PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT - Proposed Lidl Store at St Peters Street, Maidstone Prepared on Behalf of Lidl Great Britain Ltd
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
Proposed Lidl Store at St Peters Street, Maidstone
Prepared on Behalf of Lidl Great Britain Ltd
JPW1588
Planning & Retail Statement
vC
February 2021
rpsgroup.com
PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
Quality Management
Version Status Authored by Reviewed by Approved by Review date
C Final Kate Gapper Chris Tookey Chris Tookey 05/02/2021
© Copyright RPS Group Plc. All rights reserved.
The report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client and unless otherwise agreed in writing by
RPS Group Plc, any of its subsidiaries, or a related entity (collectively 'RPS'), no other party may use, make
use of, or rely on the contents of this report. The report has been compiled using the resources agreed with
the client and in accordance with the scope of work agreed with the client. No liability is accepted by RPS for
any use of this report, other than the purpose for which it was prepared. The report does not account for any
changes relating to the subject matter of the report, or any legislative or regulatory changes that have occurred
since the report was produced and that may affect the report. RPS does not accept any responsibility or liability
for loss whatsoever to any third party caused by, related to or arising out of any use or reliance on the report.
RPS accepts no responsibility for any documents or information supplied to RPS by others and no legal liability
arising from the use by others of opinions or data contained in this report. It is expressly stated that no
independent verification of any documents or information supplied by others has been made. RPS has used
reasonable skill, care and diligence in compiling this report and no warranty is provided as to the report’s
accuracy. No part of this report may be copied or reproduced, by any means, without the prior written consent
of RPS.
Prepared by: Prepared for:
RPS Lidl Great Britain Ltd
Kate Gapper Adam Forsdick
Associate Regional Head of Property
2 Callaghan Square Northfleet RDC
Cardiff Crete Hall Road
CF10 5AZ Gravesend
DA11 9BU
T +44 2920 668 662
E gapperk@rpsgroup.com
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1
Scope and Purpose ................................................................................................................... 1
2 SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................. 2
Planning History......................................................................................................................... 3
3 THE APPLICATION PROPOSALS ........................................................................................... 4
Lidl Business Model ................................................................................................................... 4
4 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT................................................................................................ 8
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 8
Development Plan ..................................................................................................................... 8
National Planning Policy Framewrok ....................................................................................... 12
5 EVALUATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH RETAIL POLICIES ................................................. 14
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 14
The Sequential Test ................................................................................................................. 14
Impact on Existing, Committed and Planned Investment in Centres ....................................... 20
Impact on Town Centre Vitality and Viability ............................................................................ 20
6 OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................... 23
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 23
Transport and Highways .......................................................................................................... 23
Noise…………………. ............................................................................................................. 24
Air Quality ................................................................................................................................ 24
Flood Risk ................................................................................................................................ 25
7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................... 23
Appendices
Appendix A - Retail Tables
Appendix B - Plan of Study Area
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.comPLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
1 INTRODUCTION
Scope and Purpose
1.1 This Planning and Retail Statement has been prepared by RPS Consulting Services Ltd on
behalf of Lidl GB Ltd to accompany a planning application in support of a new 2,070sqm Lidl
foodstore at St Peter’s Street, Maidstone.
1.2 In association with the sub-division of the existing Wickes retail unit, to provide two
independent units, the application proposals involve external alterations to the building to
provide a Lidl ‘shopfront’, a new plant area to the rear of the unit and changes to the car park
including a covered trolley store. Lidl’s application relates to just part of the existing retail unit
and for ease of reference will be referred to herein as Unit B. The remaining floorspace will
be retained by Wickes and an application for external alterations to the remainder of the retail
unit (Unit A) will be made separately.
1.3 This report focuses on the general planning and retail policy issues associated with the
proposed development. It is intended to assist Maidstone Borough Council in the
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 planning policies and considers the justification and implications
of the proposed development, particularly in relation to the retail policy considerations
including the impact on trading patterns and the vitality and viability of designated town
centres.
1.4 This report is not a standalone document and should be read in conjunction with all other
elements of the application which include:
• Design and Access Statement prepared by One Design;
• Transport Assessment and Travel Plan prepared by Mayer Brown Ltd;
• Flood Risk Assessment prepared by RPS;
• Noise Assessment prepared by MRL Acoustics; and
• Air Quality Assessment prepared by Mayer Brown Consultants Ltd.
1.5 The remainder of this Statement is structured as follows
• Section 2: provides a description of the site and surrounding area;
• Section 3: describes the application proposals including Lidl’s business model;
• Section 4: provides an overview of the planning policy context;
• Section 5: evaluates the proposed development against relevant planning policies.
• Section 6: summarises the findings of accompanying technical reports.
• Section 7: summarises the key considerations and presents our overall conclusions.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
1PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
2 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 The application site is located off St Peter’s Street approximately 350m to the west of Maidstone
town centre on the opposite side of the River Medway. It is currently occupied by a Wickes Extra
store and its associated customer car parking area. Access to the site (customer and deliveries)
comes directly from St Peter’s Street albeit from two separate access points.
Figure 2.1: Site Location Plan
2.2 The site is bounded to the east by St Peter’s Wharf Retail Park which contains a number of
other large retail units occupied by Asda Living, TK Maxx, HomeSense, HobbyCraft and The
Range. The River Medway lies beyond the retail units. To the north, the site is bounded by
flatted residential accommodation at Pevensey Court and St Peters nursery school (Grade II
Listed) is located to the south. To the west the of the site on the other side of the existing
landscaping that bounds the railway line lies St Anne Court and other residential and commercial
units on Buckland Road. The site benefits from excellent transport links being within close
proximity to the M20 motorway which links into the M25 motorway which lies 10 miles away.
2.3 In relation to public transport, the nearest bus stops are located on the A20 London Road and
Tonbridge Road approximately 500m from the site. In regard to train stations, the site is located
close to three main railway stations which are all under one mile from the site. These train
stations comprise Maidstone Barracks Station (0.5 miles to the north), Maidstone West Station
(0.3 miles to the south) and Maidstone East Station (0.7 miles to the north east).
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
2PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
Planning History
2.4 The existing Wickes Extra Store was permitted under planning permission MA/03/1035 which
was approved with conditions on 15th December 2003 for the “demolition of existing buildings
and erection of retail warehouse unit with associated parking, landscaping and access”.
Subsequent discharge of condition and variation of condition applications were submitted to
make up the majority of the site’s planning history relating to application ref: MA/03/1035.
2.5 Much of the other history that relates to the site is not relevant to this proposal. However, the
following applications are worth citing.
• Application ref. 08/0190 - Permitted 17th April 2008 for the “Variation of condition 22 of
MA/03/1035 (No activity in connection with the use hereby permitted, other than the
cleaning of the premises, shall be carried out outside of the hours of 07.30-20.00 hours
Monday to Saturday and 10.00 hours - 18.00 hours on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays)
to 07.00-20.00 Monday to Saturday” at Wickes, St. Peters Street, Maidstone.
• Application ref. MA/04/0582 - Approved with conditions 19th July 2004 for the
“Variation of condition 21 of planning permission MA/03/1035 to allow stacking of
objects in the external display area in the north western corner to a height of 4 metres;
and variation of condition 22 to allow use of premises between 07:30-20:00 hours on
Bank and Public Holidays”.
• MA/04/1961 - Application for advertisement consent approved with conditions 16th
February 2005 at Wickes, St. Peters Street, Maidstone.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
3PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
3 THE APPLICATION PROPOSALS
3.1 This application seeks consent for external alterations to part of the existing Wickes Extra retail
unit, including the removal of the existing entrance lobby and installation of a new entrance pod
and replacement glazing to shopfront. The application seeks consent to allow occupation for a
Class E (formerly A1) foodstore retailing convenience and comparison goods, and also includes
alterations to the existing delivery bay; reconfiguration of the customer car park to provide trolley
storage; covered cycle parking; and car parking for disabled drivers and parents with children.
3.2 The proposed Lidl store (Unit B) will have a 2,070 sqm gross internal area (GIA) comprising a
net sales area of 1,250 sqm plus warehouse and ancillary floor space including staff welfare
facilities, offices and toilets.
3.3 The remaining floorspace (3,458sqm) will be retained by Wickes and an application for external
alterations to the remainder of the retail unit (Unit A) will be made separately.
3.4 The existing pedestrian / vehicular access arrangements to the site from St. Peter’s Street are
considered appropriate for the proposed development and hence will remain as per existing.
3.5 In terms of car parking, following the proposed car park modification works, a total of 186 spaces
will be provided onsite to serve both units, consisting of 162 standard, 6 van, 10 disabled and 8
parent and child spaces. New cycle parking (5 Sheffield stands providing 10 spaces) will also
be provided. The development involves no changes to the existing delivery or customer access
arrangements or the landscaping.
3.6 It should be noted that Lidl have an existing store at the end of St Peter’s street, fronting onto
Broadway which is part of The Broadway Shopping Centre to the south of the site. It is proposed
that the new store at Wickes Extra will replace the existing Lidl on Broadway. There will not be
two Lidl stores operating simultaneously. The relocation of the Lidl will provide an improved
store, with parking and sales all on one level, which will be more efficient to operate and provide
customers with an improved shopping environment. It will also assist in bringing the Broadway
Shopping Centre redevelopment forward for much needed residential which is an option the
council are currently considering within the review of the Local Plan.
Lidl Business Model
3.7 The proposed store will be occupied by Lidl, who together with Aldi are classed as a Limited
Assortment Discounter (LAD), 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.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
4PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
3.8 The Lidl format is a well-established shopping experience in Europe with almost 10,000 stores
across the continent. The company is seeking to build upon its strong presence in the UK with
over 800 stores opened to date, employing over 23,000 people.
Product Range and Pricing Structure
3.9 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 2,500 items, although the company’s planning consents allow the flexibility for up to
3,500 items so as to accommodate future growth. In comparison the major operators, such as
Morrison, Tesco, Asda and Sainsbury, can retail over 35,000 items. In addition to the limited
product range, unlike its counterparts in the retail industry Lidl seldom stock multiple lines of the
same product.
3.10 For these reasons, Lidl stores successfully trade immediately adjacent to larger superstores and
smaller convenience stores in numerous locations across the UK. Indeed, Lidl have always
operated as a complementary retailer, with a significant proportion of customers also choosing
to visit other retailers to fulfil their needs.
3.11 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.
3.12 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.
3.13 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
(although it must be noted that Netto have ceased operations in the UK and sold their store
portfolio to Asda). Prices within the sector are acknowledged to be “well below the prices of the
market leaders and have a considerably smaller range of goods” It is notable that the former
Netto stores that Asda converted to their new small supermarket format typically retail 10,000
grocery products, substantially more than the previous deep discount format they replaced. This
research (Competition Commission - Report on Supermarkets 2000; and Competition
Commission – Market Investigation of the Supply of Groceries in the UK 2008) is now quite
dated, however it remains relevant inasmuch as the sales models of both Lidl and Aldi have
remained largely unchanged – changes that have been incorporated over time have been to
make stores more accessible with, inter alia, larger car parks, improved cycle parking and
customer toilets. Previous Verdict reports have stated that Lidl and Aldi retail products at prices
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
5PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
of 30% lower than the large retailers and it is notable that in January 2021 Lidl were identified
as being the cheapest supermarket of 2020.
3.14 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
has risen as consumers seek 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: as a result, many now combine a
trip to Lidl as part of their regular food shop at the larger mainstream stores.
3.15 Lidl operate on far lower profit margins than the major foodstore operators and can therefore
pass on the savings to their customers, which instils loyalty and a return to store mind set.
3.16 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 LPAs, Planning Inspectors and
the Secretary of State in application and appeal decisions across England.
Servicing
3.17 Mindful of minimising disturbance to any neighbouring landowners each Lidl store typically has
only 1-2 deliveries a day for all its products, including ambient, fresh, frozen and chilled goods.
Total unloading time is generally only around 60 minutes.
Sustainability
3.18 On the issue of waste, Lidl recycle their packaging material, with their merchandising and display
formats being designed to facilitate this. All cardboard is compacted and stored on site for daily
collection by the returning HGV, along with all plastic, food waste, wood and all non-recyclable
refuse. In the UK between March 2016 and February 20172019 Lidl recycled 100%
(82,000110,163 tonnes) of their cardboard and paper; 100% (3,5004,492 tonnes) of plastic and
98% (12,57316,942 tonnes) of their general waste. The volume of recycled material has
increased year-on-year and the long-standing ambition is to achieve zero waste to landfill. In
terms of food 470 tonnes of surplus produce was redistributed to good causes in 2016 and that
is the baseline that the company has is working from – they have set a goal of reducing their
food waste by 40% by 2025 and 50% by 2030, and in 2019 they achieved 26%. This reduction
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
6PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
has been partially achieved through the donation of surplus food to over 2,200 local charities –
in 2019 1,611 tonnes were given away, contributing to over 6.5 million meals.
3.19 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
3.20 Lidl stores typically generate in the order of 40 jobs, as is the case in the existing store at
Broadway Shopping Centre. The lease on that store is coming to an end, and the Council are
considering the redevelopment of the site for new housing, but the proposed development on
the Wickes site will allow the existing Lidl to be relocated, which will ensure the continuity of
employment for all their staff. The close proximity of the new site to the existing store will be
beneficial not only to customers but also to staff, who will not have to be concerned about
journey times or routes to work changing
3.21 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 longstanding corporate strategy being to
promote from within the business.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
7PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
4 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT
Introduction
4.1 This section of the report considers the national and local planning policies of relevance to the
proposed retail development. 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 Maidstone Borough Council Local Plan which was adopted 25th October 2017.
Other material considerations include national policy set out in the National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF).
4.2 It is also noteworthy that Maidstone Borough Council are currently in the process of reviewing
their Local Plan and initiated a call for sites between March and May 2019. Between July and
September 2019, the Council then consulted on the Local Plan Review Scoping, Themes and
Issues and are now currently consulting on the Preferred Approaches which is next stage of
informal stakeholder and public involvement in the Local Plan Review process.
Development Plan
The Maidstone Borough Council Local Plan 2011-2031 (Adopted October 2017)
4.3 According to the Local Plan Policies Map, the application site is located within the defined ‘Town
Centre’ and ‘Urban Boundary’ and within a mineral safeguarding area (defined as being within
a River Terrace Deposit area). The site lies just outside the defined primary shopping area which
is located on the opposite side of the Medway River centred around Fremlin Walk and Week
Street. The site therefore benefits from being located within the town centre but outside of the
defined primary shopping area.
4.4 The following Local Plan policies are therefore considered relevant to the application:
4.5 Policy SS1 (Maidstone Borough Spatial Strategy) outlines that between 2011 and 2031
provision is to be made through the granting of planning permissions and the allocation of sites
for 6,100 sqm floorspace for retail use (convenience goods) and 23,700 sqm floorspace for retail
use (comparison goods). The policy advises that an expanded Maidstone urban area will be
the principal focus for development in the borough. Best use will be made of available sites
within the urban area. Regeneration is prioritised within the town centre, which will continue to
be the primary retail and office location in the borough.
4.6 Policy SP1 (Maidstone Urban Area) advises that the Maidstone urban area is the most
sustainable location for new development and that “within the urban area and outside of the
town centre boundary identified in policy SP4, Maidstone will continue to be a good place to live
and work. The policy explains that will be achieved by:
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
8PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
• Allocating sites at the edge of the town for housing and business development;
• The development and redevelopment or infilling of appropriate urban sites in a way that
contributes positively to the locality's distinctive character;
• Retaining well located business areas;
• Maintaining the network of district and local centres, supporting enhancements to these
centres in accordance with the overall hierarchy of centres;
• Retaining the town's green spaces and ensuring that development positively contributes to
the setting, accessibility, biodiversity and amenity value of these areas as well as the River
Medway and the River Len; and
• Supporting development that improves the social, environmental and employment well-
being of those living in identified areas of deprivation”.
4.7 Policy SP4 (Maidstone Town Centre) states that the regeneration of Maidstone town centre,
as defined on the policies map, is a priority. This will be achieved by:
i. Retaining and enhancing a variety of well-integrated attractions for all ages including
shopping, service sector-based businesses, leisure and cultural facilities;
ii. The retail-led redevelopment of Maidstone East/Royal Mail Sorting Office site;
iii. For the medium to longer term, promoting a comprehensive retail redevelopment centred
on The Mall;
iv. The retention of the best quality office stock whilst allowing for the redevelopment of lower
quality offices;
v. The protection and consolidation of retail uses in the primary shopping frontages;
vi. Outside the primary shopping frontages, allowing for a wider range of supporting uses
including those that contribute to the night time economy;
vii. Select opportunities for residential redevelopment;
viii. The retention of the best environmental features, including the riverside, and delivery of
schemes to improve the public realm and pedestrian environment as identified in the
Infrastructure Delivery Plan; and
ix. Achieving improved accessibility to the town centre through the measures in the Integrated
Transport Strategy and Infrastructure Delivery Plan.
4.8 The policy further stipulates that development in the town centre should;
i. Demonstrate a quality of design that responds positively to the townscape, including
ensuring the conservation and enhancement of the town centre’s historic fabric. Additionally
for sites adjacent to the River Medway, development should:
a. Respond positively to the river’s setting as seen in both short range views and in
longer range views from the river valley sides; and
b. Ensure public access to the riverside is secured and maintained either through on-
site measures or off-site contributions.
ii. Contribute to the priority public realm and accessibility improvement schemes for the town
centre identified in the Infrastructure Delivery Plan.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
9PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
4.9 The supporting text to the policy (para 4.55) also sets out a vision for the future role of Maidstone
town centre. The vision states that “by 2031 a regenerated and sustainable Maidstone town
centre will be a first class traditional town centre at the heart of the 21st Century County Town
that has maintained its place as one of the premier town centres in Kent by creating a distinctive,
safe and high quality place that has:
• Retained its best environmental features, including the riverside and the enhanced public
realm;
• Provided a variety of well-integrated attractions for all ages including new shopping,
service sector-based businesses, leisure, tourism, and cultural facilities; and
• Improved access for all”.
4.10 The policy goes on to advise that key components in realising this vision are:
• Enhancing the diversity of the retail offer, supporting a continued balance between
independent and multiple retailers;
• Creating a highly sustainable location resilient to future climate change;
• Establishing the town centre as an attractive hub for business building on the town
centre’s assets and environment;
• Creating a stronger mix and balance of uses within the centre to support long term
viability including where appropriate residential development; and
• Tackling congestion and air quality issues through improvements in provision for
vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists, including public transport.
4.11 Paragraph 4.56 further refers to the Retail Capacity Study (2013) which forecasts the need for
new shopping floorspace in the town for both comparison and convenience shopping over the
time frame of the local plan as set out below.
4.12 Policy SP21 (Economic Development) sets out that the council is committed to supporting
and improving the economy of the borough and providing for the needs of businesses. The
policy advises that this will be achieved through the allocation of specific sites and through:
i. The retention, intensification, regeneration of the existing industrial and business estates
identified as Economic Development Areas as defined on the policies map;
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
10PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
ii. The retention, intensification, regeneration and expansion of the existing economic
development premises in Maidstone urban area and the rural service centres provided the
site is in an appropriate location and suited to the economic development use in terms of
scale, impacts and economic viability;
iii. Enhancing the vitality and viability of Maidstone town centre and maintaining the hierarchy
of retail centres;
iv. Supporting proposals that encourage highly skilled residents to work in the borough to
reduce out-commuting;
v. Improving skills in the workforce in particular by supporting further and higher education
provision within Maidstone’s urban area;
vi. Supporting improvements in information and communications technology to facilitate more
flexible working practices;
vii. Prioritising the commercial re-use of existing rural buildings in the countryside over
conversion to residential use, in accordance with policy DM31; and
viii. Supporting proposals for the expansion of existing economic development premises in the
countryside, including tourism related development, provided the scale and impact of the
development is appropriate for its countryside location, in accordance with policy DM37.
4.13 Policy DM1 (Principles of good design) sets out that applications will be permitted providing
that the proposal is created with high quality design and meets a set of criteria relating to good
design.
4.14 Policy DM16 (Town Centre Uses) sets out that proposals for main town centre uses should be
located in an existing centre unless:
i. By means of a sequential approach, it is demonstrated that the proposal could not be
accommodated first on a site within an existing centre and the proposal is located at the
edge of an existing centre, or second it is demonstrated that the proposal could not be
accommodated on a site within or at the edge of an existing centre and the proposal is
located on an accessible out of centre site; and
ii. By means of an impact assessment it is demonstrated that a retail, office or leisure
proposal would not result in a significant adverse impact, cumulative or otherwise, on the
vitality and viability of an existing centre or undermine the delivery of a site allocated for
the use proposed.
4.15 The policy goes on to advise that proposals located at the edge of an existing centre or out of
centre should ensure the provision of specific measures which will improve the quality and
function of sustainable connections to the centre, in particular walking and cycling routes and
public transport links and specific measures which will mitigate the impact of the proposal on
the identified centre or centres. The nature, extent and permanence of the measures will be
directly related to the scale of the proposal.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
11PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
4.16 Supporting text (paragraph 6.73-6.76) states that applicants will be expected to give specific
analysis to the impact of their proposals on the retailers in the primary shopping frontages
because maintaining the health of this core retail area is considered to be particularly important
in sustaining the future vitality and viability of the town centre. Applicants will be expected to
follow a sequential approach when selecting development sites for town centre uses, including
fully exploring how the scheme could be adapted so that it could be accommodated on a more
central site (i.e. 'disaggregation'). The sequential approach, whereby in centre and then edge of
centre sites are selected above well connected out of centre sites, is underpinned by the
principle that sites closest to existing centres are likely to be better served by public transport
and be more accessible by walking and cycling. Development on such sites also increases the
prospect of linked trips, whereby one journey into the centre can serve a number of purposes.
However, it should be noted that the need to consider the potential for disaggregating floorspace
to try and fit on to sequentially preferable sites is no longer required by the NPPF.
4.17 In respect of retail impact assessments, paragraph 7.76 of the Plan is clear in saying that these
will be required for proposals above the NPPF’s specified threshold of 2,500sq m floorspace.
4.18 Policy DM21 (Assessing the Transport Impacts of Development) sets out that new
developments have the potential to generate a considerable number of vehicular and pedestrian
trips which can have both direct and cumulative impacts on the transport network. To further
minimise these impacts, public transport, walking, cycling and highway infrastructure promotion
to minimise vehicular trip generation will be supported.
National Planning Policy Framework
4.19 A revised edition of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in February
2019. The Framework must be taken into account in the preparation of local and neighbourhood
plans and is also a material consideration in planning decisions.
4.20 Two of the objectives of the NPPF were to simplify national planning policy and support and
encourage sustainable economic development. Paragraph 11 makes clear that “Plans and
decisions should apply a presumption in favour of sustainable development”. 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 there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most
important for determining the application are out of date, granting permission unless:
i. the application of policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular
importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or
ii. 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.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
12PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
4.21 Paragraph 80 says that planning policies and decisions should help create the conditions in
which businesses can invest, expand and adapt, and that significant weight should be placed
on the need to support economic growth and productivity. Paragraph 81 goes on to say that
planning policies should, inter alia, be flexible enough to accommodate needs not anticipated in
the plan, to enable a rapid response to changes in economic circumstances. Paragraph 82 says
that planning policies and decisions should recognise and address the specific locational
requirements of different sectors.
4.22 In relation to town centres and retailing, Section 7 of the Framework reiterates previous guidance
that LPAs should support the role that town centres play at the heart of communities, by taking
a positive approach to their growth, management and adaptation, and promote their long-term
vitality and viability. Paragraph 86 requires a sequential approach to selecting sites for main
town centre uses (which include retail development, hotels, restaurants and bars) where they
are not in an existing centre or in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan. The first preference
is for sites within town centres, followed by edge-of-centre locations and only then out-of-centre
sites. Sites must be suitable and available, and both developers and local planning authorities
should demonstrate flexibility on issues such as format and scale.
4.23 Paragraph 89 states that for retail development outside a town centre and not in accordance
with an up-to-date Local Plan, an impact assessment will be required if the development is over
a proportionate locally set floorspace threshold: in the absence of a locally set threshold the
default is 2500sq m. Any such assessment should consider:
• The impact of the proposal on existing, committed and planned public and private
sector investment in a centre or centres within the catchment area of the proposal; and
• The impact on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and
trade in the centre and wider area.
4.24 The NPPF is clear in saying that an assessment of impact may be made up to five years ahead
of when the application is submitted. For major schemes where the full impact will not be
realised in five years the impact should also be assessed up to ten years from the date of the
application.
4.25 Paragraph 90 of the Framework says that where an application fails to satisfy the sequential
test or is likely to have significant adverse impact on the vitality and viability of defined centres,
or planned investment in any centre, it should be refused.
4.26 Section 9 seeks to promote sustainable transport and says, inter alia, that developments that
generate significant movement should be located where the need to travel will be minimised and
the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised.
4.27 Paragraph 153 in Section 14 says that new development should be expected to comply with
local requirements for decentralised energy supply, unless that can be demonstrated to be not
feasible or viable, and take account of landform, layout, building orientation, massing and
landscaping to minimise energy consumption.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
13PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
5 EVALUATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH RETAIL POLICIES
Introduction
5.1 Section 7 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:
○ Impact on existing, committed and planned public and private investment in centres
within the catchment area.
○ Impact on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and
trade in the town centre and wider area.
5.2 Paragraph 90 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 Test
5.3 Both national and local planning policies on retail development mandate a sequential approach
to site selection, whereby the first preference should be locations within town centres, followed
by sites on the edge of a centre and only then out-of-centre sites at accessible locations.
5.4 It is important to note at the outset that the site is located within Maidstone Town Centre as
defined by the Local Plan Policies Map and Policy DM16. It is proposed that the Lidl foodstore
re-locates into an existing retail unit and as such there will no increase in A1 retail floorspace
within the town centre as a result of the development proposals. Given the site’s location in
close proximity to other retail units including Wickes itself and those located in the adjacent St
Peter’s Wharf Retail Park, there is also an ability to link trips to surrounding uses in an
established retail destination.
5.5 Whilst located within the town centre, it is however recognised that the site is located outside of
the primary shopping area. The primary shopping area in Maidstone encompasses the core
retail element of the town centre with further significant retailing and larger retail and bulky goods
units situated on more outlying streets. In order to comply with the provisions of the NPPF and
Policy DM16, a sequential site search has therefore been undertaken.
5.6 In assessing potential sites there is a requirement for them to be both suitable and available,
and for both developers and planning authorities to demonstrate flexibility on issues such as
scale and format. The purpose of searching for alternative sites is to ensure that the identified
need (which can be both quantitative or qualitative) is met in the most appropriate location, and
a number of High Court judgements over the years have established that suitability of potential
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
14PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
sites needs to be judged having regard to the nature of the need (see R v Cambridge City
Council ex parte Warner Village Cinemas Ltd (2000) and JJ Gallagher Ltd v SSL, DTR and
Gateshead MBC (2002).
5.7 Similarly, in considering whether a site is ‘suitable’ under the sequential approach, it has been
established in case law that the requirement is for sites capable of accommodating the broad
type of development that is being proposed by the applicant. This was made clear in the High
Court judgment of Aldergate Properties Ltd v Mansfield District Council (2016) and the
judgement of the Supreme Court in Tesco Stores Limited (Appellants) v Dundee City Council
(Respondents) (Scotland) [2012] UKSC where at paragraph 37 of the judgment Lord Hope
stated:
“It is the proposal for which the developer seeks permission that has to be considered
when the question is asked whether no suitable site is available within or on the edge of
the town centre”.
5.8 In this instance, and as previously stated, it is important to note that the proposed development
is intended to facilitate the continued use of existing retail floorspace, and so it accords with
national policy on making the effective use of land and securing economic growth. The
proposed Lidl will occupy an existing unit which already has a non-food permission: the external
alterations to the building are non-contentious, and the only issue of any note is the widening of
the permission to allow the sale of food.
5.9 While policy requires developers/retailers to be flexible when assessing alternative sites under
the sequential approach, there is no longer a requirement to consider the disaggregation of
floorspace where the development would be split onto separate sites: this has been confirmed
in a number of appeal/call-in decisions, including Rushden Lakes in Northamptonshire (PINS
ref. APP/G2815/V/12/2190175 and Cribbs Causeway in South Gloucestershire
(APP/P0119/V/17/3170627), as well as the judgement of the Court of Appeal in Warners Retail
(Moreton) Ltd v Cotswold District Council (2016). Neither the National Planning Policy
Framework or National Planning Practice Guidance give any detailed guidance as to what
degree of flexibility is required, or what forms it might take, although it is generally held to include
multi-level stores, shared or multi-level parking and innovative servicing arrangements.
5.10 In terms of the site parameters that are essential to enable the Lidl business model to trade
viably, these include:
• A minimum size of store for trading operations to be viable, with the sales floor open and
unencumbered by support columns. Each store requires sufficient space to sell a
standard range of goods and number of lines, but there is some limited scope for flexibility
in the net sales area (principally the width of the aisles), in the rear warehouse and the
amount of customer parking. However, any significant deviation from the standard store
requirement has the potential to undermine the viability of the business model. The
increasing popularity of Lidl stores over the last 10 years has led to the company
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
15PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
increasing its optimum store size, in order to cope with a larger throughput of customers.
The current format is now circa 2,200sq m gross with circa 120 parking spaces- the range
of goods sold in the larger stores is largely the same as in the earlier/smaller formats, but
the additional floorspace allows wider aisles and lower level display shelves, to improve
the shopping experience and enable more efficient restocking.
• Provision of dedicated parking and adequate service access.
• The store must be directly visible from the main road network.
5.11 Like all successful retailers Lidl’s trading format has evolved over time, with stores now providing
more spacious circulation space and the provision of an improved offer, including an area for
the sale of a limited range of fresh bakery goods which were not sold in Lidl’s smaller first
generation stores.
5.12 Limited Assortment Discount stores such as those operated by Lidl are intended to function as
neighbourhood foodstores serving relatively small local catchment areas – these typically
extend to around 5 minutes drivetime.
The Sequential Search
Primary Shopping Area
5.13 The boundary of Maidstone’s Primary Shopping Area is centred around Fremlin Walk, Week
Street and The Mall indoor shopping centre. The majority of the primary shopping area is
pedestrianised and has an attractive environment with low levels of vacancy. The centre benefits
from convenient access to public transport and public car parks.
5.14 The Maidstone Local Plan seeks to maintain and enhance the primary shopping area. However,
while new retail development is directed there, there doesn’t appear to be any suitable vacant
sites or any specifically allocated for new large-scale retail developments.
The Mall
5.15 The Mall is the Town Centre’s main indoor shopping centre and currently contains over 60
separate tenants. Having been approached in respect of a vacant unit on the lower level of the
Mall, Lidl have assessed the suitability of this as an alternative to the application site. The vacant
unit in question is located adjacent to Iceland and JC Rook & Sons on the lower level of the Mall
and extends to only 1,400sq m gross, although there is a further 1,000sq m available at
basement level. Service access is via a delivery bay at basement level from which goods must
then be wheeled through into the building to a delivery lift, which would then take them up to the
store on the lower level. The Mall is served by a multi-storey car park (MSCP) and the owners
have said they would be willing to restrict the floor at the lower level for use by only Iceland and
Lidl customers.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
16PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
5.16 It is accepted that local and national planning policy looks to direct retail uses to town centre
locations and Lidl do operate stores within malls in Uxbridge, Manchester, Liverpool and
Glasgow. However that is only four stores out of more than 800 across the UK, and the reason
for that is because Lidl have found that such stores do not perform very well, with operations
compromised by the non-standard formats that have to be accommodated in order to fit into an
existing shopping mall.
5.17 The format and business models of LADs are different to the mainstream grocery retailers, and
the design of the stores, the interaction of the warehouse and the sales floor and the servicing
and access arrangements are of critical importance. Occupying space in a retail shopping centre
means moving away from the standardised concept store model and utilising floorspace that is
not designed with ‘deep discount’ in mind. This invariably means that the efficiencies and cost
savings that come with a standardised store model are not able to be realised, and therefore
such stores must achieve significantly increased turnover to account for increased operating
costs.
5.18 Given the above, occupying space in a managed shopping centre location must be carefully
considered before Lidl will commit to locating there. Capital & Regional, who are the owners of
the Mall in Maidstone, have said that visitor numbers are in the region of 9 million per annum,
which is not high enough for Lidl to consider it to be a viable location for a store, even before
practical considerations such as store layout and customer and service access. The Chimes in
Uxbridge has visitor numbers of over 11 million annually, Manchester Piccadilly Gardens 30
million, Liverpool Lime Street 15m and Jamaica Street Glasgow 33 million; given none of those
stores perform to their benchmark level a similar format in a location with only 9 million visitors
a year is unlikely to be successful. The LAD business model is based on simplicity, convenience
and efficiency, and the vacant unit in the Mall would have to deviate from the standardised
model, which would then breach those fundamental criteria.
5.19 From a general perspective there is a concern about the prominence and visibility of this part of
the centre in terms of its external profile as it is not highly visible from the road.
5.20 In terms of the customer experience, Capital & Regional have said that the lower level parking
deck in the MSCP could be restricted to only Lidl and Iceland shoppers. However: i) we are
unsure how such a restriction could be effectively policed; ii) we are unclear on the total number
of parking spaces there would be, but on the information we have it is unlikely to be sufficient
given the deck is proposed to be shared with another retailer; iii) there is a gradient down from
the Mall floor which presents a hazard if, for example, someone accidently let go of a trolley; iv)
the MSCP is not set up to cater for trolley shoppers - as a shared deck within a larger MSCP
Lidl would not have full control over ‘their’ car park and assuming trolleys could be incorporated
on this deck store staff would have to be taken off the shop floor to collect/manage them, which
would disrupt the efficiency of the LAD retail model; and v) Lidl normally offer free parking for
customers and trade until 10:00pm Monday to Saturday, while the Mall car park is not free and
closes at 7:00pm.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
17PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
5.21 In terms of servicing, there would be a delivery bay at basement level and a delivery lift up to
the store. Lidl employ delivery drivers as contractors who work alone to load 20-30 pallets off
the lorry directly to and from the store. The distance from the delivery bay to the store, via the
lift, would mean the HGV being left unattended for long periods at a time as the driver would
have to off-load the lorry and wheel the produce into the building, along a corridor, up a lift and
then into the store. In the few store examples where servicing is on a different floor, this has
required the installation of two goods lifts sufficient to transport 12 pallets at a time. This is to
ensure that deliveries are efficient, and HGVs are not left unattended or double parked for long
periods of time whilst deliveries are taking place. The vacant unit in the Mall is serviced by a
single lift and we have seen no information on its capacity – Lidl pallets weigh around one tonne
and require a 2.6m clearance along any corridors and in the lift.
5.22 In summary while relocating the Lidl into the Mall would comply with policy and the sequential
approach, in practice the vacant unit that is being suggested by the landowner is not suitable
and at best would result in a compromised store that would not be able to operate efficiently and
in accordance with the LAD business model. There is also the issue of the Local Plan’s seeking
to bring forward a redevelopment of an area that encompasses the Mall as part of a wider
regeneration of the town centre. This uncertainty over the future of the centre means it would
be unreasonable for the Council to insist that Lidl relocate there when they are promoting its
demolition and rebuilding.
Edge of Primary Shopping Area
5.23 In the absence of any suitable and available sites within the defined primary shopping area, the
next preference is for sites on the edge of the centre, which means land that is well connected
to, and up to 300m from, the primary shopping area. There are no available sites that could
accommodate a Lidl store however the following sites were investigated due to their size and if
they were available to occupy.
Maidstone East and former Royal Mail Sorting Office, Sandling Road, Maidstone
5.24 This is a longstanding development site which Policy SP4 identifies as a priority to assist in the
regeneration of the town centre. The allocation proposes a retail led development of up to
10,000sq m of retail space (comparison and convenience goods); 4,000sq m of offices and circa
210 dwellings, as well as a new entrance into the railway station and the provision of commuter
parking to serve the station. There is no suggestion that a large foodstore is envisaged for the
site and a solus development of a LAD foodstore would not be practical given a comprehensive
development will be required in order to satisfy the various criteria in the policy. In addition to
that the site is not sequentially superior to the application site: in a 2014 planning appeal for
development including a LAD store at Baltic Wharf a short distance from the application site, at
the north end of St Peters Street, the Inspector considered the potential impact of a LAD store
at Baltic Wharf on the Maidstone East/Sorting Office site and concluded that: a) the two sites
were sequentially the same, being within the town centre but outside the primary shopping area;
and ii) the proposed LAD would not have a significant adverse impact on planned investment
on Maidstone East. Given the proposed Lidl is a relocation of their existing store it cannot be
expected to prejudice development on the allocated site.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
18PLANNING & RETAIL STATEMENT
King Street Car Park and former AMF Bowling Site, Maidstone
5.25 This site is allocated for up to 1,400sq m comparison and/or convenience retail and circa 53
dwellings. However, the bowling site has been redeveloped for retirement apartments leaving
just the public car park, which at circa 1,900sq m is too small to accommodate a large foodstore.
Town Centre Allocations
5.26 The Maidstone Local Plan includes two further mixed-use retail allocations which are located
within the town centre boundary but are situated further than 300m away from the Primary
Shopping Area. These include:
• Powerhub building and Baltic Wharf, St Peter's Street, Maidstone - this site is located a
short distance to the north of the application site on St Peters Street and is allocated for
mixed uses including housing, offices, leisure, cafes/restaurants and retail. A
comprehensive development is required and must retain and enhance the listed
Powerhub building. A hybrid planning application was submitted on the site in 2013 that
included a foodstore of up to 7,430sq m gross, and that was approved on appeal in July
2014 but never implemented. It is understood that this was a speculative development
with no food operator signed up, and it can be assumed that the scheme was not attractive
to the market and therefore not taken up. The site is within the town centre but outside
the primary shopping area. We are not aware of any proposals for redevelopment of the
site for food retailing, but sequentially it is on a par with the application site.
• Newnham Park, Bearsted Road, Maidstone - this comprises the existing Newnham Court
Shopping Village and the KIMS Hospital, adjacent to junction 7 of the M20. The
development being sought is an expansion of the existing hospital facilities to provide a
medical campus, but the adjoining shopping village is considered to have a poor visual
appearance so it has been included in the allocation in order that a comprehensive
development may be undertaken that will include replacements for the existing garden
centre and shop units. Given that the intention is that the retail will be replacements for
the existing uses, none of which are food retail, the proposed Lidl cannot be expected to
have any impact on the implementation of this particular allocation. Paragraph 4.207 of
the Plan says that any additional retail over and above the existing space/uses will have
to satisfy the sequential and impact tests and in that respect the site is out-of-centre and
so inferior to the application site on St Peters Street, which is within the town centre.
Conclusions on the Sequential Test
5.27 The sequential search analysis has not identified any available alternative development sites
that could meet the criteria to accommodate a foodstore. In the absence of any alternative site
within or adjoining the primary shopping area, the Wickes Extra site which is already located
within the town centre must be considered to be acceptable under the sequential approach to
site selection.
Planning & Retail Statement | vC | February 2021
rpsgroup.com
19You can also read
