Stanton SPD

Retail Provision at Stanton

Background Paper August 2016

1

Introduction

This background paper presents what the Borough Council considers to be the appropriate

level of retail floorspace that should be provided at the Stanton Regeneration Site (SRS)

“centre of neighbourhood importance” (CNI). This is strictly a consideration of the retail

element of any floorspace at the neighbourhood centre; facilities floorspace such as for

healthcare and education provision is not deliberated as part of this background paper.

The background paper identifies what the Borough Council considers to be an appropriate

net floorspace amount for the provision of convenience goods (primarily food, with some

inevitable trace comparison, likely located within a single core unit) and it will also identify

what the Borough Council considers to be an appropriate net floorspace amount for the

provision of 'other’ goods and services provision (some comparison goods, professional

services, specialist convenience (such as newsagents), located across several smaller units).

In arriving at a recommended floorspace amount for each of the retail elements, this

background paper considers the planning reasoning associated with it, and references –

where appropriate – any primary or secondary evidence used to inform the conclusions of

the background paper.

Suggested net convenience floorspace provision at the CNI

The planning basis

The Borough Council has promoted and continues to support as part of any development at

the SRS an appropriately scaled CNI. This is stipulated as part of the local plan for the

Borough, specifically within the newly adopted Erewash Core Strategy (March 2014), at

Policy 20.

Critically, the CNI sits below what are defined as “Local Centres” within the Core Strategy,

namely, Borrowash and Sandiacre which, in turn, sit below what are classed as “Town

Centres”, defined as Ilkeston and Long Eaton, at Policy 6.

The justification for this hierarchy and the specific stipulation that the SRS should support a

neighbourhood level retail centre is borne out of an evidence base that has been fully

examined and found sound by an independent planning inspector.

Critically, this evidence base covers a conurbation-wide geography, and through this

evidence base a hierarchy of retail centres has been defined across the Greater Nottingham

Housing Market Area (GNHMA) through various pieces of evidence including the Greater

Nottingham Retail Study (GNRS) (2008) and subsequent updates. The retail hierarchy within

Erewash Borough has not been developed in isolation and therefore any steer away from it

would have wider implications for neighbouring authorities when planning for new retail

development. Clearly, factors relating to planning appropriately for new retail development

prevail across boundaries, such as in relation to expenditure capacities.

2

Primarily the hierarchy has been developed to support the vitality, viability and

regeneration of existing centres – which have experienced decline in recent years. This is a

core principle of the newly adopted Erewash Core Strategy and one that, if undermined,

would impact negatively on wider regenerative efforts across the Borough. One role of any

retail centre at the SRS would be to consolidate and strengthen the existing network and

hierarchy of centres as set out in Policy 6, and not compete with them. This is clearly

outlined at Policy 20.

Below is a table, with explanatory footnotes, which indicates what the Borough Council

considers to be an appropriately scaled convenience retail element of a CNI, based on a

sound planning methodology.

Fundamentally, it is based on the policy position that the appropriate scale of retail for a CNI

– particularly convenience provision - should be such that it provides for the ‘top-up’

shopping needs of residents of the SRS only, with some additional population interactions

from nearby villages such as Stanton-By-Dale and south Kirk Hallam, and does not act as a

‘destination’ centre which would undermine the retail hierarchy for the Borough and wider

GNHMA.

Table 1- calculating appropriate scale of floorspace for convenience top-up shopping for the future projected

population of the SRS only/ the population of the SRS and surrounding area as defined in the PitneyBowes

AnyTime report 0-5 min drivetime catchment.

# Description Outcome Outcome (+

Surrounding

Area)

Calculating total available top-up convenience expenditure

1 Per capita convenience expenditure per year (£) 1844.00 1844.00

2 Total expected population of the SRS, at completion 4660 5254

3 Total annual food expenditure capacity created by new SRS

population (£)

8,593,040 9,688,376

4 Proportion of total annual convenience expenditure capacity that

would be expected to represent ‘top-up’ only shopping (£)

1,718,608 1,937,675

Calculating convenience floorspace requirements for the CNI, based on available top-up convenience

expenditure identified above

5 Indicative sales density for convenience floorspace per sqm (£) 7000 7000

6 Total top-up expenditure capacity as identified at #4 (£) 1,718,608 1,937,675

7 Approximate net floorspace requirement to meet the top-up

convenience shopping needs of the SRS population (sqm)

245.52 276.81

3

8 Approximate gross floorspace requirement to meet the top-up

convenience shopping needs of the SRS population (sqm)

331.45 373.69

Total net/gross floorspace requirement to facilitate top-up shopping

needs at the CNI (sqm)

245.52/ 331.45 276.81/ 373.69

References and methodology

1. Figure is the per capita convenience expenditure projected for the primary catchment (within 0-5

minutes drive time, derived from the PitneyBowes AnyTime isochrone Report) contained within the

addendum to Appendix 12.2 of the Environmental Statement, submitted by Alliance Planning

(February 2014).

2. Average taken from projections for the year 2021 within the 2011 household interim projections in

England (2011 to 2021).

3. Per person convenience expenditure (£) x total expected population of SRS

4. Based on findings from surveys, supported in both the 2007 and 2010 (update) Retail Study for

Erewash carried out by White Young Green. This stated that on average, 20% of people’s total

available convenience expenditure is spent by way of ‘top-up shopping’ within the Borough. In

essence, it is telling us that actually only 20% of total available expenditure produced by the new SRS

population should be directed to the new convenience development on site if the retail element is to

conform with policy (i.e. to develop a neighbourhood level centre and appropriately scaled

convenience provision) and be top-up only, and not draw trade from a much wider population, and

for main food shopping.

5. Figure is the benchmark average at 2011, referred to within the addendum to Appendix 12.2 of the

Environmental Statement (at Appendix B, table 4a), submitted by Alliance Planning in February 2014.

6. As identified at #4.

7. Total top up expenditure capacity (i.e. popn. of SRS x per capita expenditure, as identified at #4) /

sales density per sqm.

8. Figure derived using net/ gross floorspace ratio split of 65/ 35, identified as being the appropriate

ratio by applicants as part of the SRS proposal. Notably, the Retail Study carried out by White Young

Green for the Borough Council (2010) indicates that an appropriate representation of the split for the

smaller stores within the borough is 70/30. By comparison the large Asda and Tesco stores at Long

Eaton have a split of 55%, owing to much more advanced requirements in terms of access, storage

and service space.

Notes

a) Surrounding area data (4th

column) calculated by using the PitneyBowes AnyTime report submitted to

the Council by Alliance Planning (February 2014) which uses a 0-5 minute drivetime catchment to

define the additional area outside of the SRS (such as South Kirk Hallam and Stanton-By-Dale).

b) The tables consider convenience top-up and convenience top-up and main. There may be trace

comparison goods on site, even with convenience top up outlets, as this may be required to fulfil

certain key services as part of the CNI.

c) Normally, the conceptual formula for working out residual expenditure capacity would take into

4

account turnover of existing stores in the locality. However the locality in this instance is the SRS

exclusively (and the expenditure of its future population). As a result, this step in the equation is not

included in the tables. Column 4 of both tables considers a slightly wider area as defined as the

‘primary’ catchment within the Alliance Planning Addendum to Appendix 12.2 of the Environmental

Statement, but this only increases the projected population at 2021 by approximately 500 persons, so

expenditure draw in these additional localities is considered to be a minor influence over the overall

equation.

d) 2021 is the base date for data wherever possible (such as the household size projection and

expenditure projection). This is due to the 2011 household projections catering only for the period up

to 2021, from which the average household size must be derived.

Table 1a – calculating appropriate scale of floorspace for convenience shopping, where main as well as top-

up shopping is undertaken by the future projected population of the SRS only/ the population of the SRS and

surrounding area as defined in the PitneyBowes AnyTime report 0-5 min drive time catchment.

# Description Outcome Outcome (+

Surrounding

Area)

Calculating total available top up and main convenience expenditure

1 Per capita top-up and main convenience expenditure per year (£) 1844.00 1844

2 Total expected population of the SRS, at completion 4660 5254

3 Total annual top up and main convenience expenditure capacity

created by new SRS population (£)

8,593,040 9,688,376

Calculating top up and main convenience floorspace requirements for the CNI based on available top-up and

main convenience expenditure identified above

4 Indicative sales density for convenience floorspace per sqm (£) 7000 7000

5 Total expenditure capacity as identified at #3 (£) 8,593,040 9,688,376

6 Approximate net floorspace requirement to meet the top-up and

main convenience shopping needs of the SRS population (sqm)

1227.58 1384.05

7 Approximate gross floorspace requirement to meet the top-up and

main convenience shopping needs of the SRS population (sqm)

1657.23 1868.47

Total net/gross floorspace requirement to facilitate top-up as well as

main shopping needs at the CNI (sqm)

1227.58/

1657.23

1384.05/

1868.47

References and methodology

1 Figure is the per capita convenience expenditure projected for the primary catchment (within 0-5

minutes drive time, derived from the PitneyBowes AnyTime isochrone Report) contained within the

addendum to Appendix 12.2 of the Environmental Statement, submitted by Alliance Planning

5

February 2014.

2 Average taken from projections for the year 2021 within the 2011 household interim projections in

England (2011 to 2021).

3 Per person convenience expenditure (£) x total expected population of SRS

4 Figure is the benchmark average at 2011, referred to within the addendum to Appendix 12.2 of the

Environmental Statement (at Appendix B, table 4a), submitted by Alliance Planning in February 2014.

5 As identified at #3.

6 Total top up expenditure capacity (i.e. popn. of SRS x per capita expenditure, as identified at #3) /

sales density per sqm.

7 Figure derived using net/ gross floorspace ratio split of 65/ 35, identified as being the appropriate

ratio by applicants as part of the SRS proposal. Notably, the Retail Study carried out by White Young

Green for the Borough Council (2010) indicates that an appropriate representation of the split for the

smaller stores within the borough is 70/30. By comparison the large Asda and Tesco stores at Long

Eaton have a split of 55%; owing to much more advanced requirements in terms of access and service

space.

Notes

a) Surrounding area data (4th

column) calculated by using the PitneyBowes AnyTime report submitted to

the Council by Alliance Planning (February 2014) which uses a 0-5 minute drivetime catchment to

define the additional area outside of the SRS (such as South Kirk Hallam and Stanton-By-Dale).

b) The tables consider convenience top-up and convenience top-up and main. There may be trace

comparison goods on site, even with convenience top-up outlets, as this may be required to fulfil

certain key services as part of the CNI.

c) Normally, the conceptual formula for working out residual expenditure capacity would take into

account turnover of existing stores in the locality. However the locality in this instance is the SRS

exclusively (and the expenditure of its future population). As a result, this step in the equation is not

included in the tables. Column 4 of both tables considers a slightly wider area as defined as the

‘primary’ catchment within the Alliance Planning Addendum to Appendix 12.2 of the Environmental

Statement, but this only increases the projected population at 2021 by approximately 500 persons, so

expenditure draw in these additional localities is considered to be a minor influence over the overall

equation.

d) 2021 is the base date for data wherever possible (such as the household size projection and

expenditure projection). This is due to the 2011 household projections catering only for the period up

to 2021, from which the average household size must be derived.

Even when taking into account some level of top-up shopping trade draw from nearby

settlements such as Stanton-By-Dale and Kirk Hallam, Table 1 suggests that the appropriate

maximum amount of convenience retail floorspace that should be provided by the CNI

should be in the region of 300/400 sqm (net/gross split), with some inevitable trace

comparison provision required to deliver key services associated with convenience

6

offerings. This would represent a centre that would provide for the top-up convenience

shopping needs of the population of the SRS, plus some additional provision to take account

of populations at Stanton-By-Dale and south Kirk Hallam. Such a provision would conform

closely to adopted policy, ensure the protection of existing centres within the retail

hierarchy for the Borough and would not prejudice future prospects for their regeneration,

a fundamental purpose of the newly adopted Erewash Core Strategy.

Notably, the floorspace estimation identified here ties in well with industry standards, for

example the Sainsbury’s convenience store hierarchy, as demonstrated within its

‘Developer’s Shell Summary Sheet’ (2010). Sainsbury’s operates a convenience model with

three main strands – ‘Neighbourhood’, ‘Fresh Local’ (High Street) and ‘Food on the Move’.

The sizes of the stores range from 325.16 to 418.06 sqm (gross) with net/sales areas ranging

from 232.26 to 278.71 sqm.

The existing retail hierarchy

The retail hierarchy contained at Policy 6 of the Erewash Core Strategy has been fully

examined and found sound. It distinguishes between ‘Town Centres’, ‘Local Centres’ and the

‘centre of neighbourhood importance’ proposed for the SRS, which sits at the bottom of the

hierarchy in terms of scale. By this, it should act to consolidate and strengthen the existing

network of other neighbourhood level centres and defined local and town centres, not

compete with them. It is reasonable that a CNI should, in order to conform with the local

plan for the area, more closely resemble that of established neighbourhood level centres

across the Borough, including Kirk Hallam, which are seated below the local centres of

Sandiacre and Borrowash.

This section outlines some comparisons between net convenience provision identified

within existing centres (of varying scales) across the Borough and that which is being

proposed at the SRS. Table 2 (below) also takes into account the amount of net floorspace

within each of the identified neighbourhood level centres that provides for the sale of other

services and goods.

Table 2 – Comparing existing retail centres with the currently proposed retail element of the SRS.

Scale

(Hierarchy)

Settlement Population

(Wards/

Parishes

derived from)

Total Net

Convenience

Floorspace

(Sqm., approx.)

Net

Convenience

Floorspace Per

Capita (Sqm.)

Total Net

‘Other’ (Sqm.)

Town Centres Ilkeston 31697 (2005

estimate taken

from 7 wards,

excluding Kirk

Hallam, which

is considered as

a centre on its

10324 0.32

7

own below)

Long Eaton 36993 (2005

estimate taken

from 6 wards)

8281 0.22

Local Centres Sandiacre 8770 (2011

estimate taken

from Sandiacre

South &

Sandiacre

North wards)

3265 (estimate

taken directly

from Alliance

Planning’s

latest retail

statement

submission,

Feb. 2014)

0.37

Borrowash 7335 (2011

estimate taken

from Ockbrook

& Borrowash

ward)

836 0.11

Neighbourhood

Level Centres

Kirk Hallam 6216 (2011

estimate taken

from Kirk

Hallam ward)

714 0.11 690

Breaston 4455 (2011

estimate taken

from Breaston

ward)

459 0.10 855

Draycott 3090 (2011

estimate taken

from Draycott

& Church Wilne

ward)

401 0.12 1389

West Hallam 4686 (2011

estimate taken

from West

Hallam parish)

235 0.05 510

Little Eaton 3430 (2011

estimate taken

from Little

Eaton parish)

454 0.13 153

CURRENTLY

PROPOSED SRS

RETAIL

ELEMENT

4660 1812 0.38

8

Notes

a) All figures rounded up to 0 decimal places.

b) Population figures taken from 2011 census where possible, excluding town centres where data was

not complete and therefore 2005 estimates were used.

c) Convenience floorspace figures for Ilkeston, Long Eaton, Sandiacre and Borrowash centres taken from

the Erewash Retail Study Update (2010) undertaken by White Young Green, based on figures at ‘net

convenience’ column (total) in relevant tables. These figures do not only take into account convenience

offering from large stores, but local stores too.

d) The neighbourhood level equivalent centres (Kirk Hallam and Breaston, for example) were assessed by

identifying individual stores (via site visits) and therefore identifying those stores classed as

convenience and by measuring the footprint of the individual buildings and applying an appropriate

gross/net ratio.

e) The appropriate gross/net ratio applied to arrive at net for convenience AND comparison was 80/20.

Larger stores (such as those at Ilkeston, Long Eaton and the local centres of Borrowash and Sandiacre)

usually represent a ratio of around 70/30 or even less (such as 60/40) and this is the same that is

applied within the Borough Council’s retail study update undertaken by White Young Green when

assessing convenience provision across the 4 main centres. Smaller stores, such as those identified at

the neighbourhood level centres do not require the same level of service or storage space (usually with

daily deliveries).

f) The Borough Council is aware that trace comparison goods will exist within any convenience

dominated provision. It is not considered expedient to consider these figures in too much detail, as the

point being made here is a general one and the figures derived are only meant to be indicative.

g) All figures take into account any identified expected future provision with outstanding planning

permission (such as Tesco at Sandiacre (1602 sqm net convenience) and Morrison’s at Ilkeston (2700

sqm net convenience)).

h) The retail hierarchy for the borough identified at Policy 6 of the Erewash Core Strategy is made up of

Town Centres, Local Centres and the Centre of Neighbourhood Importance identified as appropriate

for the SRS. Whilst other neighbourhood level centres such as, for example, Kirk Hallam, do not

technically form part of this defined hierarchy, by virtue of the SRS centre being formally included as a

classification below local centres, and by virtue of the fact that other centres such as Kirk Hallam are

not included in the local centre classification (and therefore are seated below), it is reasonable to

make comparison between the range of retail centres that exist even if they do not technically form

part of the defined hierarchy within the Erewash Core Strategy.

Convenience retail

Table 2 demonstrates that convenience floorspace provision increases in line with the size

of the centre. It is also clear that the convenience floorspace/ capita ratio changes with the

size and significance of the centre. It is found that, the larger and more significant the centre

within the retail hierarchy, the more convenience floorspace is provided per capita (when

considered against an estimated population for the town). This is a result of the higher order

9

centres (town and local) rightfully acting as shopping destinations for wider populations

outside of their usual resident population. This is one purpose of town and local centres,

and informs their status and position within the retail hierarchy for the Borough.

Conversely, the neighbourhood level centres identified provide for significantly less

convenience floorspace per capita than their local and town centre counterparts. This

reflects well their role and duty as centres that sit below the local level to provide primarily

for the essential (and likely top-up) needs of their normal resident population (their specific

locational need). Established neighbourhood level centres within the Borough do not

currently act as destination shopping locations with regards to convenience expenditure,

and this is the expected pattern.

Notably, the size range of net convenience floorspace considered at part 2 of this

background paper also conforms closely with the range witnessed across the selection of

established neighbourhood level centres, falling between 235 (West Hallam) and 714 (Kirk

Hallam) sqm (net). A recommendation of between 300-400 sqm net convenience, on this

basis, seems sensibly informed and supported by current patterns across established retail

centres within the Borough, as well as relationships between them.

Non-convenience retail

The amount of net floorspace identified across the neighbourhood level centres that

provided for non-convenience goods and services ranged from 153 (Little Eaton) – 1389

(Draycott) sqm (net). This is a wide range, but the nature of products and services sold

outside of the convenience sector is such that there is less of a consistent requirement for

their provision at every settlement. Instead, some centres tend to accommodate a higher

proportion of such provision in part influenced by their location and ability to catch passing

trade (such as Draycott). Due to the ‘non-essential’ nature of many of these goods and

services, it is also true that the level of provision of such floorspace is far more reactive to

market need and interest.

Table 3 – Calculating appropriate individual unit sizes to provide for non-convenience floorspace at the CNI.

Name Of

Neighbourhood

Centre

Popn. Total Non-

Convenience

Floorspace (sqm,

net)

Total Non-

Convenience

Floorspace per

Capita (sqm, net)

Size (Range) Of Non-

Convenience Outlets

Identified (Sqm, net)

(approx.)

Smallest Largest

Kirk Hallam 6216 690 0.11 52 153

Breaston 4455 855 0.19 22 114

Draycott 3090 1389 0.44 37 85

10

West Hallam 4686 510 0.10 40 117

Little Eaton 3430 153 0.04 50 103

Averages 0.17 40.2 114.4

Notes

a) Net size of non-convenience outlets identified, estimated from gross floorspace measured, with an

80/20 ratio applied.

b) Range worked out by recording the largest and smallest size of outlet identified and presenting this

range from which the average range was derived.

c) Total non-convenience floorspace per capita (sqm net) worked out by dividing the total non-

convenience floorspace identified across the total population for the settlement. These outcomes were

then averaged to give an indicative per capita floorspace figure that can be used to identify what a

suitable total amount might be for the CNI if it is to conform to the retail hierarchy for the Borough.

The centre could be supported a single convenience store, and by non-convenience service

and goods providers across a number of small retail units. In terms of constituting

appropriate levels of net floorspace for the provision of non-convenience services and

goods at the CNI, a methodology for calculating this is demonstrated in Table 3a.

Table 3a – Calculating appropriate floorspace provision for non-convenience goods and services at the CNI.

SRS Projected Population Indicative Per Capita Non-

Convenience Floorspace (sqm,

net)

Suggested Non-Convenience

Floorspace at the CNI (sqm, net)

4660 0.17 792.2

Notes

a) Population as identified using methodology demonstrated at Table 1 of this background paper.

b) Indicative per capita non-convenience floorspace calculated via Table 3 of this background paper.

c) Suggested non-convenience floorspace calculated by multiplying projected population by per capita

indicative floorspace amount.

Based on evidence as referenced in tables 3 and 3a (above), in addition to a single

convenience store, provision for up to approximately 800 sqm (net) non-convenience

floorspace is considered appropriate. This should act as a rounded, sensibly informed guide

rather than a static one.

11

In terms of individual unit sizes, on considering existing established neighbourhood level

centres as identified, the size of individual non-convenience units ranged from an average of

40.2 to 114.4 sqm (net). In order for a range of different non-convenience goods and service

providers to be able to establish at the CNI, it is suggested that individual units would be

most appropriately sized at the lower end of the scale. However, even at the top end of the

scale, a number of different stores providing a range of non-convenience goods and services

could be provided for within the CNI whilst remaining within an appropriate size range.