
4.16 Tables 3 and 4 go on to detail Shirley Town Centre’s share of the total expenditure generated
across the study area, in percentage (Table 3) and monetary terms (Table 4). The percentage
market shares in Table 3 are taken directly from the Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study and
where derived from a household survey undertaken in 2011. From Table 4 it can be seen that
the total spending captured by Zone 3 will grow by £1.99m over the next five years, which is
greater than the £1.3m uplift in Lidl’s turnover.
4.17 Table 5 provides a rough estimate of the impact on Shirley Town Centre from the additional
£1.3m of convenience goods turnover that will be diverted to the larger Lidl store. Such analysis
should normally be undertaken against the actual turnover of existing stores, but in this instance
that data is not included in the Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study (the results of the
household survey are not appended and none of the capacity tables provide a detailed
breakdown of the survey derived turnover of existing stores). Table 32 in Appendix 3 of the
retail study does provide floorspace and benchmark turnovers for individual stores in each
centre, and we have therefore utilised those turnover figures, projecting them forward to 2017
and 2022 using Experian’s forecast changes in convenience sales densities (from their Retail
Planner Briefing Note 14).
4.18 We assume that all the existing Lidl’s trade will transfer across to the new store, which leaves
£1.3m of additional turnover to be diverted from other shops. This is a worst-case scenario
since in practice the additional floorspace provided in the larger store will in part be used for
qualitative improvements that will improve the shopping environment but may not result in an
uplift in turnover. We estimate that £0.8m of this £1.3m will come from the Sainsbury store,
£0.1m from the Tesco Express and £0.24m from other shops in the centre (which will include
the Iceland). The remaining £0.19m is expected to come from stores outside Shirley. None of
the resulting impacts are significant, with the highest being -4.3% on the Sainsbury. It should
also be noted that the table excludes the Co-op on Shirley Road, which was included in the
retail study but has since closed. The turnover of that store is likely to have been redistributed
to other shops within the centre, which will assist in ameliorating any impact from the new Lidl.
4.19 In relation to comparison goods, the uplift in turnover in the larger Lidl will be in the order of
£0.2m. The likely trade diversion from any existing stores will be minimal and swiftly offset out
by the growth in comparison spending within the City.
4.20 Overall it can be seen that the proposed development will not result in any significant impact on
the vitality or viability of existing stores or centres, while at the same time it will provide a
quantitative and qualitative improvement to Lidl’s offer in Shirley Town Centre.
13 rpsgroup.com/uk5 Summary and Conclusions
5.1 This retail assessment has been prepared by RPS Planning and Development on behalf of Lidl
UK, to accompany a planning application for the replacement of their existing foodstore fronting
Church End in Shirley. The existing store provides 991sq m net sales area and the proposed
new store will increase that to 1,401sq m net.
5.2 With regard to the retail policy elements of the proposal the pertinent facts are as follows:
• The application site is brownfield land within a location accessible by public transport
and walking/cycling and a retail use would therefore conform to national and local
planning policies encouraging sustainable development.
• The proposal complies with the sequential approach to site selection, since:
o The larger store is required in order to provide qualitative improvements to
Lidl’s existing offer, and as a consequence it cannot be disaggregated;
o The application site lies partly within the town centre boundary and one area is
designated as a secondary shopping area;
o The replacement store proposed on the application site will be superior to the
existing store inasmuch as it will have a direct customer access off the high
street, whereas the existing store is on a back-land site. The potential for linked
shopping trips will therefore be greater.
• The larger store will result in only a modest uplift in Lidl’s turnover. Since it will function
as a town centre store any trade diverted from other shops within the centre will be valid
commercial competition and not a reason for refusing planning permission.
Notwithstanding that, the potential levels of trade diversion are not expected to result in
any significant impact on the vitality or viability of any defined centre.
• The improved store will help to sustain Lidl’s important role as a main food shopping
destination in this part of the City.
• The NPPF provides a presumption in favour of economic development that will provide
new employment opportunities. The proposed development will meet these policy
objectives, since the enlarged store is likely to give rise to a need for additional staff, as
well as further job opportunities during the construction phase. Lidl’s policy is, where
possible, to make positions available to local people.
5.3 Having regard to the above conclusions, it can be seen that the proposed development would
conform to both national and local planning policies. Paragraph 27 of the NPPF states that
where an application fails to satisfy the sequential test or is likely to have a significant adverse
impact, it should be refused. Conversely that suggests where it has been demonstrated that
there the development satisfies the sequential test and that there will be no significant adverse
impact, then planning permission should be granted. That would conform to the NPPF’s
fundamental presumption in favour of sustainable development (at paragraph 14), which it says
should be the golden thread running through decision-taking. Since the development satisfies
the sequential test; it is located at an accessible location; it involves a substantial investment in
Shirley and will provide local residents with a larger and more modern store built to the latest
sustainable design; it is likely to create additional jobs; and as it will not result in any significant
14 rpsgroup.com/ukadverse impact on any defined centre, it is clear that the benefits of the scheme clearly
outweigh any adverse impact and consequently in accordance with the NPPF planning
permission should be granted.
15 rpsgroup.com/ukAppendix 1
Lidl UK
Proposed Replacement Store at 390 Shirley Road, Southampton
Table 1: Turnover of the Proposed Development
Turnover of proposed replacement Lidl store
Gross internal floorspace (sq m) 2207
Net sales area (sq m) 1401
Convenience sales area (sq m) 1121
Comparison sales area (sq m) 280
Convenience sales density 2017 (£/sq m) 4035
Comparison sales density 2017 (£/sq m) 2310
Convenience turnover 2017 (£m) 4.5
Comparison turnover 2017 (£m) 0.6
Total turnover 2017 (£m) 5.2
Convenience sales density 2022 (£/sq m) 4003
Comparison sales density 2022 (£/sq m) 2555
Convenience turnover 2022 (£m) 4.5
Comparison turnover 2022 (£m) 0.7
Total turnover 2022 (£m) 5.2
Turnover of existing Lidl store
Gross floorspace (sq m) 1323
Net sales area (sq m) 991
Convenience sales area (sq m) 793
Comparison sales area (sq m) 198
Convenience sales density 2017 (£/sq m) 4035
Comparison sales density 2017 (£/sq m) 2310
Convenience turnover 2017 (£m) 3.2
Comparison turnover 2017 (£m) 0.5
Total turnover 2017 (£m) 3.7
Convenience sales density 2022 (£/sq m) 4003
Comparison sales density 2022 (£/sq m) 2555
Convenience turnover 2022 (£m) 3.2
Comparison turnover 2022 (£m) 0.5
Total turnover 2022 (£m) 3.7
Net increase in turnover from larger store at 2022
Convenience (£m) 1.3
Comparison (£m) 0.2
Notes:
Notional sales density of proposed store is Lidl company average at 2017
derived from Global Data 2017 (formerly Verdict Research), with allowance
for forecast changes in retail sales densities 2017-2022 (derived from
Experian Retail Planner Briefing Note 14).
Expressed in 2009 prices.
JPW0190/171108/Tables v2
08 November 2017Lidl UK
Proposed Replacement Store at 390 Shirley Road, Southampton
Table 2: Available Convenience Goods Expenditure
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Zone 11 Zone 12 Zone 13 Zone 14 Zone 15 Zone 16 Zone 17 Zone 18 Zone 19 Zone 20 Zone 21 Zone 22 Zone 23 Zone 24 Zone 25 Zone 26 Zone 27 Zone 28 Total
(£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m)
2011 36.21 31.07 43.12 60.63 57.49 3.16 22.38 12.81 26.07 13.50 2.77 33.75 52.83 28.87 60.75 68.73 27.45 33.84 4.16 23.54 26.71 20.68 39.17 677.83 163.91 51.57 231.34 140.02 1994.35
2016 39.37 32.53 46.92 67.23 60.06 3.37 23.54 13.07 28.35 14.12 2.90 35.26 54.45 31.51 62.87 71.78 28.98 35.26 4.24 24.16 28.00 21.47 40.46 720.62 175.25 53.62 246.34 150.29 2116.01
2017 40.11 32.94 47.76 68.58 60.97 3.42 23.91 13.21 28.92 14.33 2.94 35.76 54.91 32.06 63.68 72.83 29.47 35.64 4.27 24.38 28.32 21.65 40.83 731.86 178.35 54.16 250.23 153.04 2148.53
2021 43.22 34.61 51.29 74.24 64.77 3.63 25.44 13.79 31.30 15.19 3.08 37.81 56.81 34.34 67.03 77.19 31.49 37.21 4.39 25.30 29.62 22.39 42.34 778.62 191.32 56.35 266.42 164.54 2283.72
2022 43.99 35.10 52.09 75.58 65.81 3.68 25.85 13.93 31.87 15.38 3.12 38.31 57.23 34.91 68.02 78.43 32.03 37.60 4.42 25.50 30.06 22.56 42.71 790.35 194.69 56.93 270.39 167.33 2317.87
2026 47.19 37.13 55.43 81.16 70.16 3.88 27.55 14.51 34.25 16.14 3.27 40.38 58.95 37.28 72.15 83.60 34.26 39.22 4.53 26.32 31.90 23.27 44.21 839.05 208.78 59.31 286.85 178.99 2459.70
Notes:
Taken from Appendix 3 Table 3 in 'Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study' (GVA, July 2011). Figures for 2017 and 2022
have been interpolated by applying compound growth rates 2016-2021 and 2021-2026.
Expressed in 2009 prices.
Table 3: Shirley Town Centre Convenience Goods Market Share
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Zone 11 Zone 12 Zone 13 Zone 14 Zone 15 Zone 16 Zone 17 Zone 18 Zone 19 Zone 20 Zone 21 Zone 22 Zone 23 Zone 24 Zone 25 Zone 26 Zone 27 Zone 28
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
2011 2.7 45.9 45.8 0.0 21.8 0.0 1.9 7.9 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
2016 2.7 45.9 45.8 0.0 21.8 0.0 1.9 7.9 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
2017 2.7 45.9 45.8 0.0 21.8 0.0 1.9 7.9 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
2021 2.7 45.9 45.8 0.0 21.8 0.0 1.9 7.9 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
2022 2.7 45.9 45.8 0.0 21.8 0.0 1.9 7.9 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
2026 2.7 45.9 45.8 0.0 21.8 0.0 1.9 7.9 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0
Notes:
Taken from Appendix 3 Table 6 in 'Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study 2011' (data derived from household survey,
January 2011).
Table 4: Shirley Town Centre Convenience Goods Spending Allocation
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 10 Zone 11 Zone 12 Zone 13 Zone 14 Zone 15 Zone 16 Zone 17 Zone 18 Zone 19 Zone 20 Zone 21 Zone 22 Zone 23 Zone 24 Zone 25 Zone 26 Zone 27 Zone 28 Total
(£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m)
2011 0.98 14.26 19.75 0.00 12.53 0.00 0.43 1.01 0.21 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.49 0.82 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 51.95
2016 1.06 14.93 21.49 0.00 13.09 0.00 0.45 1.03 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.50 0.86 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 55.17
2017 1.08 15.12 21.87 0.00 13.29 0.00 0.45 1.04 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.51 0.87 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 56.02
2021 1.17 15.89 23.49 0.00 14.12 0.00 0.48 1.09 0.25 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.54 0.93 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 59.55
2022 1.19 16.11 23.86 0.00 14.35 0.00 0.49 1.10 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.54 0.94 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 60.45
2026 1.27 17.04 25.39 0.00 15.29 0.00 0.52 1.15 0.27 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.58 1.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 64.20
Notes:
Application of market share (from Table 3) to available spending (from Table 2).
Expressed in 2009 prices.
JPW0190/171108/Tables v2
08 November 2017Lidl UK
Proposed Replacement Store at 390 Shirley Road, Southampton
Table 5: Impact on Shirley Town Centre (Convenience Goods)
Conv Turnover Conv Turnover Trade Draw to Resultant Impact
2017 2022 New Lidl Turnover
(£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (%)
Sainsbury, Redcar Street 18.9 18.8 0.8 18.0 -4.3
Tesco Express, Shirley Road 2.3 2.3 0.06 2.2 -2.6
Existing Lidl, Church End 3.2 3.2 3.2 0.0 -100.0
Proposed replacement Lidl - - - 4.5 -
Other shops in Shirley Town Centre 7.8 7.7 0.24 7.5 -3.1
Stores outside Shirley 0.19
Total 4.5
Notes:
Turnovers of named stores are derived from convenience sales areas in Appendix 3 Table 32 of the 'Southampton
& Eastleigh Retail Study 2011', multplied by 2017 company average sales densities derived from Global Data
(formerly Verdict) that have been projected forward to 2022 using Experian's forecast growth rates for changes in
convenience sales densities (from Retail Planner Briefing Note 14). Sales density of other shops is based on figure
in Appendix 3 Table 32 of the 'Southampton & Eastleigh Retail Study 2011', projected forward to 2017 and 2022.
Turnover of existing and proposed Lidl stores assume the company average sales density for 2017 from Global
Data, projected forward using Experian growth rates (as per Table 1).
Totals may not tally due to rounding.
Expressed in 2009 prices.
JPW0190/171108/Tables v2
08 November 2017Appendix 2
You can also read
