Retail Planning Statement - Broxtoweplanning.broxtowe.gov.uk/(S(uty1go45qksumt450fckhtjz))/Published/... · The Oxylane Group Retail Planning Statement November 2012 gva.co.uk 1 1.

gva.co.uk

Report

Report

GVA 3 Brindleyplace Birmingham B1 2JB

Retail Planning Statement Oxylane Village, Broxtowe Land at Junction 26 of the M1, Nuthall

November 2012

The Oxylane Group Retail Planning Statement

November 2012 gva.co.uk

CONTENTS

1. Introduction............................................................................................................. 1 2. Application Proposals ............................................................................................ 3 3. Decathlon Business Model .................................................................................... 8 4. Garden Centre Business Model .......................................................................... 10 5. Retail Provision Overview..................................................................................... 14 6. Planning Policy Framework ................................................................................. 17 7. Retail Evidence Base............................................................................................ 22 8. NPPF Assessment - Impact On Investment ........................................................ 28 9. NPPF Assessment – Impact On In-Centre Trade ................................................ 35 10. Conclusions........................................................................................................... 44

Appendices

1. Greater Nottingham Retail Study Catchment Plan

2. Retail Provision Plan

3. Sports Facilities Schedule

4. Sports Facilities Goods Range Matrix

5. Garden Centre Facilities Schedule

6. Garden Centre Impact Assessment Methodology

7. Garden Centre Impact Assessment Tables

8. Garden Centre Schedule of Goods


November 2012 gva.co.uk 1

1. Introduction

1.1 This statement has been prepared in support of an outline planning application by

Sportstock Ltd1 for a mixed-use development on land at Junction 26 of the M1 at Nuthall,

Broxtowe Borough. The description of development is as follows:

“Outline planning application with all matters reserved for subsequent approval (except

for means of access) for the construction of a mixed use development (outdoor multi-

sport, lifestyle and recreation facility) incorporating 2 x buildings (5665 sq m and 4535 sq

m) (use class A1 (sports retail)/ A3/D1/D2 or garden centre (with additional outdoor sales

area and polytunnels/ glass houses), a multi use sports building (use class D2), sports

facilities and open space, construction of a new vehicular access, car parking and

associated works”.

1.2 The application scope has been confirmed through detailed pre-application discussions

with Broxtowe Borough Council and relevant statutory and non-statutory consultation

bodies, with a view, in accordance with best practice, to ensure that the submission

represents a robust basis for assessing the proposed development scheme.

1.3 The statement is intended to cover retail planning matters and should be read alongside

the Planning Statement and Alternative Sites Assessment prepared as part of the overall

application submission. These provide considerable detail on the locational context of the

site, the nature of the application proposals, the Oxylane Village concept and the

planning policy framework against which the scheme will be assessed.

1.4 The Alternative Sites Assessment addresses the sequential policy test requirements as set

out in the adopted Local Plan and NPPF. This statement therefore, does not seek to

replicate the wider planning documents, but instead provides a discrete assessment of the

proposed development against the two retail impact tests set out in the NPPF (para. 26).

The statement is accordingly structured as follows:

• Section 2 – Application Context summarises the proposal in more detail, confirming

the nature of the retail offer.



• Section 3 – Decathlon Business Model sets out the nature of the Decathlon offer in

terms of product ranges, customer experience and operational constraints.

• Section 4 – Garden Centre describes the likely nature of the operation (no operator

identified as part of the application).

• Section 5 – Retail Provision Overview details the location of existing provision within the

Greater Nottingham PUA and the product ranges on offer.

• Section 6 - Planning Policy Framework sets out the statutory development plan and

specific policy tests against which the emerging proposals will be determined.

• Section 7 – Retail Evidence Base summarises the main findings of the Greater

Nottingham Retail Study which currently informs the development of the emerging

Joint Core Strategy.

• Section 8 – NPPF Assessment (Investment) considers the application proposals against

the impact on investment test.

• Section 9– NPPF Assessment (In-Centre Trade) identifies the likely trading impacts of

the proposals and the significance on existing in-centre provision.

• Section 10 – Summary Conclusions draws together the main points arising and

demonstrates that the proposal should be positively determined

1.5 The next section introduces the site in its terms of its location and surroundings.

1 Within the UK, the legal structure of the Oxylane Group comprises the retail company, Decathlon, and the property company, Sportstock Ltd.



2. Application Proposals

2.1 The application proposals seek to deliver a new sport, health and well-being destination

concept known as Oxylane Village. The Planning Statement provides a full description of

the concept supporting the project.

2.2 The focus of the proposal however, is to deliver grass roots, family-focused sports and

recreation facilities aimed at faciltating improved lifestyle choice. The result will be to

create the potential to increase levels of participation, ultimately improving health and

well-being. The concept builds on the Sport England model of ‘community sports hubs’ - a

mix of public and private sector sport and leisure facilities, enabled by supporting

commercial development and located on one site to give critical mass, increase footfall

and generate economies of scale.

2.3 The project is however, distinctly different in that it is led by private sector finance and will

deliver significant inward investment to the Borough in terms of delivery of new facilities

(site and infrastructure) and a significant level of new employment opportunities.

Importantly, the project will also deliver around £2.7m of investment in the local highway

network, which will alleviate congestion over and abve that required by the development.

1) LAYOUT AND FACILITIES

2.4 In physical terms, whilst the outline application does not seek to fix layout at this stage, the

concept masterplan details how the proposed development is likely to be laid out into

four distinct zones, as follows:

• THE HUB, which occupies the north east of the site and comprises all of the proposed

built development, the Village Square, a children’s games / multi-sport area,

associated car parking and delivery yard. A bus drop-off point, with shelter and

timetable information would also be situated in this zone, outside the main building

• PRAIRIE (PARK), which occupies the north west of the site, and comprises an extensive

area of parkland providing space for informal sport and recreation

• TEAM SPORTS, which comprises all of the formal sports facilities, including football

pitches and tennis courts in the south east of the site



• ADVENTURE, which includes the aerial rope walk experience, closed circuit cycle track

and BMX track in the south west of the site

2.5 With specific regard to the external facilities provided within the Prairie, Team Sports and

Adventure elements of the scheme, the current proposals, which have been developed in

consultation with sporting partners such as the Football Association and other national

governing bodies (NGB’s), and the Local Planning Authority and will include;

• 3.4 hectare Prairie (or park);

• 3 junior grass football pitches;

• All-weather 3G football centre;

• 4 tennis / netball courts;

• A closed circuit cycle track;

• BMX track;

• Adventure golf area;

• Multi-use community games area; and

• Woodland adventure (high ropes).

2.6 A network of footpaths / cycleways will also be provided throughout the development.

2) BUILT DEVELOPMENT - USE AND QUANTUM

2.7 Whilst the majority of the application site will be used for the purposes of outdoor sport and

recreation (Class D2) activities, the proposed built development element comprises 2

principal buildings (main and partner), along with a sport box (although this would not be

used for retail puposes and is therefore not assesed within the statement. The main and

partner buildings are are summarised below.

A) MAIN BUILDING

2.8 The proposed main building is to be operated as a Class A1 Decathlon sports store with a

total gross external floorspace of 5,655 m2 (5,000 m2 net retail sales). The building would

also include ancillary offices (back of house administrative function), meeting rooms etc.

It is intended that Decathlon would operate the proposed main building.



2.9 In this respect, the existing Decathlon store at Giltbrook Retail Park (out-of-centre) would

relocate to the main building within the new Oxylane Village; The existing store has a

ground floor retail sales area of 3,678 m2. The proposed new Decathlon store at Oxylane

Village would have a net sales area of 5,000 m2 and therefore delivers an uplift in net sales

of 1,322 m2.

2.10 Notwithstanding this position, Oxylane Group require maximum flexibility of use in order to

ensure commercial viability and the availability of corporate funding for the project. As a

result, the main building is proposed to include the following retail uses;

• Sports retail; Class A1 store (5000 m2 net retail sales) or

• Garden centre use; Class A1 store (2,937 m2 net retail sales area).

2.11 This would be in addition to the uses within Class D1 or D2 of the Use Classes Order, subject

to appropriate controls as set out in the Planning Statement.

2.12 In terms of the proposed garden centre use, whilst the main building has a footprint of

5655 m2, , it is proposed that the net sales area for the main building would be limited to.

2,937 m2 net sales), similar to the partner building if used as a garden centre. This would

enable storage areas to be provided, and would reflect that whilst the partner building

includes external storage areas, this is not the case with the main building.

2.13 As a result, use of the main building for such an alternative use would generate a need for

a greater proportion of floorspace to be set aside for storage puposes.

B) PARTNER BUILDING

2.14 Oxylane are currently in discussions with a range of potential partners about occupying

some or all of the partner building. The proposed end use therefore needs to remain

flexible at this stage and could comprise either of the following uses:

• Garden centre use; Class A1 store (4,535 m2 gross internal) with associated open-air

plant sales (8,680 m2 gross; 2,937 m2 net retail sales); or

• Sports retail; Class A1 store (2, 937 m2 net retail sales).

2.15 In terms of retail use of the partner building, given that assessment for garden centre use is

based upon 2,937 m2 , the amount is also utilised to assess a potential retail use, given the



need for storage and administrative space etc, which would also need to be

accomodated within the building shell.

2.16 The subsequent retail impact assessment therefore, seeks to identify the individual and

cumulative impacts of the potential alternative uses for the main building (i.e. uplift in

floorspace associated with Decathlon relocation or garden centre use) and partner

building (Class A1 sports retail or garden centre use).

2.17 In terms of the alternative uses, Oxylane Group have sought to focus on the types of

alternative uses that would not conflict or result in adverse impact upon town centre uses

and would ensure that the concept for the proposal remains focused on sport and leisure.

C) SPORT BOX

2.18 The proposed development also includes a sports box, which would be used solely for the

purposes of sport and recreation. The use of the building is described within the Planning

Statement and falls outside of the scope of the NPPF tests. The buuilding is not therefore

considered further within this report.

3) USER RESTRICTIONS

2.19 In order to deliver certainty, it is proposed that both the main and partner buildings would

be subject to appropriate planning conditions to restrict the nature of the operation and

range of goods that can be sold from the site.

A) MAIN BUILDING

2.20 It is proposed that the Class A1 retail use within the main building be restricted by planning

condition to the sale of sports goods, equipment and accessories in order to prevent the

premises being used for other retail activities which might impact adversely on existing

centres without applying for planning permission. Such a planning condition (to be

agreed with the Local Planning Authority) could potentially be worded as follows:

“The retail floorspace hereby permitted within the main building shall be used for the sale

of sports goods, equipment and accessories (up to 5000 m2 net), or for garden centre use

(up to 2937 m2 net), Class D1 or D2 use (excluding gym or swimming pool) and for no other

purpose whatsoever, including any purpose set out in Class A1 of the Schedule of the

Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).”



2.21 The net sales area could also be formalised via an appropriate planning condition.

B) PARTNER BUILDING

2.22 As with the main building, it is proposed that the Class A1 retail use within the partner

building is restricted by planning condition in order to prevent the premises being used for

retail activities which might impact adversely on existing centres. Given that the proposed

partner building could potentially comprise a garden centre, a proposed planning

condition could be worded as follows:

The retail floorspace hereby permitted within the partner building shall be used for the sale

of sports goods, equipment and accessories (up to 2937 m2 net) or as a garden centre (up

to 2937 m2 net), Class D1 or D2 use (excluding gym or swimming pool) and for no other

purpose whatsoever, including any purpose set out in Class A1 of the Schedule of the

Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).

2.23 As with the main building, an appropriate planning condition can formalise the net sales

area of the partner building under either the garden centre or sports retail use scenario.



3. Decathlon Business Model 3.1 The proposed main building (Class A1 sport retail use) is to be occupied and operated by

Decathlon or alternatively as a garden centre.

3.2 Decathlon’s business model and retail offer is summarised below. However, in the first

instance, it is important to note that Decathlon is proposing to relocate from its existing

retail store at the out-of-centre Giltbrook Retail Park to the proposed Oxylane Village; the

delivery of the new facility can be linked to relocation through a s106 legal agreement.

3.3 It should also be noted that Decathlon has no ongoing control of the existing store once its

leasehold interest is terminated.

3.4 The existing Decathlon store at Giltbrook Retail Park currently comprises the following:

Floor Description / Use Area (m2)

Ground Sales 3,678

Ground Plant Room (back-of-house) 23

Office Office (back-of-house) 519

TOTAL AREA 4,220

3.5 In terms of the proposed new Decathlon store, the buildings would have a net retail sales

area of 5,000 m2. The creates an uplift in net sales area, relative to the existing out-of-

centre Giltbrook store of 1,322 m2.

The Operator

3.6 Decathlon are an international brand and part of the Oxylane Group’s original chain.

Retailing in 18 countries with 541 stores worldwide, each individual store houses up to 70

sports and on average 35,000 products. Decathlon has in the region of 60,000 employees

with 6,000 staff recruited every year, worldwide.

3.7 Through a worldwide network of stores, Decathlon sells their own exclusive ‘passion’ brand

products alongside other international brands many of which are unique to Decathlon in

the UK. The ethos of the company is to provide affordable sports equipment across as



many different sports as possible. All the stores are also focussed on working with local

communities to encourage mass-participation in sport.

Customer Experience

3.8 Customers can get advice from Sales Assistants who are all sports enthusiasts themselves.

Customers can find products ranging in price from entry level to top of the range and

there is a large choice on offer in terms of well-known international and passion brands.

3.9 Customers can try out potential products free of charge both within the store, which is

designed and laid out for this purpose, and in the external try-out environment before

making a purchase. After-sales care is also important to Decathlon and most stores have

workshops staffed by a team of professional technicians for tuning, servicing and repairs.

Such an approach to sales makes sport more accessible and desirable which in turn

makes more people want to get involved, raising physical activity participation levels.

3.10 Decathlon aim to keep prices as low as possible while focusing on 3 levels of expertise;

• First time starter packs

• Intermediate level

• Competitively priced high technicality products

3.11 Decathlon offer a range of products widely recognised in Europe and they also offer what

is termed their ‘Passion’ brands that represent the core of what Oxylane is aiming to

achieve, through the Decathlon stores. Passion brands are offer value for money, are

accessible and technically easy to use.

3.12 Decathlon prides themselves on the quality of the product and by listening to customer

feedback and continually improving the practical qualities of their products so the long

term satisfaction of their customers is achieved. Each Decathlon store seeks to respond to

the interests and demands of the local area, liaising with local clubs and community

groups so that the range of products on offer meets their needs. Given the wide range of

products designed, manufactured and sold by Decathlon these can be provided with a

high level of technicality at the best price possible.



3.13 Decathlon is leading the sports retailing market in the UK in terms of its range, pricing and

customer and staff initiatives. Decathlon currently operates out of a stand-alone retail

warehouse format and has 14 stores in the UK with an ambition to grow to 120 stores.

The Store

3.14 Decathlon store layout and design differs from most high street sports goods retailers in

that it offers a ‘self-informed choice’ which translates into the layout of the store,

incorporating wider aisles allowing for greater space so that customers can trial the

products around the store before buying. In the case of this proposal customers will also

be able to sample the products in an outdoor sports area outside of the store or within the

adjacent sports facilities forming the Oxylane Village

3.15 The level of comparison between Decathlon stores and high street sports retailers is limited.

High street sports stores are usually located within town and city centres, they are usually

independently operated and focused on a small number of specialist products or they are

part of a chain focussed on fashion sports branded clothing and footwear.

3.16 Decathlon offer a one stop shop approach delivering a full range of sports goods, many of

which are bulky items such as cycling, canoeing, table tennis or camping equipment

which is not suited to a town centre format. The majority of sales are of own brand

products exclusive to Decathlon and therefore, not directly comparable to products at

any other location.

3.17 In addition, all textile and footwear products have been designed for a specific sporting

usage and incorporate technical functionality to support that usage. The retailing of

fashion clothing and footwear is not part of Decathlon’s commercial policy from a

marketing perspective.



Product Range

3.18 Decathlon has an ‘all sports inclusive’ approach and they stock a number of ranges in any

one store. The range of sports and activities of goods which are routinely stocked in a

Decathlon store include:

• Camping;

• Combat Sports (martial arts,

boxing);

• Cycling (bikes, accessories,

components, tools);

• Fishing;

• Fitness / Gym / Dance;

• Golf;

• Hiking;

• Horse riding;

• Ice Skating;

• Mountain sports;

• Racket sports (badminton,

squash, tennis, table tennis, out-

of-court);

• Roller and Skate;

• Running;

• Ski and Snowboard;

• Team Sports (basket ball, cricket,

football, handball, rugby,

volleyball);

• Target Sports (archery, darts);

• Swimming;

• Walking;

• Water sports (boating, canoeing,

kayaking, surfing, diving).

3.19 As detailed above, Decathlon will tailor the range of goods on offer to meet the interests

and demands of the surrounding area. To deliver this concept, Decathlon requires an

accessible and relatively low cost location as many of the items are bulky and cannot be

economically and efficiently merchandised in a more constrained high cost environment

(i.e. town centre format).

3.20 In the region of 75% of sales are own brand products exclusive to Decathlon and therefore

are not directly comparable to other standard (branded) sports retail stores. All textile and

footwear products have been designed for a specific sporting use and incorporate

technical functionality to support the activity (i.e. waterproofing, breathability etc.).



3.21 The retailing of sports fashion clothing and footwear is not part of Decathlon’s commercial

policy from a marketing perspective unlike sectoral competitors such JD Sports, JJB Sports

and Sports Direct.

Decathlon – Operational Constraints

3.22 Given that Decathlon already operates a full range store at Giltbrook Retail Park near to

the application site, it would be onerous to expect the applicant to demonstrate

disaggregation of sales format when the new proposal effectively provides for a relocated

but enhanced store offer.

3.23 Decathlon is also constrained by its business model in respect of the ability to occupy town

centre locations given the low density bulky retail nature of its offer.

3.24 A high proportion of floorspace within its existing stores is dedicated to the display of bulky

items and the store needs appropriate car parking proximity adjacent to the store, given

that most customers need to transfer goods to their vehicles without significant

inconvenience (particular for larger goods). Many of the products are genuinely bulky by

reference to size, volume and weight and cannot be carried on public transport nor as

part of a linked shopping trip. The majority of Decathlon purchases are not delivered.

3.25 Taking these considerations into account, including the requirement for the sale and

display of bulky goods, the operational needs to display stock on the sales floor (rather

than within a large stock holding area) and the significant amount of retail sales area

required to display the extensive product range of bulky goods, the retail operation

requires a large format store.



4. Garden Centre Business Model

4.1 The proposed main and partner buildings within the scheme could both accommodate a

garden centre use. Whilst no specific operator is identified at this stage, the likely business

model of such a use is summarised below for reference and to inform the subsequent retail

assessment.

Nature of the Operation

4.2 The proposals are to create (in part) a garden centre retail operation with both indoor and

external sales areas. Due to the nature of the majority of products sold, a modern high

quality garden centre operation incorporates space-expansive displays and includes

large aisles to create an enjoyable and relaxing atmosphere for customers.

4.3 The proposed garden centre would seek to operate through the specialist combination of

space expansive retail products sold and the attractive ‘day out’ leisure experience that

they would offer their customers. The business model therefore, relies on a specialised

range of goods being sold and seeks to create a unique quasi retail / leisure destination

which offers consumers the highest quality visitor experience.

Core Goods

4.4 The primary range of goods would encompass a wide range of products and services that

relate to horticulture, nature and associated lifestyles. The core products are plants and

gardening products with the majority of the other products tailored to support sustainable

horticulture. The homeware product ranges are likely to primarily include goods which are

sold in support of outdoor living, garden furniture and barbecues, whilst similarly children’s

garden accessories/toys will be themed towards horticulture, nature and the garden.

4.5 The range of goods is consistent with most garden centres models and which is consistent

with those visited as part of the qualitative assessment undertaken and as set out at

Appendices 2 and 3.

4.6 In addition to selling a core range of garden, plants, horticulture and outdoor (garden)

goods, the garden centre is likely to include a convenience food hall element. This



convenience offer would be ancillary to the main operation of the garden centre and

would specialise in selling high quality, locally sourced produce and convenience

products. On the basis of comparable modern garden centres elsewhere, it is likely that

the convenience offer would comprise a ‘farm foodhall’ format.

4.7 It is estimated that the ‘farm foodhall’ element of the overall garden centre would be

limited to c. 450 m2; this would ensure that it remains ancillary to the main operation and

occupies only a small percentage of the total floorspace.

Concessions

4.8 The sale of certain goods requires specialist knowledge and/or specialist back up services,

referred to as ‘concessions’. Particular examples would be garden sheds, greenhouses

and conservatories where the design, transportation, construction and ongoing

maintenance require significant back up. Another example is garden machinery, where

the repair and maintenance is a significant part of the service.

4.9 In addition to the primary range of goods sold, all modern garden centre operations

require some flexibility to be able to satisfactorily plan for future changes to their product

range and seasonal variations. This may include, from time to time, introducing certain

goods that would not fall within those listed under their primary range. Referred to as

‘ancillary unrestricted comparison retailing’, it is proposed that an allowance of 15% of the

total sales floorspace (internal and external) is permitted for the sale of such goods, to

provide at least some flexibility in this regard. The applicant would be willing to accept a

similar appropriately worded condition in this case.

4.10 These controls will help ensure that the proposals would not, at any future point, lead to

significant adverse impact on defined centres, as examined below. It also ensures that

any planning permission specific to the garden centre operation cannot revert to more

mainstream type retail activity at the site.

Range of goods

4.11 A list of proposed primary range of goods is provided at Appendix 8; the range of goods

within this list have formed the basis of the retail assessment.



4.12 The schedule of goods enclosed has been accepted by a number of local authorities

over recent years in relation to other garden centre proposals, as befitting the type of

retail operation one would anticipate to experience at a new modern, high quality

garden centre.

Garden Centre- Operational Constrints

4.13 The nature of operations associated with a garden centre creates unique physical and

location constraintsas follows:

• A garden centre facility requires both internal heated space and sales area as well as

external unheated covered areas for the display and cultivation of garden and

horticultural goods;

• Appropriate circulation (aisle) space is required in order to maintain an appropriate

cultivation and shopping environment; garden and horticultural products cannot be

stored intensively like standard retail products. The space utilisation for garden centres

is by its very nature not as efficient as Class A1 foodstores for example.

• An external yard area with appropriate storage tanks for watering / cultivation and

direct deliveries is required;

• It would be highly unlikely for visitors to the garden centre to undertake linked

shopping trips on foot with garden and horticultural products given the bulk of some

plants and products; and

• Direct access to a car park in front of the garden centre facility is required in order to

enable customers to transfer purchased garden and horticultural goods into their

vehicles without restrictions given the bulk of some plants and products.

• A garden centre use is space intensive and would clearly not generate sufficient sales

productivity to trade within a town centre scheme. A garden centre has a

traditionally low sales density (horticultural items are not high value goods) and is also

influenced by seasonal patterns of trade.


display of bulky goods, the operational needs to display stock inside and outside results in

a need for a large format store in a non town centre location.



4.15 As a result, It is therefore considered at the outset that the proposed garden centre would

not have an the impact on existing, planned or committed in-centre schemes given the

specific nature of the offer.



5. Retail Provision Overview

5.1 In order to inform the retail impact assessment, it is important to understand the nature

and location of comparable retail provision (garden centre and sports retail) within the

catchment of the application proposals. A comprehensive site search exercise to identify

existing national multiple and local independent retailer provision has therefore been

undertaken. This exercise has been supplemented by visits to the respective sites to

understand the nature of the offer and the product ranges available.

Location of Existing Provision

5.2 A detailed plan showing the existing sports and garden centre provision within the Greater

Nottingham Primary Urban Area (defined as the proposed catchment for the purposes of

the sequential assessment2) is provided at Appendix 2 for reference.

5.3 However, the main sports and garden centre provision relative to the application site is

summarised below for reference:

• Kimberley Town Centre (Broxtowe); the town centre primarily comprises a Sainsbury’s

foodstore with a limited retail and service offer3. There is no garden centre or sports

retail provision within the town centre.

• Eastwood Town Centre (Broxtowe); the town centre primarily performs a convenience

shopping function (Morrison’s) with a commensurate retail and service offer4. There is

no sports retail provision within the town centre aside from a local independent

angling store. A small pet shop is also located within the town centre.

• Eastwood (Out-Of-Centre); a B&Q warehouse is located at Bailey Grove Industrial

Estate on Derby Road. Independent garden centres (Shaw Rueben is located to the

north east of the town in a semi-rural location.

• Giltbrook Retail Park (Broxtowe); existing Decathlon store (4,220 m2 net) is located at

the out-of-centre retail and leisure park at present. Other national multiple bulky and

2 Refer to submitted Alternative Sites Assessment. 3 As detailed in the Joint Aligned Core Strategy retail background paper (refer to Chapter 7 of the report). 4 Ibid.



high street comparison retailers present include Boots, BHS, Comet, IKEA and Pets at

Home.

• ilkeston town centre (broxtowe); the town centre performs a convenience and

comparison shopping function. Sports retail provision within the town centre

comprises a small Sports Direct shop and two small local independent cycle shops.

• Waterside Retail Park (Broxtowe); the out-of-centre retail park includes a Halfords store

which retails a variety of bicycle products.

5.4 It is clear from the on-site review of surrounding centres that the existing garden centre

and sports retail offer (Decathlon aside) within the main centres in the borough and the

wider borough-wide catchment is relatively limited and already operates alongside out-

of-centre provision located within large retail parks in Broxtowe (Waterside and Giltbrook)

and Nottingham (Riverside, Victoria etc.).

Qualitative Review of Existing Provision

5.5 A detailed assessment of the range and quality of goods provided within existing garden

centre and sports retail provision within the Greater Nottingham PUA (defined catchment)

has been undertaken in support of the application.

Sports Retail Provision

5.6 Sports provision within the wider Greater Nottingham PUA is dissipated and is split between

out-of-centre retail park locations (i.e. JJB Sports at Lady Bay retail park; the store at

Riverside Retail Park closed in mid September) and Nottingham city centre.

5.7 Existing sports retail provision within the catchment was assessed in terms of the ability to

provide any or all of the standard Decathlon offer. The review is provided at Appendices

3 and 4 for reference. However, in summary, the review indicates the following:

• No one store would be able to offer a width of range which would ordinarily be

provided within either the existing (Giltbrook) or proposed relocation Decathlon store

(Oxylane Village).

• Where the stores were able to provide a wide range these tended to be extremely

focussed in relation to a specific sport or activity (i.e. team sports, cycling or angling).



• Where independent retailers attempted to meet the requirements of a wide range of

sporting activities, the width of the range provided is extremely poor and limited in

terms of quality and price.

• Those retailers offering the most expansive product range were generally national

retailers specialising in general sport or sports-specific activities (JJB, Sports Direct,

Halfords etc.).

• Aside from the existing Decathlon store at Giltbrook, there are no significant multi-sport

focussed facilities available to meet the wide-ranging needs for sport and leisure

goods across a wide range of sports activities.

5.8 On this basis and having regard to the overall nature of sports retailing within the principal

shopping centres in the Greater Nottingham PUA, it is clear that none of the centres are

reliant to any extent upon sports good representation. The majority of centres within the

catchment have a very low representation of sports goods operators.

Garden Centre Provision

5.9 Consistent with the review of sports retail provision within the Greater Nottingham PUA set

out above, a detailed review of garden centre provision within the catchment has been

undertaken to inform the retail (impact) assessment. The review of existing provision is

provided at Appendix 5 for reference.

5.10 However, in summary, in relation to the wider Greater Nottingham PUA, the garden centre

provision is predominantly located at out-of-centre retail parks (national multiple DIY

operators such as Homebase and B&Q) or semi-rural locations (nurseries etc.). There is an

extremely limited horticultural / garden centre offer within any defined centre in the PUA

given its relatively specialist nature.

5.11 Therefore, in the subsequent assessment of impact, it is important to recognise that the

vitality and viability of defined centres within the Greater Nottingham PUA are not

sustained by a garden centre offer.



6. Planning Policy Framework

6.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Act 2004 and Section 70(2) of the Town and

Country Planning Act 1990 requires that applications for planning permission must be

determined in accordance with the statutory development plan unless material

considerations indicate otherwise.

6.2 The adopted statutory development plan for Broxtowe Borough, where the application

site is located, presently comprises:

• The ‘saved’ policies of the Broxtowe Local Plan, adopted in September 2004; and

• Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the East Midlands.

6.3 In addition to the statutory development plan, the following documents should be given

appropriate weight in the planning assessment:

• Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) prepared by the Council to amplify

existing UDP policy requirements;

• The emerging Greater Nottingham ‘Aligned’ Core Strategy; and

• National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), published March 2012.

6.4 The planning statement prepared in support of the application provides a comprehensive

overview of the current statutory development plan framework and other planning

guidance. Given that this statement solely addresses itself to retail planning matters, only

relevant retail and town centre based policies are summarised below.

1) Statutory Development Plan

Broxtowe Local Plan

6.5 The Broxtowe Local Plan was adopted in September 2004 and the majority of existing

policies have been ‘saved’ until the emerging Joint Core Strategy is adopted. The retail

and town centre policies relevant to the proposal are set out below.



Site Specific Policy

6.6 The site is identified as Green Belt in the adopted Local Plan. It is located outside of any

defined centre and therefore, constitutes an out-of-town location for the purposes of retail

planning policy.

Retail Policy

6.7 Adopted UDP policy S3 largely reflects the former PPG6 retail policy guidance at the time

of Local Plan adoption in 2004. The policy states that proposals for retail and associated

development of more than 1,000 m2 gross floorspace will be permitted outside town

centre locations only if:

• There is an identified need for the proposed development;

• Availability of a site for the proposed development has been examined and

demonstrated to be unsuitable, first in town centres, and then in edge-of-centre

locations, before any proposal to locate elsewhere is considered;

• The site (if an edge of centre location) is within convenient walking distance of a

prime shopping frontage within the town centre;

• The proposal, either by itself or when considered with other committed schemes,

would not harm the viability or vitality of any of the defined town centre, or any other

town centre in a neighbouring authority;

• The proposal would be well served by public transport and would be easily accessible

by bicycle and on foot; and

• The proposal includes appropriate provision for access, servicing and car parking, and

the traffic generated by the proposal would be accommodated satisfactorily on the

local highway network.

6.8 As will be detailed later in the report, the adopted policy has been superseded by the

publication of NPPF in March 2012. The requirement to identify need is not consistent with

the NPPF. It is considered therefore that the relevant NPPF policies and tests should prevail

in the assessment of the application proposals.



Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS)

6.9 Whilst it is the Government’s stated intention is to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS),

the revocation process has been delayed so that environmental assessment can been

undertaken; RSS therefore remains part of the statutory development plan. The stated

intention does however constitute a material consideration in assessing applications.

6.10 In terms of retail development, RSS policy 22 – Regional Priorities for Town Centres and

Retail Development which seeks to prevent the development of regional scale out-of-

town retail and leisure floorspace.

6.11 With specific regard to the compliance of the application proposals against the RSS policy

22, it is considered that it is not relevant in this instance for the following reasons:

• The policy was informed by a Regional Centres Study from 2003 which sought to

identify quantitative capacity and priorities across the region. There is no longer a

requirement to demonstrate need in consideration of application proposals. The

policy has been largely superseded by NPPF.

• The defined catchment set out in the Alternative Sites Assessment corresponds to the

Greater Nottingham Principal Urban Area (PUA). The catchment is of a sub-regional

rather than regional significance. The proposed Oxylane Village scheme would not

attract significant inflow of trade from the wider East Midlands region given the

proposed nature of the Class A1 retail offer.

• The overall quantum of Class A1 retail development proposed for occupation by

either Class A1 sports retail or garden centre uses (or a combination of both) only

totals c. 7,900 m2 net floorspace under the scenario whereby Decathlon occupies the

main building and the partner building is occupied by either a Class A1 sports retail or

garden centre use (2,937 m2). This quantum is not of a regional significance when

compared to the overall quantum of floorspace in surrounding centres.

6.12 On this basis it is our view that the requirements of RSS policy are not relevant in this

instance. The scheme would not constitute a regional scale out-of-town proposal.



2) Non-Statutory Development Plan Considerations

6.13 As detailed in the introduction to this chapter, the emerging Joint Aligned Greater

Nottinghamshire Core Strategy and the recently published National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) do not form part of the statutory development plan. Appropriate

material weight can however be applied by the Council in its overall assessment of the

application; the relevant provisions of the respective policy guidance is set out below.

A) Local Development Framework (Ldf) – Draft Core Strategy

6.14 The Joint (Aligned) Core Strategy (Broxtowe, Gedling and Nottingham) has been

significantly delayed due to changes in national policy. Whereas the original plan

preparation programme identified that the Core Strategy would be subject to formal

(public) examination in Summer 2012, consultation has only just finished (July 2012) on the

publication version (published June 2012).

6.15 Therefore, in accordance with the transitional arrangements identified in the recently

published NPPF, limited weight can be given to the emerging Core Strategy at this stage.

The emerging policies do however provide a useful ‘direction of travel’ and are therefore

summarised below for reference.

Policy 6 – Role of Town and Local Centres

6.16 The policy identifies the role of individual centres and the sub-regional hierarchy. In

relation to retail and leisure uses in edge and out-of-centre locations, the policy details

that proposals will need to demonstrate suitability through a sequential site approach and

provide a robust assessment of impact on nearby centres.

6.17 The thresholds for the scale of main town centre development in edge and out-of-centre

locations is to be established through subsequent Development Plan Documents (DPDs).

B) National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

6.18 The NPPF was published in March 2012 and sets out the Government’s planning policies

having replaced the former suite of Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) notes and Planning

Policy Statements (PPS) . The NPPF is a material consideration in planning decisions and

local planning authorities are directed to approach decision making in a positive way,

looking for ‘solutions’ rather than ‘problems’.



6.19 At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. In

determining planning applications, local authorities are required to approve development

proposals that accord with the development plan without delay. Where a development

plan is absent, silent or out-of-date (the Broxtowe Local Plan was adopted in September

2004), planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so

would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the

NPPF as a whole. The core planning principles running through the NPPF are summarised

below.

Ensuring the Vitality Of Town Centres

6.20 In seeking to promote competitive town centre environments, local planning authorities

are required from a planning policy perspective to (amongst others):

• Promote competitive town centres that provide customer choice and a diverse retail

offer and which reflect the individuality of town centres;

• Meet the needs for retail uses in full and ensure that delivery is not compromised by

limited site availability.

• Allocate appropriate edge-of-centre sites for main town centre uses that are well

connected to the town centre where suitable and viable town centre sites are not

available.

6.21 In assessing planning applications, local planning authorities are required to:

• Apply the sequential test with edge of centre sites supported only if there are no in-

centre alternatives available and that the site is accessible and well connected to the

town centre;

• Assess the impact of a proposal on existing, committed and planned public and

private investment in a centre or centres in the catchment area of the proposal; and

• Assess the impact of a proposal on town centre vitality and viability, including local

consumer choice and trade in the town centre and wider area up to five years from

the time an application is made.

6.22 The NPPF directs that where an application fails to satisfy the sequential test or is likely to

have significant adverse impact on one or more of the above factors it should be refused.



7. Retail Evidence Base

7.1 The emerging Core Strategy retail policy is currently informed by the Greater Nottingham

Retail Study, published in January 2008. The study primarily identifies shopping patterns for

food and non-food goods prior to identifying the quantitative need for new provision and

where this need is best met in locational terms.

7.2 Accompanying the quantitative-based study, a separate qualitative-based assessment,

including healthcheck, of the main town centres within the Greater Nottingham area has

been completed as part of a supplementary retail background paper (June 2012) to

inform the emerging Core Strategy.

A) Greater Nottingham Retail Study (2007)

7.3 The study follows a standard methodology in identifying a series of catchment zones

across Greater Nottingham, quantifying the level of expenditure available within the zones

and apportioning this to destinations (centres and individual stores) in accordance with

the household telephone survey results for food and non-food shopping (c. 2,000 survey

sample). The main headline points are as follows:

• Catchment; the application site is located within survey zone 6 which covers a

significant area around the north and west of Nottingham including Broxtowe,

Hucknall, Heanor and Ilkeston.

The M1 motorway does however form the boundary between Broxtowe and the City

of Nottingham administrative area which is located within survey zone 4.

• Available Comparison Retail Expenditure; comparison non-food expenditure within

the Broxtowe catchment (survey zone 6) is projected to increase over the emerging

Core Strategy period (to 2026) as follows:

2011 2016 2021 2026

£473.4m £579.4m £719.7m £893.1m



• Recreational Goods Expenditure; the assessment projects that there was £115.6m of

recreational goods expenditure available within the Broxtowe catchment (survey zone

6) in 20075.

• Diy / Garden Goods Expenditure; the assessment projects that there was £47.9m of DIY

and garden goods expenditure available within the Broxtowe catchment (survey zone

6) in 2007.

• Market Share (2007); the household survey results (2007) identify the following DIY /

Garden Goods and Recreational Goods shopping patterns in the Broxtowe

catchment (survey zone 6):

Destination DIY / Garden Goods Recreational Goods TOTAL RETAIL SALES (2011)6

Nottingham City Centre 7.3% / £1.9m 43.6% / £4.1m £27.7m

Nottingham – Non-Central (Retail Warehousing)

6.7% / £5.6m 0% / £0m £28.4m

Eastwood Town Centre 25.6% / £12.2m 2.3% / £2.6m £28.7m

Kimberley Town Centre 2% / £0.9m 0% / £0 £4.1m

Broxtowe – Non-Central (Retail Warehousing)7

2% / NA 0% / NA £28.7m

Derby 2% 9.4% -

Illkeston 18.2% 14.3% -

Hucknall 4.4% 4.9% -

Heanor8 2% 3.4% -

• Quantitative Capacity [Scenario 1]; rolling forward the overall comparison turnover of

the respective destinations on a constant market share basis, the assessment identifies

the following capacity:

5 All Other Comparison Goods includes Books, Jewellery and Watches, China, Glassware and Kitchen Utensils; and Recreational and Luxury Goods 6 Total Retail Sales includes all comparison expenditure (clothing, furniture, textiles, household appliances, audio-visual, DIY / Garden, Chemist and Beauty and all other comparison goods (as per footnote 1) drawn to destination. 7 Table 90 does not indicate sales by goods due to market share data from household telephone survey is insufficient 8 Retail Assessment does not indicate comparison retail turnover for centres outside of the Greater Nottingham area (as defined for purposes of Joint Core Strategy)



FLOORSPACE CAPACITY Destination

2011 2016 2021 2026

Nottingham City Centre -£130.7m

(-20,350 m2 net)

-£21.3m

(-3,100 m2 net)

£150.7m

(20,400 m2 net)

£375.3m

(47,150 m2 net)


£8.2m

(2,600 m2 net)

£44.4m

(12,900 m2 net)

£99.3m

(26,900 m2 net)

£170.1m

(42,700 m2 net)

Eastwood Town Centre £2.8m

(750 m2 net)

£8.1m

(2,000 m2 net)

£15.7m

(3,650 m2 net)

£25.6m

(5,500m2 net)

Kimberley Town Centre £0.4m

(100 m2 net)

£1.1m

(300 m2 net)

£2.1m

(600 m2 net)

£3.5m

(900 m2 net)

Broxtowe – Non-Central (Retail Warehousing)9

£-37.8m

(-11,900 m2 net)

£-22.8m

(6,600 m2 net)

£1.4m

(400 m2 net)

£33.3m

(8,400m2 net)

• Quantitative Capacity [Scenario 2]; the assessment seeks to take account of major

committed non-food developments in the wider locality. The assessment assumes that

Nottingham city centre market share from the overall study area will increase from

19.8% in 2007 to 20.9% (constant from 2011 to 2021) and 21% in 2026.

Eastwood and Kimberley market shares remain the same (constant market share)

whilst Broxtowe Non-Central from the overall study area rises from 2.5% in 2007 to 2.8%

in 2011 (thereafter constant to 2026) due to the IKEA extension at Giltbrook Retail Park.

FLOORSPACE CAPACITY Destination

2011 2016 2021 2026

Nottingham City Centre -£81.3m

(-12,800 m2 net)

-£36.9m

(5,400 m2 net)

£222.8m

(30,150 m2 net)

£375.3m

(47,150 m2 net)


-£22.7m

(-7,150 m2 net)

£7.05m

(2,050 m2 net)

£53.2m

(14,400 m2 net)

£113.2m

(28,400 m2 net)

Broxtowe – Non-Central (Retail Warehousing)

-£20.5m

(-6,400 m2 net)

-£2.1m

(-600 m2 net)

£26.8m

(7,250 m2 net)

£64.4m

(16,200 m2 net)

7.4 On the basis of the capacity findings, the study advises the following in terms of forward

strategy and site allocations:

9 Table 90 does not indicate sales by goods due to market share data from household telephone survey is insufficient



• There is no need to identify sites for new non-central comparison goods retailing in

Nottingham and Broxtowe until the latter phases of the emerging Core Strategy

period (i.e. post 2021) given existing commitments (IKEA extension at Giltbrook).

• There is significant capacity for new comparison goods floorspace in the medium term

in Eastwood (amongst others). However, due to the economic climate and

polarisation of retailers towards larger centres, it is concluded that development in

smaller centres such as Eastwood will be incremental and therefore there is no

pressing need to identify and allocate sites.

• Depending on the validity of the population projections utilised in the assessment,

there could be additional quantitative capacity for non-central development in

Broxtowe (c. 9,200 m2 net under Scenario 1; 17,100 m2 net under Scenario 2) if high

population growth is realised.

• The Greater Nottingham area (study area as a whole) is well provided for in terms of

traditional bulky comparison retail provision in terms of furniture, household

appliances, audio-visual, hardware and particular DIY / Garden retail. This provision is

recognised to be predominantly located in out-of-centre locations with limited market

share for Nottingham city centre for DIY goods in particular.

• Eastwood and Kimberley are identified to be performing relatively well in spite of

enhanced competition from Giltbrook Retail Park (extended).

• Giltbrook Retail Park attracts just under half of its visitors from the Nottingham

catchment (44%). There are significant inflows to the park (primarily IKEA) from Derby

(27%), Leicester (12%) and Sheffield (9%).

7.5 A partial update to the study was completed in early 2012 as part of the emerging Joint

Core Strategy evidence base audit. The main headline findings of the retail study review

are set out below.

B) Retail Background Paper (June 2012)

7.6 The retail background paper was published joint by the five Greater Nottingham Councils

(Nottingham City, Broxtowe Borough, Gedling Borough, Erewash Borough and Rushcliffe

Borough) to inform the emerging Core Strategy (Nottingham, Gedling and Broxtowe)

which has been delayed due to regional and national planning policy changes.

7.7 The background paper primarily considers two fundamental factors:



• Whether the 2007 Greater Nottingham Retail Study (GNRS) remains relevant and

current given the time lapse since it was published; and

• Whether the GRNS meets the requirements of changes to national planning policy

guidance given that it was prepared in accordance with the then PPS6 guidance.

7.8 On the basis of a joint assessment, the paper concludes that no quantitative based

update to the study is required at this stage given that:

• Validity of Growth Projections; whilst the study acknowledges that the expenditure

growth and capacity figures identified in the GNRS did not foresee the adverse

economic downturn, the overall picture of future growth and capacity remains valid

for the purposes of informing the emerging Core Strategy.

• Opportunity Sites; the sites identified in the GNRS which have not been developed in

the intervening period remain appropriate for retail uses.

• Overtrading; whilst acknowledging that it is specifically identified in the PPS4 practice

guidance (which remains as an informative tool for interpreting NPPF), it is concluded

that overtrading is more of a local issue and a new quantitative-based study may not

be able to deal with this in the short term.

7.9 A partial update of the qualitative elements of the study through new healthcheck

assessments for the main city and town centres has been undertaken. The main findings

for the centres nearest to the application site are set out below.

Eastwood

7.10 The healthcheck assessment identifies / concludes as follows:

• The centre has a good mix of businesses although the lack of a pedestrian friendly

environment with a busy road and under-representation of services explains the

relatively high rate of vacant units plus low pedestrian footfall counts.

• The town has a fairly large catchment extending beyond the borough boundary.

• Over half of the primary and secondary shopping areas within the town centre are

within a designated conservation area.

• There are 4 no. vacant units within the primary shopping area (4.4% of primary

shopping area total) with a further 8 no. vacant units (9.6%) in the secondary shopping



area. The total level of vacant units within the town centre is only 6.9% (12 out of 173

units) which is acknowledged to be ‘encouragingly low’.

• Giltbrook Retail Park is a threat although the restriction on convenience goods

maintains vitality and viability of the centre.

7.11 Overall therefore, it is apparent that the centre is vital and viable. The conclusion that the

centre has a relatively high rate of vacancies appears to contradict the wider

healthcheck analysis which concludes that vacancies are relatively low (few vacancies

within the primary shopping area and overall).

Kimberley

7.12 The healthcheck assessment identifies / concludes as follows:

• The retail offer is relatively limited given the small size of the town centre. The retail

offer is largely concentrated on the large Sainsbury’s store.

• There are no vacant units within the primary area of the town centre.

• There are 5 no. vacant units within the secondary area of the town centre. This is only

5.2% of the overall number of units within the town centre (96 no. units in total).

• Kimberley is primarily used for convenience top-up based shopping with the

comparison retail offer extremely limited due to the proximity to Giltbrook Retail Park.

7.13 Overall, the assessment identifies that the centre has a fairly strong retail mix offering most

items necessary for weekly shopping. The centre does however lack facilities and services

(i.e. banks etc.).



8. NPPF Assessment - Impact On Investment

8.1 NPPF (para. 26) requires proposals for main town centre uses that are not in an existing

centres and are not in accordance with an up-to-date development plan to be assessed

against two impact tests;

• Assess the impact of a proposal on existing, committed and planned public and

private investment in a centre or centres in the catchment area of the proposal; and

• Assess the impact of a proposal on town centre vitality and viability, including local

consumer choice and trade in the town centre and wider area up to five years from

the time an application is made.

8.2 This section considers the impact of the proposed Oxylane Village on existing, committed

and planned public and private investment in a centre or centres in the catchment area

of the proposal.

8.3 In the first instance, in reaching an overall judgement on impact, it is important that due

regard is had to the following:

• The PPS4 practice guidance specifically states that in reaching an overall judgement

on impact, there must be clear evidence10 of significant adverse impacts.

• The impact tests clearly require assessment of impacts on centres11. A recent appeal

decision in Stoke-on-Trent clearly holds this principle, confirming that any impact

assessment should be based on the defined town centre (PSA) defined for the

purposes of a development plan rather than a ‘functional’ centre which includes

edge-of-centre provision12.

8.4 There is consequently no NPPF requirement to assess the impact of the Oxylane Village

proposals on non-central schemes which are not afforded protection under NPPF.

10 GVA Emphasis 11 GVA Emphasis 12 Appeal Ref. APP/M3455/V/10/2122016 (Para. 264 of the Inspector's Conclusions) states that the requirement to assess is on the basis of a defined centre and not the 'functional' centre (i.e. including edge-of-centre provision when assessing impacts).



Assessment

8.5 The PPS4 practice guidance, which remains an informative tool in the interpretation of

NPPF impact policies, identifies a number of considerations (contractual position, need

and market opportunity) to assess the impact of a proposed development on existing,

committed and planned public and private sector investment in a centre. As a result, the

impact of the proposed development is assessed against such investment, taking into

account the needs of store format and locational characteristics.

8.6 In this respect, as set out at sections three and four of this report, the nature of the

Decathlon store, as a bulky goods operator, along with a garden centre are not

consoidered to be suitable town centre operations.

8.7 It is therefore considered at the outset that the proposed Decathlon store and garden

centre uses would not have an the impact on existing, planned or committed in-centre

schemes given the specific nature of the offer and physical/ locational arrangements.

Broxtowe

8.8 On the basis of pre-application discussions with the Council and a review of current

planning commitments, it is apparent that there is no existing, committed and planned

public or private investment in the main town centres in the Borough.

8.9 Whilst a planning brief has been prepared for the former Kimberley Brewery site, this is

located to the north east and outside of the defined town centre boundaries established

in the adopted Local Plan proposals map. The brewery site however is considered to be

unsuitable in any event to accommodate any new substantive development given

access, ecology and conservation issues (i.e. retention of some historic buildings).

8.10 In relation to Eastwood, whilst it is noted that there is a wider policy based aspiration to

regenerate an area within the town centre around the existing library and The Hollies, this is

also constrained by access and conversation constraints as well as the fact that the

existing town centre market is held on the site.

8.11 The proposed Oxylane Village scheme would realise a materially different market

opportunity to either schemes given the scale and nature of the proposed end uses (Class

A1 sports retail or garden/horticultural uses) for the main and partner buildings.



Other Centres (Outside Broxtowe)

8.12 The Alternative Sites Assessment undertaken to inform the NPPF sequential test is based on

the Greater Nottingham Principal Urban Area (PUA). The catchment for the proposal

therefore extends beyond Broxtowe Borough to include the administrative areas of

Nottingham City, Gedling, Rushcliffe and Erewash.

8.13 In the first instance, our research has not identified any existing, planned or committed

schemes in Gedling and Rushcliffe boroughs. However, two town centre masterplans

have been published by Erewash Borough Council in respect of Long Eaton and Ilkeston.

There are also two committed retail extension schemes in Nottingham city centre

(Broadmarsh and Victoria shopping centres) which need to be considered.

Long Eaton Town Centre Masterplan / Aap

8.14 The masterplan / AAP was adopted in 2007 and seeks to primarily re-establish Long Eaton

as a market town with a viable mix of uses. The Beaconsfield Street car park area within

the town centre is identified as potentially accommodating c. 3,100 m2 of new retail

development within small ‘town centre’ style retail and leisure units. It is not certain

whether this quantum of floorspace is net additional (i.e. new retail floorspace) or re-

provision of existing.

8.15 The town centre core is acknowledged as being constrained by conservation / historic

building assets, limited access and highways capacity in addition to residential areas

immediately bounding the primary shopping area (thereby preventing physical extension

opportunities for the centre).

8.16 On the basis of these existing town centre constraints, it is considered that the proposed

Oxylane Village development would not materially undermine the realisation of the town

centre masterplan. There is simply limited physical capacity to accommodate either a

garden centre or sports retail use of any substantive scale within the town centre

(including servicing and parking arrangements).

8.17 The proposed Oxylane scheme proposess very specific retail uses and would serve a

materially different market (offer / sector) than envisaged for Long Eaton which primarily

focuses on small-scale ground floor town centre retail and leisure units with residential



above. In addition, given that the masterplan was adopted in 2007, it is considered that

the masterplan scheme is not viable in the current market given that:

• There is no extant planning permission for the site or anticipated planning application

to be submitted in the foreseeable timescale.

• There is no evidence that the scheme has moved beyond the masterplanning stage in

terms of site assembly, developer procurement etc. (no contractual position).

8.18 Consequently, it is appropriate to conclude that the Oxylane scheme would not generate

any significant adverse impacts on the planned investment envisaged by the masterplan

for the town centre.

Ilkeston Town Centre Masterplan

8.19 The masterplan was adopted in December 2007 and also seeks to establish the town

centre as a viable market town, with a commensurate range of retail and leisure uses.

8.20 Aside from physical (public realm, landscaping etc.) and accessibility enhancements, the

masterplan primarily proposes the development of a new anchor foodstore (c. 3,000 m2)

with some complementary retail as part of the redevelopment of the Albion Centre. The

masterplan identifies that the Albion Centre redevelopment project would be a medium

term opportunity which would require both public incentivisation (closure and re-provision

of leisure centre, land assembly and subsidy) and private investment.

8.21 As with the Long Eaton masterplan, given the time lapse since adoption, it is considered

that the masterplan scheme is not viable in the current market given that:

• There is no extant planning permission for the site or anticipated planning application

to be submitted in the foreseeable timescale.

• There is no evidence that the scheme has moved beyond the masterplanning stage in

terms of site assembly, developer procurement etc. (no contractual position).

8.22 The proposed Oxylane scheme proposes a materially different retail offer than a new

anchor foodstore for the town centre. The redevelopment of the Albion Centre ultimately

seeks to deliver a foodstore anchor with some small-scale town centre retail units and a

new leisure (food & drink) offer.



8.23 The site is not suitable for a garden centre use and a sports retailer would not ultimately

anchor the redevelopment of the centre itself; the masterplan in any event identifies the

requirement for a foodstore anchor to draw back local residents and encourage linked

shopping trips.

8.24 On this basis, it is considered that there is no clear evidence that the proposed Oxylane

scheme would generate any significant adverse impacts on the masterplan aspirations for

the town centre.

Nottingham City Centre – Broadmarsh And Victoria Centre Proposals

8.25 Proposals for the redevelopment and extension of the Broadmarsh Shopping Centre in

Nottingham City Centre has been long-standing, as follows:

• Outline planning permission (LPA ref. 02.0161/POUT) was originally granted in 2002 for

the enlargement of the centre from its current size of 42,000 m2 gross) to 120,300 m2,

arranged in individual blocks on three trading levels and including (amongst others)

two department stores, supermarket and shop units.

• The original consent was subsequently revised under a separate application in 2007

(LPA ref. 07/00177/PVAR3) and proposed a further increase in the gross lettable

floorspace to 136,000 m2.

• A new outline planning application (LPA ref. 09/02714/POUT) was submitted in 2009

and is similar to the revised 2007 scheme with a 136,000 m2 gross lettable

development.

8.26 Whilst the scheme was formally identified as a commitment and was subsequently taken

into account in the preparation of the Greater Nottingham Retail Study, the scheme has

yet to materialise in over a decade. The retail background paper prepared in June 2012

to inform the emerging Joint Aligned Core Strategy provides further clarification on the

current deliverability and timescales for the scheme, detailing that the City Council is in

dialogue with the centre owners (Capital Shopping Centres – CSC) following the

acquisition of the Victoria Shopping Centre.

8.27 In terms of the Victoria Centre, a planning application (LPA ref. 11/01859/PFUL3) was

submitted in mid 2011 for an extension to the shopping centre comprising new retail

floorspace (37,000 m2 gross), new 4 storey anchor department store (c. 14,200 m2 gross –



included within the overall net additional retail) and extension to the existing House of

Fraser store (c. 600 m2 gross).

8.28 On the basis of the background to the two city centre schemes, it is considered that the

Oxylane proposals would not have a significant adverse impact on the following basis:

• Victoria Centre; the application remains undetermined at this stage and it has been

recently announced, as of September 2012, that the scheme has been formally

abandoned by the shopping centre owners due to the prevailing economic climate.

It is understood that the current intentions for the Victoria Centre are for more

qualitative based improvements through investment in existing shopping environment

and surrounding public realm etc. The Oxylane proposals would not have any

bearing on private investment to improve an existing asset.

• Broadmarsh Centre; whilst there is an extant planning permission for the

redevelopment / extension scheme, the prospects of viable delivery within a

defineable timeframe is uncertain at this time. The likely realisation of the permitted

scheme is further reduced by a recently published report by the shopping centre

owners which concluded that the Broadmarsh Centre shopping should be the focus

for convenience, independent and smaller retailers to avoid competition with the

Victoria Centre. On this basis, it is unlikely that the scheme will proceed. There is no

evidence of pre-lets being agreed or publicised, particularly in relation to the critical

department store anchors.

• Market Opportunity; the Victoria and Broadmarsh centre schemes are intended to

enable the city centre to perform an enhanced regional retail shopping function

through primarily targeting a wide range of high quality national and international

fashion retailers. The proposals are not dependent on and would not solely focus on

sports retail but instead on provide a higher order mixed retail and leisure offer.

8.29 The city centre schemes therefore in reality constitutes a materially different market

opportunity to the Oxylane Village proposals.

8.30 As previously detailed, a Decathlon (retail sports) or garden centre scheme of the nature

proposed could not be physically or viably accommodated within a town centre

shopping centre development given its operational requirements. The respective centre

proposals included multi-storey extensions which would be inherently unsuitable and

unviable to accommodate such a land intensive use with a limited turnover density.



8.31 In terms of the potential occupation of the partner building (2,937 m2 sales) at the Oxylane

scheme by a Class A1 sports retailer (to co-locate next to the proposed relocated

Decathlon store in the main building), it is considered that the proposal would not

materially undermine the delivery of the respective schemes. Given the proposed control

on the Class A1 retail use of the Oxylane partner building (goods restriction via appropriate

planning conditions), there is no clear evidence to suggest that any impact could be

significantly adverse.

8.32 The Oxylane proposal does not seek to introduce anything new in terms of sports retailing

that is not already provided for in the Greater Nottingham PUA and specifically within out-

of-centre retail parks in the city (i.e. JJB, Sports Direct etc.).

8.33 It is therefore considered that the proposal meets the NPPF test in relation to impact on

town centre investment. There is no clear evidence that the proposal will undermine

existing, planned or committed investment in a centre in this instance.



9. NPPF Assessment – Impact On In-Centre Trade

9.1 Flowing on from an assessment of impact on investment in existing centres, the NPPF (para.

26) requires proposals to also demonstrate that there would not be a significant adverse

impact on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and trade in

the town centre and wider area, up to five years from when an application is made.

Scope of Assessment

9.2 As set out in Section 2, the existing Decathlon store at Giltbrook Retail Park (out-of-centre)

would relocate to the main building within the new Oxylane Village; The existing store has

a ground floor retail sales area of 3,678 m2. The proposed new Decathlon store at

Oxylane Village would have a net sales area of 5,000 m2 and therefore, delivers an uplift in

net sales of 1,322 m2.

9.3 It is important in this instance, to confirm that GVA considers that there is no requirement to

assess the impact of the proposed new (relocated) Decathlon store on its own, given that

the amount of floor area would be below the threshold of 2500 m2 within the NPPF.

Notwithstanding this position, the potential use of the partner buildings for either sports

retail or garden centre use creates the following scenarios, which are subsequently

assessed.

9.4 The impact assessment for the application proposals is set out as follows:

Main Building Partner Building Total Net Floorspace Scenario 1 Class A1 Decathlon Sports

Store – 5,000 m2 net (1,322 m2 sales uplift arising from

relocation)

Class A1 Garden Centre – 2,937 m2 net sales

7,937 m2 (total) – Sports Retail / Garden Centre 4,259 m2 (uplift) – Sports Retail / Garden Centre

Scenario 2 Class A1 Decathlon Sports Store - 5,000 m2 net (1,322 m2 sales uplift arising from

relocation)

Class A1 Sports Retail Store – 2,937 m2 net sales

7,937 m2 (total) – Sports Retail

4,259 m2 (uplift) – Sports Retail

Scenario 3 Class A1 Garden Centre – 2,937 m2 net sales

Class A1 Garden Centre – 2,937 m2 net sales

5,874 m2 (total) – Garden Centre Retail

Scenario 4 Class A1 Garden Centre – 2,937 m2 net sales

Class A1 Sports Retail Store – 2,937 m2 net sales

5,874 m2 (total)



9.5 In terms of the proposed garden centre use, whilst the main building has a footprint of

5655 m2, , it is proposed that the net sales area for the main building would be limited to.

2,937 m2 net sales), similar to the partner building if used as a garden centre. This would

enable storage areas to be provided, and would reflect that whilst the partner building

includes external storage areas, this is not the case with the main building. As a result, use

of the main building for such an alternative use would generate a need for a greater

proportion of floorspace to be set aside for storage puposes.

9.6 The worst case in retail impact terms would be that both the main and partner buildings

are occupied by either Class A1 sports retail uses (scenario 2) or Class A1 garden centre

uses (scenario 3); this is summarised in turn below. A more detailed explanation of the

step-by-step methodology in quantifying the expenditure capacity and thereafter the

trading impacts (tables) of the proposals is provided at Appendix 7.

Garden Centre

9.7 As set out at length in the report, it is considered that a garden centre is not a main town

centre use given the nature of the offer and its operational constraints (large site required

for parking and growing areas, low sales density etc.). The lack of comparable provision

within the existing centres in the Greater Nottingham PUA catchment recorded through

our on-site surveys reflects this reality; the main garden centre destinations are either in

semi rural urban fringe locations or form part of a wider DIY-based retail warehouse offer.

9.8 On this basis, given the lack of in-centre provision, it therefore follows at the outset that the

proposed garden centre use, either occupying one or both of the proposed main and

partner buildings, would not have a significant adverse impact on the existing vitality and

viability (including in-centre trade) of town centres.

Scenario 1 and 4 - Individual Garden Centre Use

9.9 The trading impact of a garden centre use only occupying the proposed partner building

(main building occupied by a Class A1 sports retailer) is set out in Table 7 (Appendix 7).

However, for ease of reference, the diversion table set out below demonstrates that trade

will be drawn from existing garden centres and retail warehouses, all of which occupy out

of centre locations which are not protected under NPPF policy.



Location Diversion (£m)

Impact (%)

Pre-proposals market share

(2014)

Post-proposals market share

(2014)

Trowell Garden Centre £0.24m 19% 3% 2%

B&Q Eastwood £0.45m 15% 8% 7%

Bardills Garden Centre £0.36m 23% 4% 3%

Shipley Garden Centre £0.21m 23% 2% 2%

B&Q Riverside Retail Park £0.24m 8% 7% 8%

Homebase Queens Drive Retail Park £0.24m 9% 7% 7%

Claw-back and Re-capture £0.48m N/A

9.10 In reality, the trade impacts will be highly dispersed and would not fall solely on one

destination. As a consequence of the location of the proposal, it would also benefit from

a significant quantum of ‘pass-by’ (inflow) trade which further reduces the likely

quantitative impact of the proposal.

9.11 It is therefore considered that the proposal will not have a significant adverse impact on

existing in-centre trade. In any event, the quantum of available garden goods /

horticultural expenditure in the PUA catchment is projected to significantly rise (c. £118.7m)

over the five year timeframe for assessment (design year 2015) which would more than

adequately compensate for any trade diversion impacts arising.

Scenario 3 – Garden Centre Use (Both Buildings)

9.12 As set out in section 2, the applicant requires maximum flexibility of land use, in order to

ensure availability of corporate funding for the project. As such, the mix of land uses

proposed includes the scenario of a garden centre use occupying both the main and

partner buildings.

9.13 Whilst it is not uncommon to find competing garden centre operations serving a similar

catchment area, the likelihood of them occupying the same site (i.e. adjacent), is

unlikely, albeit this scenario forms part of the proposals and is assessed in relation to the

NPPF impact test.

9.14 As explained previously, a garden centre is not a main town centre use and this is

substantiated by the location of competing centres and horticultural provision recorded

elsewhere within the Greater Nottingham PUA, occupying predominantly out of centre



and in some cases, out of town locations. It follows therefore, that two garden centre

operations at the site would not have a significant adverse impact on the existing vitality

and viability (including in-centre trade) of town centres.

9.15 Further, it is highly unlikely that two garden centre operations at the site would both

generate turnover at the levels stated within Table 6a (Appendix 7) and it is anticipated

that the combined turnover of two similar operations, side by side, would be somewhat

suppressed.

9.16 As such, it is our view that the principal competing garden centre and DIY retail

warehouse locations would simply absorb greater levels of impact. As previously detailed,

existing facilities of a comparable nature all occupy out of centre locations which are not

protected under NPPF policy in any event.

9.17 In parallel, we anticipate that claw back and recapture of horticultural expenditure from

the catchment area would also increase, given that we estimate outflow would still

account for some £12.06m in 2015 (Table 8, Appendix 7).

Sports Retail

9.18 As set out at section 3 of this report, the format and operational requirements of

Decathlon’s stores make them unsuitable for a town centre location, given the range of

goods sold. Given that Decathlon already operates a full range store at Giltbrook Retail

Park near to the application site, it would clearly be onerous to expect the applicant to

demonstrate disaggregation of its store format, when the new proposal effectively

provides for a relocated but enhanced store offer.

9.19 A high proportion of floorspace within its stores is dedicated to the display of bulky items.

Many of the products are genuinely bulky by reference to size, volume and weight and

cannot be carried on public transport nor as part of a linked shopping trip (canoes/

surfboards/ archery equipment/ table tennis equipment etc). The majority of Decathlon

purchases are not delivered.

9.20 As a result, appropriate car parking proximity is needed adjacent to the store, given that

most customers need to transfer goods to their vehicles without significant inconvenience

(particular for larger goods).




display of bulky goods, the operational needs to display stock on the sales floor (rather

than within a large stock holding area) and the significant amount of retail sales area

required to display the extensive product range of bulky goods, the retail operation

requires a large format store.

Sales Density;

9.22 In addition, Decathlon is also constrained by its business model given the low density bulky

retail nature of its offer.

9.23 In this respect, Decathlon stores achieve turnover based on £1,500 per m2, which is

significantly lower than many national sports retail chains, which include a significant

proportion of fashion clothing as part of their offer.

9.24 In this respect, published sales density data (Mintel / Verdict identify Sports Direct as

achieving £3,670/ m2)

9.25 Evidence also exists that other town centre based national chains, where fashion products

form a large part of the goods offer would retail at the higher figure of up to £3,750/m2.

9.26 This would not be the case in respect of the Decathlon store and as a result, the known

sales density figures for the Decathlon store are retained for the purposes of the

assessment.

Scenario 1 – Decathlon (Main Building)

9.27 As detailed above, it is proposed that Decathlon would relocate from their existing store at

the out-of-centre Giltbrook Retail Park to the Oxylane Village scheme. This would result in

an uplift of 1,322 m2 of net sales floorspace, compared to the existing store at Giltbrook.

9.28 On the basis of Decathlon achieving a comparison retail sales density of £1,500 per m2,

the turnover uplift would only be in the order of £2.3m. Allowing for an appropriate

degree of inflow (c. 10% given prominent location adjacent to M1 and IKEA) which draws

from a regionally based catchment, the overall trade draw required to sustain the

proposed turnover of the store would be in the order of £2.1m.



9.29 This quantum of expenditure is minor in overall terms and would be dissipated across a

number of sports retail destinations (in-centre and out-of-centre) across the defined

Greater Nottingham PUA. The trade impact would not fall directly on the nearest

comparable sports retail provision in the catchment and in reality would be imperceptible.

Scenario 2 – Sports Retail (Both Buildings)

9.30 On the basis of scenario 2, both the main and partner buildings would be occupied by

Class A1 sports retail uses. The total uplift in floorspace would be 4,259 m2 (Decathlon 1322

m2 uplift plus 2,937 m2 net sales for partner building). The impact can be quantified as

follows:

Net sales;

9.31 The buildings occupied for sports retail use would have a total net (internal) retail sales

area of 4,259 m2.

Sales density;

9.32 The Decathlon store turnover would be £2.3m (based on £1,500 per m2). Assuming that

the partner building is occupied by a national sports retail chain (not Decathlon), the store

may achieve a retail sales density of £3,750/m2. The total turnover for the partner building

if occupied by a Class A1 sports retailer therefore would be c. £10.9m (2010 price year),

based on the net retail sales area and sales density figures identified above.

9.33 The overall total turnover therefore, under this scenario (both buildings occupied by Class

A1 sports retail, with Decathlon occupying the main building) is therefore £13.2m.

Inflow;

9.34 A total of 10% of turnover would be derived from inflow from outside of the defined

Greater Nottingham PUA (i.e. inflow). As detailed above, this is considered appropriate

given the location of the site adjacent to the M1 motorway junction and its proximity to

IKEA at Giltbrook Retail Park (the Core Strategy retail background paper identifies that the

IKEA store draws a significant quantum of trade from the wider East Midlands region).



9.35 The overall total turnover which would be derived from immediate comparable provision

in the Greater Nottingham PUA is therefore c. £11.9m.

Expenditure Capacity within PUA Catchment;

9.36 The latest Experian retail planner database identifies that the average spend per person

on sports related goods in the catchment is £55 (2010 prices). This is the same as

horticultural goods and generates available expenditure capacity of £35.6m in 2012 rising

to £38.2m in 2015 (2010 prices).

9.37 In terms of trading impact of the proposal, in accordance with the ‘like-affects-like’

principle set out in the PPS4 practice guidance and having regard to the proximity

(greatest trade draw from closest existing proposals) and nature of comparable sports

retail provision in the wider locality, it is considered that a sports retail use under this

scenario will primarily draw trade from the following destinations:

Destination Sequential Status Trade Draw (%) Trade Draw (£m)

Existing / Proposed Decathlon (Giltbrook Retail Park / Oxylane)

Out-of-Centre 40% £5.3m

Sports Direct (Chilwell Retail Park) Out-of-Centre 5% £0.7m

Sports Direct (Ilkeston) Town Centre 5% £0.7m

Various - Nottingham City Centre City Centre 25% £3.3m

Other - 15% £2.0m

INFLOW 10% £1.3m

OVERALL TURNOVER 100% £13.2m

9.38 As the table identifies, the main trading impact (40%) arising from ‘internal’ competition

whereby shoppers who ordinarily attend the existing or new Decathlon store within the

main building would also divert to a competing new Class A1 sports retail store adjacent.

9.39 Effectively the co-location scenario would result in both sports retail uses (Decathlon and

the partner building) surpressing the sales potential of each other. It is unlikely therefore, in

our view that both proposals would perform to their full expected benchmark given the

adjacent of potential competiotion under such a scenario. Neither the existing or

relocated Decathlon store is subject to policy protection under the NPPF and therefore the

impact is not a planning policy issue.



9.40 In terms of the other trade impacts, an overall impact of £3.3m on existing sports retail

provision in Nottingham city centre will generate an imperceptible impact in our view. The

current city centre sports retail offer reflects the regional status of the centre with all the

main national multiples located. The existing city centre offer is predominantly orientated

towards sports fashion (clothing and footwear) and it is highly unlikely that any such shops

would close as a result of a new sports retail store opening alongside Decathlon as part of

the Oxylane Village scheme.

9.41 The existing city centre sports retail provision has historically operated alongside out-of-

centre provision (Sports Direct at Chilwell, Decathlon at Giltbrook and JJB at Riverside and

Lady Bay retail parks) and therefore the proposed new sports retail provision at Oxylane

does not introduce anything new in either quantitative or qualitative terms into the

Greater Nottingham PUA catchment. The closure of the JJB store at Riverside Retail Park is

also likely to have released additional expenditure into the catchment which be captured

by existing comparable sports retail provision elsewhere. The overall impact identified

under the dual sports retail occupation scenario detailed above is therefore in reality likely

to be even less.

9.42 It is subsequently our view that there is no compelling evidence that the proposed

Decathlon store or partner building would result in any undue or hamful impact upon;

existing sports retail provision within Nottingham city centre. Existing retailers would

continue to viably trade within the city centre given its regional status and the significant

trade generated by its location adjacent to other mainstream national and international

comparison retail multiples (benefits of linked trips, enhanced footfall etc.). It is highly

unlikely that shoppers who current visit Nottingham city centre for comparison shopping

(of which sports retail shopping is a minor part) would divert to Oxylane given the lack of a

wider comparison retail offer (i.e. only sports related).

9.43 In relation to the Sports Direct stores at Chilwell Retail Park and Ilkeston town centre, the

former is not protected in NPPF terms given its out-of-centre location. With respect to

Ilkeston, it is our view that the impact (£0.5m) is extremely limited in quantitative terms and

would not undermine its continued trading viability. The store forms part of a mainstream

national chain which operates multiple formats including small towns, large sub-regional

and regional centres as well as out-of-centre retail warehouse schemes.



9.44 The Ilkeston store is extremely small and has a limited range of sports goods. It is our view

that the store primarily serves the occassional sports retail shopping needs of a highly

localised catchment. The store is not a main sports retail shopping destination in the wider

catchment given the limitations on the range of goods that are available.

9.45 There is no clear evidence that the Ilkeston store would close or that the wider town centre

vitality and viability would be subject to significant adverse impacts. The town centre is

not solely sustained by its sports retail offer and new alternative provision at Oxylane would

not in our view reduce footfall or general activity levels within the town centre. The centre

is primarily sustained by its convenience (Tesco Extra) and service function (town hall, civic

facilities etc.). The wider comparison offer (Boots, Curry’s, Dorothy Perkins etc.) would not

be materially effected by the Oxylane proposal.



10. Conclusions

10.1 This statement primarily seeks to demonstrate the compliance of the application proposals

against the NPPF impact tests (impact on investment and in-centre trade). The statement

should be read alongside the wider application submission and in particular the

Alternative Sites Assessment which addresses the NPPF sequential test requirements and

the Planning Statement which covers technical and ‘principle’ related matters.

10.2 With specific regard to the NPPF impact tests, the assessment concludes as follows:

• Decathlon use; the operator will relocate from its existing premises at the nearby out-

of-centre Giltbrook Retail Park to the new Oxylane scheme. The uplift in net retail sales

floorspace (1,322 m2) is below the NPPF floorspace threshold for assessment (2,500 m2)

and the Borough Council does not have an adopted locally set threshold. The impact

of the net floorspace uplift has however been assessed for robustness and

demonstrates that the trading impact would be minor in quantitative terms (c. £2.1m

uplift in turnover after inflow trade accounted for). Additionally, the relocated store

does not introduce anything new into the catchment in qualitative terms in any event.

• Garden centre use; given the operational and spatial requirements of garden centre

operations, it is considered that such a use is not appropriate for a town centre

location. An on-site survey of existing provision in the wider locality identifies that no

centre accommodates such a use with most garden centres being located at semi-

rural urban fringe locations or within a wider DIY-based retail warehouse offer (B&Q,

Homebase etc.). The nature and general location of the offer therefore, means that it

will not have a significant adverse impact on planned investment or the wider vitality

and viability of any centre within the Greater Nottingham PUA (under either the single

or dual building occupation scenarios).

• Alternative use scenario’s; given the flexibility in alternative uses that is sought

regarding both the main and partner building; different scenarios were assessed to

understand the potential impact that may arise. The most likely “worst case” scenario

of both building being occupies for a restricted “sports retail” use was assessed. The

likely impact of two sports goods retailers operating side by side would be to suppress



trade based upon competition and as a result the impact of trade draw would be

minor and would largely affect existing out of centre trade.

• NPPF – Impact upon planning investment (1); the two town centre masterplans (Long

Eaton and Ilkeston) are aspirational and were produced at the height of the

commercial market in 2007. There is no evidence to suggest that the identified site

opportunities within the respective town centres are viable with no progress on land

acquisition etc.

• NPPF - Impact upon planning investment (2); the two proposed city centre retail-led

extension schemes in Nottingham city centre (Broadmarsh and Victoria Centres) have

been abandoned by the existing centre owners (CSC) for primarily commercial /

economic viability reasons. Any new sports retail provision within the respective

planned schemes would have formed one minor part of an overall wider comparison-

led retail and leisure enhancement of the city centre offer so as to enable it to better

perform as the primary regional shopping destination for the East Midlands.

• NPPF – Town centre impact (Sports retail); there is no clear evidence of significant

impacts arising from the respective single or dual occupation scenarios for Class A1

sports retail in both proposed buildings (worst case scenario). The occupation of both

proposed buildings (main and partner) by sports retail uses would not generate any

significant adverse impacts on surrounding provision. The impact on Nottingham city

centre in particular would be imperceptible given the wider regional function of the

city centre. The main trade draw would ultimately be from the existing / proposed

Decathlon store as two adjacent operators would effectively suppress trading through

competition.

• NPPF – Town centre impact (Garden Centre); the proposed garden centre would not

generate significant adverse impacts given that it is not a town centre retail activity.

10.3 The acknowledged significant positive benefits arising from the scheme should be given

significant weight in the Council’s overall consideration of the application. It is concluded

that there are no NPPF based impact matters which would preclude outline planning

permission being granted expeditiously.

10.4 Appropriate planning conditions restricting the proposed use of the main and partner

buildings to Class A1 sports retail or garden centre use (partner building) can be attached

to any subsequent planning permission.

Report

Appendix 1

Report

Appendix 2

1

8

4

10

11

12

5

41

2

6

7

3

1

40

6

16 262728

3234

3536

29

2

37

3

4

5

8

10

25

37

38

1214

151331

24

9

17

18

19

42

20

21

23

22

16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

1315

14

Greater Nottingham PUASports / Leisure Store / Garden Centre Provision

0

0

Nottingham City District Boundary

District/Town Centres

City Centre

Application Site

Local/Neighbourhood Centres

Sports/Leisure Stores

Garden Centres

Retail Parks



City Centre


0 Gym/Sports Fitness Centre

Application Site

0

11

18

2021

22

3

4

6

23

2528

29

27

30

7

31

24 26

9

2

37

6042

6536

69

6763

52

39

41

35

33

54

64

10

17

15

16

59

5140

58

47

6271

43

30

44

34

45

35

70

36

72

37

73

38

53

12

14

19

13

8

5

1

32

68

49

Greater Nottingham PUAGym Provision

0

0



City Centre

Application Site


Sports/Leisure Stores

Garden Centres

Retail Parks



City Centre


0 Gym/Sports Fitness Centre

Application Site

0

Report

Appendix 3

SPORTS AND LEISURE FACILITIES WITHIN CATCHMENT

Sequential Location

Facility Address Description In Edge Out

1

Notts County Football

Club Shop

Meadow Lane, Nottingham,

NG2 3HJ

An ancillary shop to the Notts Country

Football club stadium specialising solely in

Football goods and equipment.

�

2

Vale Cycles 13 Bridge Grove, West

Bridgford, Nottingham, NG2

7LE

A small independent specialist cycling store

offering mountain bikes, a small range of

children’s bikes and cycle accessories.

Situated in a predominantly residential out of

centre location.

�

3

Desperate Measures

(kayaking Shop)

39-41 Trent Boulevard West

Bridgford, Nottingham NG2

5BB

A small independent water sports shop with a

range of water sports lines, predominantly

focused on Kayaking and sailing. Adjacent

to the National Water sports Centre.

�

4

Mapperley Sport 91 Front Street, Arnold,

Nottingham NG5 7EB

A small independent retailer with a relatively

extensive online offer. Store offers a range of

sports lines including cricket, football,

swimwear and running.

�

5

European Golf 6 Arnot Hill Road, Arnold,

Nottingham NG5 6LJ

A mid size independent specialist golf store in

adjacent to Arnold local high street offering

a relatively extensive range of golfing

equipment.

�

6

Rock 'N' Roll Cycles 47 Carlton Road,

Nottingham, Nottinghamshire

County NG3 2DN

A mid size independent cycling store in an

edge of centre location on a main arterial

route into Nottingham. Store offers a range

of cycling goods including mountain, trail

and junior bikes as well as cycle accessories.

�

7

The Bike Shop 68-72 Tamworth Road, Long

Eaton, Nottinghamshire NG10

3LW

A mid size independent specialist cycle store

within Long Eaton district centre offering a

range of cycling goods.

�

8

Halfords, Arnold 116 Front Street, Arnold,

Nottingham NG5 7EG

A small chain retailer located on Arnold high

street offering a relatively limited range of

cycling goods and accessories.

�

9

Sports Direct, Ilkeston 22 Bath Street, Ilkeston,

Derbyshire DE7 8FB

A relatively small multiple retailer operating in

an in centre location offering a modest

range of sports goods.

�

10

Cycle Inn 35-37 Chilwell Road, Beeston,

Nottingham NG9 1EH

An independent specialist cycle store with a

relatively modest offer including mountain,

trail, children bikes and accessories.

�

11

Cotswolds Outdoors Castle Buildings, Castle

Boulevard, Nottingham NG7

1SA

A multiple retailer operating from an out-of-

centre location offering a modest range of

predominantly outdoor sports goods.

�

12

TS Bikes Huss's Lane, Long Eaton,

Nottingham NG10 1GT

A specialist cycle store operating from an

edge of centre location adjacent to Long

Easton district centre. The store specialises in

mountain bikes.

�

13

Tracey Maid Cycles 73 Market Place, Long Eaton,

Nottingham NG10 1JQ

A mid size cycle store operating from Long

Eaton Town centre selling a mid range of

bicycles.

�

14

Powered Bicycles Main Street, Long Eaton,

Nottingham, UK NG10 1GN

A mid size store operating from an out of

centre location selling a range of electric

powered bicycles.

�

15

Longeaton Cycle Centre 49 Tamworth Road, Long

Eaton, Nottignham NG10 1AX

A mid size cycle warehouse operating from

Long Eaton town centre selling an extensive

range of cycles.

�

16

Sports Direct,

Nottingham

28 Clumber Street,

Nottingham, NG1 3GA

A multiple retailer operating from

Nottingham’s shopping core selling a range

of sports goods with an emphasis on football

and sports fashion clothing.

�

17

Urban Air 94 Bath Street, Ilkeston,

Derbyshire County DE7 8FE

A small cycling retailer operating from

Ilkeston selling a limited range of second

hand and new bicycles.

�

18

Mojo Cycles 16 Granby Street, Town

Centre, Ilkeston DE7 8HN

A small independent retailer operating from

an edge of centre location selling a range of

cycling accessories and limited range of new

cycles.

�

19

Pewit Golf Shop/Course 40 West End Drive, Ilkeston,

Derbyshire DE7 5GH

An out of centre golf course with a small golf

shop in the club house.

�

20

Eastwood Angling

Centre

46 Nottingham Road,

Eastwood, Nottingham NG16

3NQ

A small angling shop selling a mid range of

fishing related goods.

�

21

Hucknall Sports 2A High Street, Hucknall,

Nottingham NG15 7HD

A small independent sports retailer selling a

limited range of sports goods with a focus on

running and football.

�

22

Leen Valley Golf Club Wigwam Lane, Hucknall,

Nottingham NG15 7TA



�

23

Pro Bikes 171 Annesley Road, Hucknall,

Nottingham NG15 7DB

A small out of centre cycling store selling a

limited range of bicycles.

�

24

Erewash Golf Shop Erewash Valley Golf Club,

Golf Club Road, Stanton by

Dale, Ilkeston, Derbyshire DE7

4QR



�

25

Evans Cycles

Nottingham

20-22 Maid Marian

Way,Nottingham,

Notinghamshire NG1 6HS

A relatively large edge of centre cycle store

selling a mid range of new cycles.

�

26

Bunneys Bikes 97 Carrington Street,

Nottingham NG1 7FE

A small independent cycling retailer selling a

limited range of cycling goods.

�

27

JD Sports, Nottingham Meadow Lane, Nottingham,

Nottinghamshire NG2 3GZ

A multiple retailer operating from an in

centre location selling a range of sports

goods with a focus on sports fashion clothing

and football.

�

28

Foot Locker 44 Clumber Street,

Nottingham, NG1 3GD

A multiple sports shoe retailer selling a range

of sports shoes focusing on running and sports

fashion shoes.

�

29

Halfords, Nuttal Road 355 Nuthall Road,

Nottingham, NG8 5BU

An out of centre cycling and outdoors

warehouse selling a range of cycles and

accessories as well as limited camping and

outdoor goods.

�

30

Used Tackle 28 Baker Street, Hucknall,

Nottingham,

Nottinghamshire, NG15 7AS

A second hand angling retailer operating

from an in centre location.

�

31

Yoemans, Beeston 118 High Street, NG9 2LN An outdoor goods retailer operating from an

in centre location selling a range of camp,

tents and hiking goods.

�

32

Yoemans, Arnold 114 Front Street, NG5 7EG An outdoor goods retailer operating from an



�

33

Powerhouse Fitness,

Notts

29-31 Upper Parliament

Street, Nottingham, NG1 2BP

A sports fitness store specialising in fitness

equipment, dietary supplements and

electronic sports accessories.

�

34

Millets, Notts 11-12 Exchange Walk,

Nottingham

An outdoor goods retailer operating from an



�

35

Castle Mountain and

Moor Cycle Store

40-44, Maid Marian Way,

NG1 6GF

A travel and outdoor sports specialist selling a

range of hiking, camping, skiing and cycling

goods.

�

36

JD Sport, Victoria Centre,

Notts

Unit 309 The Victoria SC,

Nottingham, NG1 3QN

A multiple sport retailer operating from the

Victoria Shopping Centre in Nottingham City

Centre selling a limited range of sports and

fashion goods.

�

37

Sports Direct, Chillwell

Retail Park

Unit 3, Chilwell Retail Pk,

Beeston, Nottingham NG9

6DS

An out of centre sports warehouse selling a

mid range of sports goods.

�

38

Halfords, Chillwell Retail

Park

Chilwell Retail Park, Chilwell,

Beeston, Nottingham NG9

6DS




outdoor goods.

�

39

JJB, Riverside Retail Park 11-15, Riverside Retail Park,

Fairground Way,

Northampton NN3 9HU



�

40

JJB, Lady Bay Retail Park Lady Bay Retail Park,

Meadow Lane, Nottingham,

NG2 3GZ



�

41

Halfords, Victoria Retail

Park

Victoria Retail Park

Netherfield, Nottingham NG4

2PE




outdoor goods.

�

42

Halfords, Waterside

Retail Park

Waterside Retail Park,

Ilkeston, Derbyshire DE7 5LF




outdoor goods.

�

Report

Appendix 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

No Product

1 Very Basic Products

2 Basic Product Range

3 Structured Product Range

2 5 1 10 3 7 8 7 22 5 13 7 8 5 7 22 5 3 2 3 18 2 0 2 10 6 10 3 7 2 11 11 12 8 20 10 21 0 19 19 7 7 120

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 12 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 11 11 0 8 7 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 18

1 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 3

2 2 2 1 1 3

2 2 2 1 1 3

3 2 2 2 1 3

3 1 2 2 2 1 1 3

1 3

0 5 0 0 0 7 8 7 0 5 0 7 8 5 7 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 6 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 15

2 2 3 3 2 1 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3

1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 2 3

1 2 2 2 2 3 1 1 2 3

1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 3

2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 1 5 0 5 5 0 0 15

1 1 2 1 1 1 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 3

1 1 1 3

1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3

1 1 3 1 1 1 3

0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 15

1 2 2 2 1 1 1 3

1 1 3

1 3

3

3

0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 3 3 0 0 6

2 3 3 1 2 3 2 2 2 2 3

1 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

3

1 3 3

2 3

2 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 6 6 0 0 15

2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3

2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 3

0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 3 4 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 4 0 0 21

3 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 3

1 1 1 1 1 1 3

3

3 2 3

3

JD Victoria Centre

Decathlon

Powerhouse Fitness, Nottingham City Centre

Millets, Nottingham City Centre

Castle M

ountain & M

oor Cycle Store

Sports Direct, Chilwell Retail Park

Halfords, Chilwell Retail Park

JJB, Riverside Retail Park

Halfords, Victoria Retail Park

Used Tackle

Yoemans Camping Store, Carlton

Yoemans Camping Store, Arnold

Squash

Football

Rugby

Hockey

Basketball

Nutrition

Electronic Accessories

Archery

Fishing

Horse Riding

Other Sports

Golf

Tennis

Badminton

Team Sports

Cricket

Running Shoes

Running Textiles

Accessories

Optical Accessories

Wet Suits

Surf Boards/Body Boards

Diving/Snorkles/Flippers

Running

Weight Lifting

Watersports

Swimwear

Swimming Accessories

Fitness Equipment

Gym & Dance

Judo/Martial Arts

Boxing

Road Bikes

Junior Bikes

Cycle Accessories

Fitness/Combat

Skiing Clothing & Equipment

Cycles

Mountain Bikes

Trail Bikes

Tents

Sleeping Bags

Hiking Shoes

Hiking Clothes

Halfords

Total Score

Outdoor

Back Packs

SPORTS STORE

SURVEY

JD Sports, Nottingham City Centre

Foot Locker

Erewash Golf Shop

Evans Cycles Nottingham

Bunneys Bikes

Hucknall Sports

Leen Valley Golf Club

Pro Bikes

Pewit Golf Shop/C

ourse

Eastwood Angling Centre

Urban Air

Mojo Cycles

Powered Bicycles

Longeaton Cycle Centre

Sports Direct, Nottingham

Tracey M

aid Cycles

Costwolds Outdoor

TS Bikes

Sports Direct, Ilkeston

Cycle Inn

Halfords, Waterside Retail Park

JJB, Ladybay Retail Park

Notts County Football Club Shop

Vale Cycles

Desperate M

easures (kayaking Shop)

The Bike Shop

Halfords, Arnold

Mappley Sport

European Golf

Rock 'n' Roll Cycles

Report

Appendix 5

NoGarden Centre /

NurseriesGoods Sold

Sales Floorspace Internal (sqm)

Sales Floorspace

External (sqm)Café

Car Parking (Approx Spaces)

Description Photograph

1

Brookfields Garden

Centre

431 Mapperley Plains

Nottingham

NG3 5RW

Variety of indoor sales items ranging from

clothing, preservatives, gourmet food

options, books, cards, giftware, kitchenware,

furniture and exotic pets.

Cafe area had approx. 60 seats.

Outdoor sales included a large variety of

plants, animal cages, pots, statues, bird

accessories and fencing supplies.

2,000 4,000 Yes 150

Garden Centre is located on its own

large site. It has 3 concessions outside

of the main complex- Diamond Spa,

Patio World & Reclaims Yard. Store

very large and offered a vast range of

stock.

2

Trowell Garden Centre

Stapleford Road

Trowell

Nottingham

NG9 3TG

Includes Clothing, jewellery, Art, indoor &

outdoor furniture, gifts, large selection of

cards, food & preservatives and garden

accessories.

Café (indoor & outdoor seating) 50 seats.

Outdoor area had large selection of plants,

paving supplies and ornaments.

There was also a Maidenhead aquatics

centre.

2,800 4,000 Yes 140

Road to site was very narrow and not

in good condition. Site is located

against a small cliff surrounding the

outdoor area of the centre. Could

have been part of an old garden

centre chain.

3

B&Q

Victoria Retail Park

Netherfield

Nottingham

NG4 2PA

Typical B&Q garden layout. Indoor sales

included garden tools, garden accessories,

pots, mowing equipment, seeds and lawn

products. There were a few plant items on

shelves at the entrance.

369 1,134 No 200 Sold basic garden supplies.

4

Wheatcroft Garden

Centre

Landmere Lane

Edwalton

Nottingham

NG12 4DE

Large complex that includes large outdoor

plants, garden products and an even larger

area selling gifts, cards, gourmet food

products, wine, toys, games, clothing,

furniture, art, garden accessories, jewellery,

kitchenware, crafts, pets, pet supplies and

many other items. Concessions onsite were:

Cotton Traders, The Edinburgh Woollen Mill,

Craft Central, Maidenhead Aquatic, Hot

Spring World, Susan Entwistle Gallery, Fireworx

Ovens, Lifestyle Lawns and Granite

Transformations. Cafe also on site- 60 seats.

4,208 3,780 Yes 200

Large site with vast range of products.

Had a 'Sage Privilege Club

Membership' on offer as part of the

Notcutts chain.

GARDEN CENTRES AND NURSERIES WITHIN CATCHMENT AREA

Appendix 3Qualitative Analysis of Garden Centre and Nursery Provision

C:\Documents and Settings\rn03\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK159\120924 Oxylane retail assessment appendix 3 RN final.xls

ke01

Text Box

5

Shaw Rueben & Sons

121 Moorgreen

Newthorpe

Nottingham

NG16 2FF

Plant focussed nursery with a wide variety of

plants. Café located on site across from

nursery. There is an indoor sales area but

limited range of products.

448 3,149 Yes 50Well laid out nursery showing a large

variety of plants.

6

Ashdale Nursery

204 Lambley Lane

Nottingham

NG4 4PB

Small and independent nursery down a busy

country lane. Sells only plants and some

plant supplies.

1,000 No 10

Located near larger Garden Centres,

there is another small nursery

approximately 1 mile down the road.

7

B&Q

Bailey Grove Industrial

Estate

Derby Road

Eastwood

Nottingham

NG16 3NZ




products.

399 1,134 No 120

Located in retail park next to Carpet

Right, BHS, Pets at Home, Paul Simon,

Harrys, Currys/PC World, Comet.

8

Floralands Garden

Village

Catfoot Lane

Lambley

Nottingham

NG4 4QL

Large site including: farm park, Frank Key

landscaping, Daisy Chain, Oak Tree

Upholstery and Artisan Jan stores. Indoor

sales included kitchenware, homeware, gifts,

cards, books, artwork and furniture.

Outdoor sales included fruit trees and

outdoor furniture.

4,000 2,500 Yes 140

The café was not extensive though

there was a very large indoor/outdoor

seating area. Plants and gardening

were not the main focus of the site.

9

Bardills Garden Centre

Toton Lane

Stapleford

Nottingham

NG9 7JB

Extensive garden centre with large indoor

sales area and external sales area. Internal

sales included food, preservatives, furniture,

gifts, cards, pet supplies and general garden

accessories. Outdoor sales included

extensive range of plants, fire, firewood and

garden pond supplies.

2,500 2,500 Yes 120

Coffee Shop located in separate

building could seat 40. Large sign off

busy round about leads to site.

10

Shipley Garden and

Aquatic Centre

Hassock Lane North

Heanor

DE75 7JB

Medium sized garden Centre selling

standard products- food, cards, furniture,

homeware, pot, clothes, aquatics and tiling

supplies.

1,000 2,502 No 10

Large café area with indoor and

outdoor seating. Located on busy

periphery road.


11

Lanes Garden Centre

Beeston Lane

Derby

DE72 3TT

Shop selling food/snacks, gifts, garden

accessories. Limited plants for sale. Owl

experience.

100 2,077 Yes 40

Tired and messy establishment with

animals located throughout the

property. Very limited plant sales.

Café not open.

12

B&Q

Riverside Retail Park

Queens Drive

Nottingham

NG2 1RU




products.

390 1,110 Located in retail park.

13

B&Q Superstore

8-10 Mansfield Road

Arnold

Nottingham

NG56BP




products.

350 1,150

14

Homebase

Queens Drive

Nottingham

NG21AL

Large store, external garden centre selling

plants, garden products, sheds, fencing etc.1,978 No 393

Located in area with similar sized

stores (B&Q).

15

Homebase

Madford Retail Park

Arnold

Nottingham

NG5 6AJ

Large store, external garden centre selling

plants, garden products, sheds, fencing etc.70 280 No 140

Located in area with similar sized

stores (B&Q).

1

Collyer's Garden Centre

and Nurseries

260 Nottingham Rd

Derby

DE72 3FR

Small business mostly focussed on selling

plants, pots, outdoor furniture and gardening

supplies. Limited indoors sales involving

seeds, cards, ornaments and gardening

related products. One drink vending

machine within the small shop also.

96 6,630 No 45Not off a major road but still well sign

posted.

2

Jacksdale Garden

Centre

Main Road

Nottingham

NG16 5HR

Indoor sales were mainly garden products,

attempting to expand to include giftware,

homeware, cards and books but still limited.

Large outdoor area selling wide range of

plants including fruit trees, also outdoor

furniture and water fountains. Café next to

store had a 30 seat capacity.

728 2,132 Yes 80Located on the edge of the town on

a large site.

* Estimated sales floorspace does not differentiate between horticultural sales and other retail and ancillary (café/restaurant etc) floorspace.

GARDEN CENTRES AND NURSERIES OUT WITH CATCHMENT AREA


Report

Appendix 6

1

Appendix 6 – GARDEN CENTRE ASSESSMENT

Quantitative & Qualitative Considerations

1.1 This appendix has been prepared to consider quantitative and

qualitative aspects of the development proposals. It will

provide information regarding the methodologies utilised and

findings from the retail assessment tables located at Appendix

7.

1.2 This is considered to be a useful exercise in addressing the

sequential assessment, retail and other economic impact

issues, set out within the NPPF.

Quantitative Considerations

1.3 To address quantitative considerations we have adopted the

following methodology:

• Define a catchment area for the proposed development

• Identify the population size and per capita spend to

quantify the volume of available expenditure within the

catchment area. This has been completed for horticultural

goods, general comparison retailing and convenience

spend.

• Consider how this is likely to change up to the three years

after the base year.

• Estimate the expected market share and corresponding

turnover of the proposed development within the

context of available expenditure.

1.4 Trade diversion and impact issues are dealt with under the

retail impact section in the main Planning and Retail

Statement.

Key Data Sources

1.5 The key data sources and assumptions used within the retail

assessment are set out below.

• Design Year: 2015. This tests the development in three

years time, assuming one year to secure planning

permission, one year for construction and a year once

trading commences.

• Price Year: 2010.

2

• Population: The population within each postal sector,

which together comprise the catchment area, are

sourced from a GVA Population Projections report (May

2006). This is based on 2001 Census.

• Expenditure: Experian Micromarketer Retail Planner Report

(November 2011) and Experian Retail Planner Briefing Note

9 (September 2011)

• Existing Floorspace: Various site visits conducted by GVA in

September 2012 .

• Company Average Turnover: UK Retail Rankings 2007,

Mintel International Group.

• Trade Draw: GVA assumptions based on experience of

similar retail proposals and established retail consultancy

practice.

Study Area

• The study area is shown at Appendix 1 and the postcodes

that this encompasses are set out in Table 1 of Appendix 7.

Catchment Area Population and Expenditure

1.6 The retail assessment tables have been included at Appendix

7.

1.7 Table 1 details the population levels for each of the postal

sectors (as noted above) included within the catchment at

both the base year 2012 and the test year 2015. This

information has been obtained from GVA’s own population

projections report from May 2006 based on the 2001 Census.

1.8 Table 1 provides population projections showing the

expected growth in population numbers from the base to the

test year. At 2012, the population level for the selected

catchment is 642,695. At the test year 2015 this increases to

646,311.

1.9 Table 2 shows the level of expenditure available within the

catchment area. Levels of expenditure have been

calculated for both horticultural goods spend, general

comparison and also general convenience spend. The level

of expenditure is calculated by multiplying the per capita

spend for each category of goods (this is sourced from

Experian Retail Planner Report, commissioned specifically for

3

this assessment) by the population level within the catchment

at both the base and test years.

1.10 It should be noted that the Experian Report for horticultural

goods covers a fairly narrow category, defined as “gardens,

plants and flowers” and therefore does not accurately reflect

the typical range of goods that a garden centre would sell.

Consequently, this is likely to suppress the level of available

expenditure we have calculated as available with the

catchment and therefore represents a worse case scenario.

1.11 For horticultural and other comparison goods it is envisaged

that expenditure will grow by 1.8% per annum. This is based on

Experian Expenditure Projections.

1.12 The analysis indicates that at the 2012 base year £35.56m of

expenditure is available for horticultural goods. This figure

increases to £38.17m at 2015, the test year.

1.13 Similar analyses on expenditure growth were also undertaken

for general comparison goods and also convenience goods.

1.14 At the 2012 base year, it was found that for convenience

retailing, £1,215.84 million available and that this increases to

£1,241.11m at the 2015 test year. This figure was calculated

based on a per capita spend of £1,892 across the

catchment in 2012.

1.15 For general comparison goods retailing, £1,615.756m is

available in 2012 increasing to £1,734.45 in 2015.

Existing Floorspace and Turnover

1.16 Table 3 examines existing garden centre and nursery

provision within the area and specifically looks at the

floorspace present dedicated to the sale of horticultural

goods. An analysis of the existing garden centres within the

area is located at Appendix 5. This was prepared following

site visits to each to inform the preparation of this assessment.

1.17 The analysis has considered both existing garden centres and

nurseries, and DIY traders, which sell to the public.

1.18 Due to the lack of retail floorspace data available for garden

centres, the floorspace figures stated are based on GVA

estimates from various site visits. As a worse-case scenario

turnover is based on all sales floorspace surveyed and does

not differentiate between horticultural and other sales.

4

1.19 Using Mintel Rankings information and based on our estimates,

it is possible to estimate the turnover of each retail location.

This is calculated by multiplying the floorspace dedicated to

horticultural sales by the sales density (£ per sqm).

1.20 For smaller nurseries and garden centres a lower sales density

figure have been apportioned given the large extent of

external sales areas which dilute the £ per sqm that can

normally be achieved from internal sales. This has been varied

for each individual garden centre following site visits and

based on GVA’s own garden centre retail planning expertise.

For the larger centres and the national multiple retailers, Mintel

Rankings information was used as a base and then discounted

to reflect the reduced sales density likely to be achieved from

the horticultural sales element.

1.21 Total turnover was calculated at the current year 2012. The

turnovers were then assessed again at 2015 assuming a 1.4%

annual growth rate for sales density. This was undertaken to

reflect likely sales floorspace efficiency increases.

1.22 From Table 3 it is asserted that the total turnover at 2012 is

£25.91m across the catchment increasing to £27.01m at 2015.

1.23 Larger garden centres in the wider area, which will be

drawing trade from the area have also been shown within

this table.

Trade Patterns and Market Shares 2012

1.24 Table 4 considers the market shares that the various

horticultural goods retailers are achieving in 2012. These

market shares are based on the turnover figures calculated in

table 3. Assumptions are made about the percentage of

turnover that each location derives from the catchment.

Given the physical extent of the catchment area, we

anticipate that most locations are deriving the majority (if not

all) of their turnover from this area. This also applies, to some

extent, to those operations outwith the catchment area.

1.25 Table 4 shows that the retailing locations within the

catchment are collectively turning over approximately

£24.70m. Therefore, £10.86m must be leaking from the

catchment area or is as a result of overtrading from existing

garden centres at 2012; most likely the latter.

Trade Patterns and Market Shares 2015

5

1.26 Table 5 undertakes the same analysis as table 4 however,

within this table, turnover and expenditure figures are

projected forward to the test year 2015.

1.27 This analysis shows that at 2015, the outflow of expenditure will

increase slightly from £10.86m to £12.42m. This is principally as a

result of population growth expanding and resulting in either

growing outflow or overtrading as there is insufficient provision

to meet demand.

1.28 The market shares for the more dominant locations are

summarised in the table below as well as the outflow from the

catchment:

Garden Centre/ Location

Turnover from

Catchment

(£m) 2015

Market Share

B&Q, Victoria Retail Park £2.73m 7%

Wheatcroft garden centre £2.25m 6%

B&Q Eastwood £3.03m 8%

Bardills garden centre £1.56m 4%

Brookfields garden centre Park

£1.41m 4%

Floralands garden centre £1.83m 5%

B&Q Riverside retail park £3.03m 8%

B&Q Mansfield Road £3.03m 8%

Outflow £12.42 33

Turnover of Application Proposals

1.29 In terms of the garden centre proposals, the floorspace

proposed within this planning application is shown at Table

6A of the assessment.

1.30 This table shows the breakdown for the three different forms

of retail floorspace proposed. The most significant element of

the proposals is the horticultural goods floorspace, which

comprises internal and external sales areas.

1.31 It is estimated that the total turnover of the horticultural

goods floorspace will be £3.33m. This sales density figure is

based on our experience of handling other similar garden

centre proposals throughout the UK and the specific turnover

6

projections for this proposal. It is based on the primary range of

goods that would be permitted to retail from the centre. A

typical range of goods list is provided at Appendix 8.

1.32 As we would anticipate that not all of the garden centre’s

trade will be drawn from the catchment area (such is the likely

draw of the combined proposals), we have estimated that 10%

will be derived from outwith this zone. Accordingly, the total

turnover from the catchment area is forecast at £3m.

1.33 Table 6A shows the expected turnover of the market food hall

area of the proposals, which would retail specialist

convenience goods. This area comprises around 450sqm and is

therefore a minor ancillary element of the overall garden

centre. At 2015, it is anticipated this floorspace will turnover

£1.42m.

Ancillary Floorspace Turnover Total

1.34 As explained earlier within the Retail Statement, an ancillary

goods allowance is sought to provide flexibility beyond the

primary range of foods. This affords an opportunity to stock

seasonal variations and similar previous planning consents for

other new garden centre developments have restricted this

area to 15% of the total sales area.

1.35 The information included at Table 6B provides further

information in relation to this. This shows that the likely

maximum turnover that could be derived from any ancillary

unrestricted Class A1 retail sales.

1.36 In reality, it is very unlikely that the entirety of this floorspace

would be used to retail ancillary goods at any one time

particularly based on our experience of garden centre

operations elsewhere in the UK.

1.37 The absolute maximum total turnover of ancillary sales from

the catchment area is £2.69m. This is based on a sales density

figure of £2,000 per sqm, which is seen to represent a robust

figure for this form of goods and the context within which

they form part of the overall retail offer.

1.38 In order to assess the worse case scenario for the horticultural

goods, convenience and unrestricted comparison goods,

the analysis double counts the 15% of floorspace that could

be attributed to unrestricted comparison goods ancillary

sales. In reality, if the 15% floorspace was used for such sales,

7

then the equivalent amount would require to be deducted

from the horticultural floorspace assessed.

Scenario Expenditure Outflow

(£m)

Expenditure

Outflow (%)

2015 based on existing floorspace

£12.42m 33

2015 including application proposals

£12.06m 32

1.39 The table above indicates the implications of the development

proposals and their potential to help redress (in part) the

current trade imbalance within the catchment. The proposals

will clawback trade from more distant locations and

encourage more sustainable trading patterns by reducing car

borne vehicular journey lengths for customers.

1.40 An analysis of this worse case scenario for the ancillary sales

element, which includes a double-counting of the sales from

existing floorspace, is provided at both table 2 and in greater

detail at Table 10. These show the growth rate in comparison

spend between 2012 and 2015 compared with the level of

comparison retail space proposed within the development.

This table demonstrates that at 2015, approximately £118.71m

additional expenditure on comparison goods will be

available. The proposals represent only 0.16% of total

comparison expenditure available at this time.

1.41 In consequence, it is clear that there is capacity to

accommodate the development proposals, even allowing

for double counting of comparison/horticultural floorspace

sales.

Convenience Floorspace Quantitative

Considerations

1.42 A more limited assessment of the convenience floorspace

proposed within the development has also been conducted.

1.43 As explained earlier within this report, the element of

convenience retailing at the proposed garden centre would

be of a specialised and ancillary nature. The proposed

garden centre would not be a location for convenience

shopping in its own right, this element being very much

ancillary to the primary horticultural nature of the garden

8

centre operation. We have however sought to assess it

separately as a worse case scenario.

1.44 To provide some analysis of this floorspace table 2 indicates

that between 2012 and 2015 convenience expenditure is

anticipated to grow by £25.3m amounting to £21,241.11m at

2015. This is summarised at Table 9.

1.45 The proposed convenience floorspace in 2015 is anticipated to

turnover approximately £1.42m from the catchment. This is only

0.11% of total convenience expenditure available at 2015.

1.46 As such, the scale of convenience floorspace proposed within

the garden centre is very minor in comparison to even the

growth in convenience expenditure and only of a small local

variety. As such, it is considered that this could be

accommodated within the local area without significant

adverse impact on any existing protected centres.

Qualitative Considerations

1.47 To address qualitative considerations within the local

catchment area and beyond, the assessment has focused on

the current existing garden centre provision.

1.48 From our extensive experience in handling other garden

centre planning applications, a modern successful garden

centre should offer the following key elements:

1. Generous space expansive internal and external

landscaped horticultural display, and merchandise areas;

2. An attractive and appropriate setting for the purpose of

gardening hobbies and horticulture;

3. An attractive external environment which include leisure

attractions such as horticultural interpretation areas and

themed/landscaped gardens. These additional elements

not only provide inspiration to visitors, but also the

necessary expertise to both the avid and novice

gardener. They also help in providing an all-year-round

destination and not just somewhere to visit in fairer

months.

4. Modern and inspirational covered garden centre

buildings, which are open in nature, use natural light

wherever possible and provide a comfortable

environment for visitors to feel relaxed in;

9

5. Ancillary attractions such as restaurant/café facility, which

provides a natural break to any visit and utilises the

outdoors where possible;

6. Sufficient car parking facilities with the garden centre also

accessible by alternative means of transport to the car and

within sufficient proximity to enable these type of trips; and,

7. Where possible, co-locating with other leisure facilities, so

that a single trip can serve several purposes and which

reinforces the synergy between gardening, the outdoors

and recreation.

1.49 Our qualitative analysis of existing garden centre provision has

demonstrated the absence of such centres offering all the key

elements that consumers demand and which the proposals

aspire to introduce at the application site. Only four existing

garden centres within the wider area show a degree of

compatibility with this proposed offer; Brookfields, Wheatcroft,

Floralands and Bardills. Of these, only Bardills is in relative

proximity to the site, with Brookfields and Floralands in

particular located on the eastern periphery of Nottingham. A

full analysis indicating their locations is shown at Appendix 2

and 5. In our view, this qualitative analysis clearly

demonstrates evidence to support the nature and scale of

garden centre operation being proposed.

Report

Appendix 7

Postcode Sector 2012 2015Av. Persons per

annum

Change

2012-15

(%)

DE7 6 11009 11070 20 0.6

DE75 7 18708 19105 132 2.1

NG16 4 5407 5505 33 1.8

NG16 3 11288 11357 23 0.6

NG16 2 16364 16416 17 0.3

NG16 1 8949 8940 -3 -0.1

DE7 4 12108 12174 22 0.5

DE7 5 9710 9830 40 1.2

DE7 8 13203 13341 46 1.0

DE7 9 3793 3939 49 3.8

NG15 6 15511 15832 107 2.1

NG15 7 11233 11448 72 1.9

NG9 1 9016 9082 22 0.7

NG9 2 13542 13832 97 2.1

NG9 3 11801 11701 -33 -0.8

NG9 4 5913 5890 -8 -0.4

NG9 5 8344 8324 -7 -0.2

NG9 6 9343 9363 7 0.2

NG9 7 5733 5777 15 0.8

NG9 8 8647 8701 18 0.6

NG10 1 8083 8237 51 1.9

NG10 2 4897 4958 20 1.2

NG10 3 14284 14456 57 1.2

NG10 4 10961 11089 43 1.2

NG10 5 8902 8979 26 0.9

NG8 1 7812 7673 -46 -1.8

NG8 2 10314 10096 -73 -2.1

NG8 3 7454 7265 -63 -2.5

NG8 4 6463 6409 -18 -0.8

NG8 5 12316 12407 30 0.7

NG8 6 9908 10115 69 2.1

NG11 7 3776 3685 -30 -2.4

NG11 8 12446 12632 62 1.5

NG11 9 8618 8492 -42 -1.5

NG7 1 11757 11760 1 0.0

NG7 2 13247 13318 24 0.5

NG7 3 5399 5399 0 0.0

NG7 4 4,967 5,040 24 1.5

NG7 5 7,172 7,217 15 0.6

NG7 6 8,597 8,690 31 1.1

NG7 7 4,105 4,100 -2 -0.1

NG6 0 7785 7739 -15 -0.6

NG6 7 4724 4744 7 0.4

NG6 8 14539 14582 14 0.3

NG6 9 7858 7755 -34 -1.3

NG5 1 7821 7811 -3 -0.1

NG5 2 5423 5386 -12 -0.7

NG5 3 4953 4957 1 0.1

NG5 4 8511 8403 -36 -1.3

NG5 5 14373 14297 -25 -0.5

NG5 6 11102 11177 25 0.7

NG5 7 7074 7058 -5 -0.2

NG5 9 9399 9514 38 1.2

NG3 1 2678 2676 -1 -0.1

NG3 2 4572 4602 10 0.7

NG3 3 6125 6133 3 0.1

NG3 4 3775 3758 -6 -0.5

NG3 5 8884 8782 -34 -1.1

NG3 6 9886 9895 3 0.1

NG3 7 6473 6454 -6 -0.3

NG1 1 1825 1802 -8 -1.3

NG1 2 147 146 0 -0.7

NG1 3 1547 1521 -9 -1.7

NG1 4 2686 2712 9 1.0

NG1 5 1095 1093 -1 -0.2

NG1 6 376 372 -1 -1.1

NG1 7 218 221 1 1.4

NG2 1 1883 1878 -2 -0.3

NG2 2 5166 5152 -5 -0.3

NG2 3 1048 1044 -1 -0.4

NG2 4 7837 7847 3 0.1

NG2 5 9809 10078 90 2.7

NG2 6 12467 12790 108 2.6

NG2 7 17604 18014 137 2.3

NG4 1 12134 12231 32 0.8

NG4 2 9046 9274 76 2.5

NG4 3 10169 10245 25 0.7

NG12 2 5988 5,973 -5 -0.3

NG12 4 4595 4,551 -15 -1.0

Catchment Area

Total642,695 646,311 1,205 0.6

Notes:

* Source - Experian Population Projections (May 2006)

OXYLANE VILLAGENOTTINGHAM

TABLE 1: Catchment Area Population

RETAIL ASSESSMENT - SEPTEMBER 2012

TABLE 2A: Horticultural Expenditure Forecasts TABLE 2B: Convenience Expenditure Forecasts TABLE 2C: Comparison Expenditure Forecasts

2010 2012 2015 2010 2012 2015 2010 2012 2015

(£)* (£)** (£)** (£)* (£)** (£)** (£)* (£)** (£)**

55 55 59 1,873 1,892 1,920 2,499 2,514 2,684

2012 2015 2012 2015 2012 2015

(£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m) (£m)

DE7 6 0.61 0.65 DE7 6 20.83 21.26 DE7 6 27.68 29.71

DE75 7 1.04 1.13 DE75 7 35.39 36.69 DE75 7 47.03 51.27

NG16 4 0.30 0.33 NG16 4 10.23 10.57 NG16 4 13.59 14.77

NG16 3 0.62 0.67 NG16 3 21.35 21.81 NG16 3 28.38 30.48

NG16 2 0.91 0.97 NG16 2 30.96 31.52 NG16 2 41.14 44.05

NG16 1 0.50 0.53 NG16 1 16.93 17.17 NG16 1 22.50 23.99

DE7 4 0.67 0.72 DE7 4 22.91 23.38 DE7 4 30.44 32.67

DE7 5 0.54 0.58 DE7 5 18.37 18.88 DE7 5 24.41 26.38

DE7 8 0.73 0.79 DE7 8 24.98 25.62 DE7 8 33.19 35.80

DE7 9 0.21 0.23 DE7 9 7.18 7.56 DE7 9 9.54 10.57

NG15 6 0.86 0.94 NG15 6 29.34 30.40 NG15 6 38.99 42.49

NG15 7 0.62 0.68 NG15 7 21.25 21.98 NG15 7 28.24 30.72

NG9 1 0.50 0.54 NG9 1 17.06 17.44 NG9 1 22.67 24.37

NG9 2 0.75 0.82 NG9 2 25.62 26.56 NG9 2 34.04 37.12

NG9 3 0.65 0.69 NG9 3 22.32 22.47 NG9 3 29.67 31.40

NG9 4 0.33 0.35 NG9 4 11.19 11.31 NG9 4 14.87 15.81

NG9 5 0.46 0.49 NG9 5 15.78 15.98 NG9 5 20.98 22.34

NG9 6 0.52 0.55 NG9 6 17.67 17.98 NG9 6 23.49 25.13

NG9 7 0.32 0.34 NG9 7 10.85 11.09 NG9 7 14.41 15.50

NG9 8 0.48 0.51 NG9 8 16.36 16.71 NG9 8 21.74 23.35

NG10 1 0.45 0.49 NG10 1 15.29 15.82 NG10 1 20.32 22.10

NG10 2 0.27 0.29 NG10 2 9.26 9.52 NG10 2 12.31 13.31

NG10 3 0.79 0.85 NG10 3 27.02 27.76 NG10 3 35.91 38.79

NG10 4 0.61 0.65 NG10 4 20.74 21.29 NG10 4 27.56 29.76

NG10 5 0.49 0.53 NG10 5 16.84 17.24 NG10 5 22.38 24.10

NG8 1 0.43 0.45 NG8 1 14.78 14.73 NG8 1 19.64 20.59

NG8 2 0.57 0.60 NG8 2 19.51 19.39 NG8 2 25.93 27.09

NG8 3 0.41 0.43 NG8 3 14.10 13.95 NG8 3 18.74 19.50

NG8 4 0.36 0.38 NG8 4 12.23 12.31 NG8 4 16.25 17.20

NG8 5 0.68 0.73 NG8 5 23.30 23.83 NG8 5 30.96 33.30

NG8 6 0.55 0.60 NG8 6 18.74 19.42 NG8 6 24.91 27.14

NG11 7 0.21 0.22 NG11 7 7.14 7.08 NG11 7 9.49 9.89

NG11 8 0.69 0.75 NG11 8 23.55 24.26 NG11 8 31.29 33.90

NG11 9 0.48 0.50 NG11 9 16.30 16.31 NG11 9 21.67 22.79

NG7 1 0.65 0.69 NG7 1 22.24 22.58 NG7 1 29.56 31.56

NG7 2 0.73 0.79 NG7 2 25.06 25.57 NG7 2 33.30 35.74

NG7 3 0.30 0.32 NG7 3 10.21 10.37 NG7 3 13.57 14.49

NG7 4 0.27 0.30 NG7 4 9.40 9.68 NG7 4 12.49 13.53

NG7 5 0.40 0.43 NG7 5 13.57 13.86 NG7 5 18.03 19.37

NG7 6 0.48 0.51 NG7 6 16.26 16.69 NG7 6 21.61 23.32

NG7 7 0.23 0.24 NG7 7 7.77 7.87 NG7 7 10.32 11.00

NG6 0 0.43 0.46 NG6 0 14.73 14.86 NG6 0 19.57 20.77

NG6 7 0.26 0.28 NG6 7 8.94 9.11 NG6 7 11.88 12.73

NG6 8 0.80 0.86 NG6 8 27.50 28.00 NG6 8 36.55 39.13

NG6 9 0.43 0.46 NG6 9 14.87 14.89 NG6 9 19.76 20.81

NG5 1 0.43 0.46 NG5 1 14.80 15.00 NG5 1 19.66 20.96

NG5 2 0.30 0.32 NG5 2 10.26 10.34 NG5 2 13.63 14.45

NG5 3 0.27 0.29 NG5 3 9.37 9.52 NG5 3 12.45 13.30

NG5 4 0.47 0.50 NG5 4 16.10 16.14 NG5 4 21.40 22.55

NG5 5 0.80 0.84 NG5 5 27.19 27.45 NG5 5 36.13 38.37

NG5 6 0.61 0.66 NG5 6 21.00 21.46 NG5 6 27.91 29.99

NG5 7 0.39 0.42 NG5 7 13.38 13.55 NG5 7 17.78 18.94

NG5 9 0.52 0.56 NG5 9 17.78 18.27 NG5 9 23.63 25.53

NG3 1 0.15 0.16 NG3 1 5.07 5.14 NG3 1 6.73 7.18

NG3 2 0.25 0.27 NG3 2 8.65 8.84 NG3 2 11.49 12.35

NG3 3 0.34 0.36 NG3 3 11.59 11.78 NG3 3 15.40 16.46

NG3 4 0.21 0.22 NG3 4 7.14 7.22 NG3 4 9.49 10.09

NG3 5 0.49 0.52 NG3 5 16.81 16.86 NG3 5 22.33 23.57

NG3 6 0.55 0.58 NG3 6 18.70 19.00 NG3 6 24.85 26.55

NG3 7 0.36 0.38 NG3 7 12.25 12.39 NG3 7 16.27 17.32

NG1 1 0.10 0.11 NG1 1 3.45 3.46 NG1 1 4.59 4.84

NG1 2 0.01 0.01 NG1 2 0.28 0.28 NG1 2 0.37 0.39

NG1 3 0.09 0.09 NG1 3 2.93 2.92 NG1 3 3.89 4.08

NG1 4 0.15 0.16 NG1 4 5.08 5.21 NG1 4 6.75 7.28

NG1 5 0.06 0.06 NG1 5 2.07 2.10 NG1 5 2.75 2.93

NG1 6 0.02 0.02 NG1 6 0.71 0.71 NG1 6 0.95 1.00

NG1 7 0.01 0.01 NG1 7 0.41 0.42 NG1 7 0.55 0.59

NG2 1 0.10 0.11 NG2 1 3.56 3.61 NG2 1 4.73 5.04

NG2 2 0.29 0.30 NG2 2 9.77 9.89 NG2 2 12.99 13.83

NG2 3 0.06 0.06 NG2 3 1.98 2.00 NG2 3 2.63 2.80

NG2 4 0.43 0.46 NG2 4 14.83 15.07 NG2 4 19.70 21.06

NG2 5 0.54 0.60 NG2 5 18.56 19.35 NG2 5 24.66 27.05

NG2 6 0.69 0.76 NG2 6 23.58 24.56 NG2 6 31.34 34.32

NG2 7 0.97 1.06 NG2 7 33.30 34.59 NG2 7 44.26 48.34

NG4 1 0.67 0.72 NG4 1 22.95 23.49 NG4 1 30.51 32.82

NG4 2 0.50 0.55 NG4 2 17.11 17.81 NG4 2 22.74 24.89

NG4 3 0.56 0.61 NG4 3 19.24 19.67 NG4 3 25.57 27.49

NG12 2 0.33 0.35 NG12 2 11.33 11.47 NG12 2 15.05 16.03

NG12 4 0.25 0.27 NG12 4 8.69 8.74 NG12 4 11.55 12.21

Catchment Area Total 35.56 38.17 Catchment Area Total 1,215.84 1,241.11 Catchment Area Total 1,615.75 1,734.45

Notes: Notes: Notes:

2010 price year

Per Person Expenditure Adjustments Convenience Goods:

Horticulture Expenditure Forecasts Catchment Area:

2010 price year2010 price year

* Sourced from Experian emarketer. * Sourced from Experian emarketer.

** Grown at 2.2% per annum, based on GVA Expenditure Growth

Projections Briefing Note based on Experian figures. (Nov 2011) Table 2

2012-2015 average

** Grown at 0.5% between 2010-2012. Grown at 0.5% per annum, based on

GVA Expenditure Growth Projections Briefing Note based on Experian

figures. (Nov 2011) Table 2 2012-2015 average

** Grown at 0.3% between 2010-2012. Grown at 2.2% per annum, based on

GVA Expenditure Growth Projections Briefing Note based on Experian

figures. (Nov 2011) Table 2 2012-2015 average

Comparison Goods Expenditure Forecasts Catchment Area:

OXYLANE VILLAGE

NOTTINGHAMRETAIL ASSESSMENT - SEPTEMBER 2012

Convenience Goods Expenditure Forecasts Catchment Area:

Per Person Expenditure Adjustments Comparison Goods:Per Person Expenditure Adjustments Horticultural Goods:

* Sourced from Experian emarketer.

TABLE 3: Existing Floorspace and Turnover Located within Study Area (Horticulture Sales)

Garden Centre / LocationStatus /

Location

Estimated Floorspace

Dedicated to Horticultural

Sales

(sq m)*

Estimated Sales

Density

(£ per sq m)**

Total Turnover

2012***

(£m)

Total Turnover

2015***

(£m)

Catchment Area

Garden Centres / Nurseries

Brookfields Garden Centre, Mapperley OOC 6,000 250 1.50 1.56

Trowell Garden Centre, Trowell OOC 4,800 250 1.20 1.25B&Q Victoria Retail Park, Nottingham OOC 1,500 1,937 2.91 3.03Wheatcroft Garden Centre, Nottingham OOC 8,000 300 2.40 2.50Shaw Rueben OOC 3,500 150 0.53 0.55Ashdale Nursery OOC 1,000 100 0.10 0.10B&Q, Eastwood OOC 1,500 1,937 2.91 3.03Floralands Garden Centre, Lambley OOC 6,500 300 1.95 2.03Bardills Garden Centre, Nottingham OOC 5,000 300 1.50 1.56Shipley Garden Centre and Aquatic Centre, Heanor OOC 3,500 250 0.88 0.91Lanes Garden Centre, Derby OOC 2,000 150 0.30 0.31B&Q, Riverside Retail Park, Nottingham OOC 1,500 1,937 2.91 3.03B&Q, Mansfield Road, Nottingham OOC 1,500 1,937 2.91 3.03Homebase, Queens Drive Retail Park, Nottingham OOC 2,000 1,312 2.62 2.74Homebase, Arnold OOC 1,000 1,312 1.31 1.37

Catchment Area Total 49,300 25.91 27.01

Outside Catchment Area

Collyer's Garden Centre, Derby OOC 6,800 150 1.02 1.06Jacksdale Garden Centre, Nottingham OOC 3,000 200 0.60 0.63Brown's Nurseries, Corban Lane OOC 840 100 0.08 0.09Bridgford Garden Centre, East Bridgford OOC 4,500 250 1.13 1.17Bradmore Garden Centre, Nottingham OOC 5,000 250 1.25 1.30Moores Garden Centre, Nottingham OOC 3,500 200 0.70 0.73

Area Total 64,440 28.74 29.96

Notes:

* Includes internal and external sales based on GVA site surveys, undertaken during September 2012 and sourced from GOAD Centre Category Reports.

*** Turnovers grown at 1.4% per annum in line with Experian Retail Planner Briefing Note 9 - September 2011 - Tables 4,4a and 4b. Average of 2011- 2018 used.

2010 price year

** GVA estimates, based on Mintel UK Retail Rankings 2008/9. Growth rate taken from Experian Retail Planner Briefing Note 9 -September 2011 - Tables 4, 4a and 4b.

TC= Town Centre DC= District Centre OOC= Out of Centre

OXYLANE VILLAGENOTTINGHAMRETAIL ASSESSMENT - SEPTEMBER 2012

TABLE 4: Market Shares 2012

Turnover

(£m)

% Turnover from

Catchment*

Turnover from

Catchment (£m)

Market Share

(%)

Catchment Area

Garden Centres / Nurseries

Brookfields Garden Centre, Mapperley 1.50 90 1.35 4Trowell Garden Centre, Trowell 1.20 90 1.08 3B&Q Victoria Retail Park, Nottingham 2.91 90 2.61 7Wheatcroft Garden Centre, Nottingham 2.40 90 2.16 6Shaw Rueben 0.53 90 0.47 1Ashdale Nursery 0.10 90 0.09 0B&Q, Eastwood 2.91 100 2.91 8Floralands Garden Centre, Lambley 1.95 90 1.76 5Bardills Garden Centre, Nottingham 1.50 100 1.50 4Shipley Garden Centre and Aquatic Centre, Heanor 0.88 90 0.79 2Lanes Garden Centre, Derby 0.30 80 0.24 1B&Q, Riverside Retail Park, Nottingham 2.91 100 2.91 8B&Q, Mansfield Road, Nottingham 2.91 100 2.91 8Homebase, Queens Drive Retail Park, Nottingham 2.62 100 2.62 7Homebase, Arnold 1.31 100 1.31 4

Total Turnover 25.91 24.70 69

Outflow from Catchment 10.86 31

Total Expenditure 35.56 100

Notes

* Based upon estimates


TABLE 5: Market Shares 2015

Turnover

(£m)

% Turnover from

Catchment*

Turnover from

Catchment (£m)

Market Share

(%)

Catchment Area

Garden Centres /Nurseries





Notes

* Based upon GVA estimates


Change

2011-14

TABLE 6A: Proposed Floorspace

Sales Floorspace TypeIndoor Sales Area

(sq m)

Outdoor Sales Area

(sq m)

Total Sales Area

(sq m)

Estimated Sales Density

(£ per sq m)*Total Turnover 2014

Total Turnover

Derived from Catchment**

Horticultural Goods 2,487 7,038 9,525 350 3.33 3.00

Convenience Goods (Farmfood Hall) 450 0 450 3,500 1.58 1.42

Total Turnover 4.91 4.42

Notes:

** Assumes that 10% turnover will be derived from outwith the catchment area.

TABLE 6B: Ancillary Floorspace Analysis

Sales Floorspace TypeIndoor Sales Area

(sq m)

Outdoor Sales Area

(sq m)

Total Sales Area

(sq m)*

Estimated Sales Density

(£ per sq m)**Total Turnover 2014

Total Turnover

Derived from Catchment***

MAXIMUM 15% Ancillary Sales (unrestricted class 1 retail floorspace) 1,496 2,000 2.99 2.69

Notes:

* Ancillary unrestricted comparison goods sales based on a MAXIMUM 15% of total permitted sales floorspace. This includes 'double-counting' of 15% of total ancillary sales floorspace reflecting absolute worst case scenario.

In reality, the physical scale of floorspace detailed within Table 6A (above) cannot be exceeded.

*** Assumes that 10% turnover will be derived from outwith the catchment area.

* Sales density for horticultural goods and convenience sales based on GVA experience of handling planning applications for new modern garden centre development

** Sales density for horticultural goods and convenience sales based on GVA experience of handling planning applications for new modern garden centre development.



TABLE 7: Trade Diversions

Status /

Location

Pre-Proposal Turnover

(£m)

Diversion

(%)

Diversion

(£m)

Post Proposal

Turnover (£m)

Impact

(%)

Catchment Area

Brookfields Garden Centre, Mapperley OOC 1.56 4 0.12 1.44 8Trowell Garden Centre, Trowell OOC 1.25 8 0.24 1.01 19B&Q Victoria Retail Park, Nottingham OOC 3.03 5 0.15 2.88 5Wheatcroft Garden Centre, Nottingham OOC 2.50 5 0.15 2.35 6Shaw Rueben OOC 0.55 2 0.06 0.49 11Ashdale Nursery OOC 0.10 0 0.00 0.10 0B&Q, Eastwood OOC 3.03 15 0.45 2.58 15Floralands Garden Centre, Lambley OOC 2.03 4 0.12 1.91 6Bardills Garden Centre, Nottingham OOC 1.56 12 0.36 1.20 23Shipley Garden Centre and Aquatic Centre, Heanor OOC 0.91 7 0.21 0.70 23Lanes Garden Centre, Derby OOC 0.31 1 0.03 0.28 10

B&Q, Riverside Retail Park, Nottingham OOC 3.03 8 0.24 2.79 8B&Q, Mansfield Road, Nottingham OOC 3.03 5 0.15 2.88 5Homebase, Queens Drive Retail Park, Nottingham OOC 2.74 8 0.24 2.50 9Homebase, Arnold OOC 1.37 4 0.12 1.25 9

Total from within Catchment 84 2.52

Outwith Catchment Area

Other (Clawback from out with catchment area and overtrading) 16 0.48

Diversion (%) 100

Total Turnover (£m) 3.00


TABLE 8: Market Shares 2014 - Post Application Proposals

Post Proposal Turnover

(£m)

% Turnover from

Catchment*

Turnover from

Catchment (£m)

Market Share

(%)

Catchment Area


PROPOSED GARDEN CENTRE 3.33 90 3.00 8




Notes

* Based upon GVA estimates


TABLE 9: Analysis of Convenience Sales

Convenience Expenditure Available 2012 (£m) 1,215.84

Convenience Expenditure Available 2015 (£m) 1,241.11

Increase (£m) 25.3

Convenience Turnover of Application Proposals (£m)* 1.42

Percentage Turnover comprises of Total Available Expenditure 2015 (%) 0.11

Notes:

* Turnover derived from catchment area (assumed that 10% derived from elsewhere)


TABLE 10: Analysis of Ancillary Comparison Sales

Comparison Expenditure Available 2012 (£m) 1,615.75

Comparison Expenditure Available 2015 (£m) 1,734.45

Increase (£m) 118.71

MAXIMUM Ancillary Comparison Turnover of Application Proposals (£m)* 2.69

Percentage Turnover comprises of Total Available Expenditure 2015 (%) 0.16

Notes:

* Turnover derived from catchment area (assumed that 10% derived from elsewhere)


Report

Appendix 8

APPENDIX 8