APPENDIX

SEFTON COUNCIL Page 1

Committee: Planning Date Of Meeting: 11th February 2009 Title of Report: Neighbouring Authority Consultation on a Planning

Application for a Tesco A1 Superstore on Land at Great Homer Street, Liverpool – PAS/2008/0541

Report of: Andy Wallis Planning and Economic Regeneration Director Contact Officers: Alan Young Telephone 0151 934 3551 Sue Tyldesley Telephone 0151 934 3569 This report contains

Yes

No

Confidential information

Exempt information by virtue of paragraph(s) ……… of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972. (If information is marked exempt, the Public Interest Test must be applied and favour the exclusion of the information from the press and public).

Is the decision on this report DELEGATED?

Purpose of Report: To advise Members of a neighbouring authority consultation and seek their endorsement of the officer response made in accordance with the consultation response deadline set by Liverpool City Council. Recommendation(s): It is recommended that Members:

(i) note this report; and (ii) endorse the officer response made to Liverpool City Council by the Planning and Economic Regeneration Director, namely that Liverpool City Council be requested to determine whether the granting of the current planning application for a Tesco foodstore would, if subsequently delivered, extinguish the St Modwen’s foodstore planning approval.

- if it would, then no objection be made by Sefton Council to the current proposal;

- if it would not, then an objection be made by Sefton Council on the

grounds that the current planning application has not addressed the key tests set out in PPS6, including need and the cumulative impact arising from the two foodstore proposals when taken together.

APPENDIX

SEFTON COUNCIL Page 2

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Impact Corporate Objective Positive Neutral Negative

1 Creating A Learning Community √ 2 Creating Safe Communities √ 3 Jobs & Prosperity √ 4 Improving Health & Well Being √ 5 Environmental Sustainability √ 6 Creating Inclusive Communities √ 7 Improving The Quality Of Council Services &

Strengthening Local Democracy √

8 Children & Young People √ Financial Implications

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 2006/ 2007

£

2007/ 2008

£

2008/ 2009

£

2009/ 2010

£ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure

Funded by:

Sefton Capital Resources

Specific Capital Resources

REVENUE IMPLICATIONS

Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure

Funded by:

Sefton funded Resources

Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? Y/N When?

How will the service be funded post expiry?

There are no financial implications arising from this report. Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report Housing Market Renewal List of Background Papers relied upon in the preparation of this report Neighbouring Authority Consultation from Liverpool City Council dated 15th December 2008. White Young Green advice to Sefton Council dated 23rd January 2009.

APPENDIX

SEFTON COUNCIL Page 3

Neighbouring Authority Consultation on a Planning Application for an A1 Superstore on Land at Great Homer Street, Liverpool – PAS/2008/0541 1 Introduction 1.1 Sefton Council has been consulted by Liverpool City Council on an outline planning

application by Tesco Stores Ltd for a foodstore and indoor market on land bounded by Great Homer Street, Scotland Road and Dalrymple Street, Liverpool. Part of the site lies within the boundaries of St Anthony’s Shopping Parade, designated as a District Centre within the Adopted Liverpool Unitary Development Plan.

1.2 Details of the planning application will be available at Planning Committee for

Members to inspect and can also be inspected on the Liverpool City Council website by putting the following link into your search engine http://northgate.liverpool.gov.uk/planningexploreraa/ and inserting the planning reference number '08O/3032' in the appropriate field.

1.3 An initial deadline for response was set at 5th January 2009 but was, by agreement

with Liverpool officers, subsequently extended to 14th January and then informally until the end of January to allow Sefton to obtain comments from its retail consultants. Accordingly, officer comments have been submitted and Members are requested to endorse them.

1.4 Members will be aware that the Council was previously consulted as a neighbouring

authority on an outline planning application submitted by St Modwen in November 2005 for a mixed use development including the creation of a new district centre, superstore, petrol filling station, retail units, open market, market hall, community and leisure facilities, residential development, light industrial units etc. After careful consideration and advice from our retail consultants, White Young Green, the Council balanced its retail impact concerns for Bootle Town Centre against the undoubted regeneration benefits of the scheme and raised no objection to the planning application, providing certain planning conditions relating to the retail development were put in place, in order to ensure that the amount of retail floorspace was carefully controlled. A copy of the relevant committee report is as attached as Annex A. Planning permission was subsequently granted by Liverpool City Council incorporating these conditions.

2 The Proposal 2.1 The current outline planning application seeks the demolition of existing buildings

and erection of indoor and outdoor markets an Class A1 superstore with associated car parking, petrol filling station, service yard, access, landscaping and ancillary works. All matters are reserved for later consideration with the exception of access and layout.

2.2 The superstore will be occupied by Tesco and would have a gross floorspace of

8,457 sq m of which the net convenience goods floorspace would amount to 3.114 sq m.

3. History

3.1 S/2006/0046 St Modwen outline planning application –details attached as Annex A.

APPENDIX

SEFTON COUNCIL Page 4

4. Consultations 4.1 Highways development control - Raise no objection to the current proposal. The

most northerly point of the site is located approximately 1.5 kilometres from the Liverpool/Sefton boundary and the Transport Assessment accompanying this application has satisfactorily demonstrated that there will be a negligible impact on Sefton’s highway network. However, they would definitely require a further traffic assessment to be undertaken should the potential exist for the St. Mowden’s foodstore development to be delivered as well as the current Tesco proposal.

4.2 Retail Consultants – White Young Green, the Council’s retained retail consultants,

have been instructed to advise on this planning application and have raised a number of concerns. Their full advice is attached as Annex B.

The key concerns are summarised below:

(i) WYG are aware that the applicants contend that the location of the proposed

Tesco foodstore is similar to that proposed by St Modwen and therefore could be adequately accommodated within the wider Masterplan for the area without prejudicing the overall vision. That noted, WYG recognise that the size of the foodstore previously proposed by St Modwen was deemed necessary in order to act as an anchor for the new district centre and the wider delivery of key regeneration and community facilities. Clearly, if planning permission is granted for the proposed Tesco store and the indoor /outdoor market, there is a danger that the rest of the district centre may not be delivered. In this regard, WYG note that this is essentially a matter for Liverpool City Council to consider in the context of their plans and vision for North Liverpool rather than something that Sefton Council should be concerned with.

(ii) Despite the above, WYG focus on the key tests set out in PPS6, including

whether a need has been demonstrated development and whether there would be an adverse impact on centres within South Sefton. In undertaking this assessment WYG note that there is already an outline planning permission in place for a new district centre that includes a foodstore totalling 10,519 sq m. gross floorspace. Consequently, the store already permitted is of a larger scale than that proposed by Tesco. Although (as indicated in para 1.4 above) concerns were raised by Sefton as to the scale of the initial foodstore, no formal objection was submitted providing appropriate conditions were attached to any planning approval. Given this, as the approved foodstore is larger than the store now proposed, it would be inconsistent and inappropriate, in WYG’s view, for Sefton to object to the Tesco foodstore now proposed.

(iii) Notwithstanding the above, the applicants have assumed that should their

proposal be approved and delivered then the foodstore element of the St Modwen’s foodstore proposal could not be implemented. Further, the applicants argue that there is now more need for foodstore than there was at the time of the St Modwen’s application but it is predicated on the fact that only one foodstore will be delivered at the new district centre. Whilst WYG raise some concerns regarding the methodology presented by the applicants and some details in their planning statement, the fundamental issue as far as WYG are concerned is whether or not the St Modwen foodstore previously granted could be implemented in addition to the Tesco scheme subject to the current planning application. If it transpires by granting this planning permission that two foodstores could be delivered within the new district centre, then clearly the

APPENDIX

SEFTON COUNCIL Page 5

Tesco store is unjustified.

(iv) To conclude, WYG are unclear at this stage whether the location of the proposed Tesco superstore would prevent the already permitted to St Modwen being delivered or whether there would be sufficient flexibility in the outline permission granted to allow two stores to be implemented.

(v) Accordingly WYG recommend that Liverpool City Council be requested to clarify

the position with regard to this matter. If a new planning permission for a Tesco foodstore were to extinguish the possibility of bringing forward the St Modwen’s foodstore, then there would be no basis for an objection on retail grounds. However, if both foodstores could, in theory, be implemented then the current planning statement does not address this situation in either the need assessment or in cumulative impact assessment terms. In such a situation WYG would recommend that Sefton Council should object to the proposed development on the grounds that the current planning application has not addressed the key tests set out in PPS6, including need and cumulative impact.

5. Conclusion 5.1 Given the above and particularly WYG’s advice and linked to the need to ensure that new retail development does not impact detrimentally on Bootle Town Centre,

Members are requested to seek Liverpool City Council’s advice regarding the relative status of the St Modwen’s foodstore vis-à-vis the Tesco proposal. If it transpires that the two foodstores could be implemented then Liverpool City Council be advised that this Council object to the current planning application on the grounds that it has not addressed the key test set out in PPS6, including need and cumulative impact. However, if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of Liverpool City Council that the current application, if approved, would extinguish the possibility of bring forward the St Modwen’s foodstore, then no objection should be made by this Council.

ITEM NO. 5G

Financial Implications

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE 2006/ 2007

£

2007/ 2008

£

2008/ 2009

£

2009/ 2010

£ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure

Funded by:

Sefton Capital Resources

Specific Capital Resources

REVENUE IMPLICATIONS

Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure

Funded by:

Sefton funded Resources

Funded from External Resources

Does the External Funding have an expiry

date? Y/N

When?

How will the service be funded post

expiry?

List of Background Papers relied upon in the preparation of this report History referred to

ITEM NO. 5G

ITEM NO. 5G

ITEM NO. 5G

The site This site lies within Liverpool City, approximately 2 km to the north of Liverpool City Centre is bounded by Scotland Road, Kirkdale Road, Great Homer Street and Buckingham Street/Conway Street. The site extends to some 21.2 hectares. Proposal Neighbouring Authority Consultation on outline application to demolish existing buildings and carry out redevelopment of site so as to create a new District Centre, including superstore (11,148 sq.m gross) petrol filling station, non-food retail units, shops, an open market, market hall, a community campus comprising a library and Primary Care Trust facilities, 371 residential dwellings, light industrial units, a transport interchange, access and pedestrian improvements and environmental improvements. Since the application was submitted it has been amended to reduce the superstore to 10,569 sq m gross, with a new District Centre and 481 dwellings. Improvements have also been made to design and public transport and pedestrian linkages. The proposal is located within an existing local centre, although Liverpool City Council is proposing that it should become a new district centre. It is understood that the superstore is to be occupied by Tesco. History None relevant. Consultations Technical Services - no objections. The most northerly point is located approximately 1.5 km from the Liverpool/Sefton boundary and the Transport Assessment accompanying this application has satisfactorily demonstrated that there will be a negligible impact on Sefton’s highway network. Retail Consultants – White Young Green, the Council’s retained consultants raise a number of concerns. The full report will be available before the meeting. The key concerns are: 1. Whilst the catchment considered is now realistic (Bootle had previously

been excluded although a wide area to the north and east had been considered) it is evident that there is still insufficient quantitative need for a new store of the proposed size. Population growth figures and therefore potential local expenditure for both Liverpool and Bootle have

ITEM NO. 5G

been over-estimated. 2. The turnover of existing stores has been under-estimated as has the

turnover of the proposed new superstore, thus giving the impression that there is more surplus expenditure available and that the trade impact of a new superstore will be less.

3. There is also inadequately demonstrated qualitative need. The

proposed store would be the largest and most modern foodstore in Liverpool, significantly larger than the stores it will compete with, including the ASDA at Aintree.

4. In terms of foodstore provision the likely impact of oversupply could

affect Bootle. This would potentially be the fourth superstore reliant on taking up the overtrading presently experienced by ASDA at Aintree. If it goes ahead, and if the proposals for Tesco at Kirkby in Knowsley proceed, then the planned new ASDA at Bootle and the Tesco store at Litherland could be vulnerable or there may be a risk of their implementation being delayed. Because these are key parts of the Council’s regeneration programme and provide support to HMRI activities, especially in Klondyke, this vulnerability is a source of some concern.

Neighbour Representations None received, although it is noted that objections on behalf of the owners of The Strand Shopping Centre (ING) and on behalf of Iceland (The Strand) have been submitted to Liverpool City Council. Policy The application site is within Liverpool. Advice on retail development in PPS6 and Policies EC8 and UR1 of RSS are relevant. Director’s Comments This site is located some 1.5 km from the Sefton boundary and there are therefore no site planning implications for Sefton. The Director of Technical Services is also satisfied that there are no concerns on highway grounds. The only planning issues which are relevant to Sefton concern the retail justification and the impact of this size of development within the sub-regional context set against the regeneration benefits of the development in the context of North Liverpool/South Sefton. The application was first received in January and at an early stage (March) the Council, acting on advice from its retail consultants, expressed some reservations about the methodology employed by the consultants for the applicant and concern about the scale of the foodstore proposed. These concerns centred on the impact on Bootle Town Centre which, as indicated in a recent health check, was shown to be experiencing decline in its market

ITEM NO. 5G

share of retail expenditure. The Council’s consultants considered that the need, both quantitative and qualitative was overstated and the potential impact on established centres underestimated. As a result of this concern, the applicants’ consultants carried out some additional work seeking to justify their methodology and conclusions in a Revised Retail statement. Considerable discussion followed with Liverpool City, the developer and their advising consultants and our own retail consultants and officers. The outcome of this has reduced the Council’s concerns, but there remain issues as summarised below. - The need for the store proposed : White Young Green consider that taking all factors into account, there remains insufficient capacity to justify a store of the size proposed. Even if the developer’s consultants (MTTP) optimistic figures were accepted (which they are not) there is only just enough capacity within the catchment area assuming that all the available capacity were devoted to the new store, which in White Young Green’s view is unrealistic. - The size of the store proposed : based on the above and White Young Green’s previous work, their analysis continues to lead to the conclusion that the size of the superstore proposed within the new district centre is too big, not only in relation to the potential need identified but also in terms of the role and function of district centres. - The likely impact on established centres : White Young Green conclude that as the superstore is too large it will result in greater trade diversion from existing facilities, including the existing Tesco store in Bootle and potentially the timing and development of the two proposed superstores at Bootle (Asda) and at Litherland (Tesco). In summary, and for the avoidance of doubt, White Young Green’s concerns are not related to the principle of a superstore as part of the Project Jennifer development, but rather concerns that the size of the proposed development is greater than the need identified and greater than the size of the store required to operate a successful district centre. The scheme is the largest single investment in this area of north Liverpool in recent times and it is acknowledged that the development has potentially very significant urban and economic regeneration benefits for one of the most deprived parts of Liverpool. It will, for instance, provide much needed community facilities and new homes and lead to the creation of 721 full time equivalent jobs, as well as local employment opportunities during construction, however, the viability of the new centre relies upon the delivery of significant retail floorspace. The area of north Liverpool served by the proposed development has suffered considerable disinvestment and dereliction in recent years. This scheme will lift its profile and is likely to have significant positive knock-on effects for South Sefton. This is especially relevant given our commitment to work collaboratively to address the physical and social problems which straddle the

ITEM NO. 5G

administrative boundary between the two authorities. It is most evident in the regeneration of local housing through the HMRI Pathfinder initiative, Liverpool’s promotion of an Area Action Plan for North Liverpool using the new LDF process and additionally by way of the recently successful joint Local Enterprise Growth Initiative bid which has been awarded £21m for a three year programme from 2007. The new district centre features as an opportunity in the SLEGI bid. These undoubted benefits must, however, be weighed against the potential impact in retail terms on south Sefton which are highlighted above. On balance, and after careful consideration of all the factors and following thorough discussions with Liverpool City, the applicant, their retail advisors and our own retained retail consultants and officers, the Director concludes that the significant urban and economic regeneration benefits linked to the scheme outweigh the potential negative retail impacts. It should also be noted that recent progress with the ASDA and Tesco investments in Bootle and Litherland respectively, provide strong and timely evidence of the continuing commitment to proceed with their planned investments in South Sefton. Accordingly, it is recommended that no objections should be raised to the proposal in this case, providing the following conditions, as strongly advised by White Young Green, are satisfied: Firstly, it is vital that no additional food convenience floorspace is granted planning approval elsewhere in the development (eg by way of a food discounter or similar), which could exacerbate our concerns about need and impact. Accordingly, it is understood that Liverpool City Council are content to accept a condition which will restrict the food convenience goods sales from the floorspace proposed beyond the superstore. Secondly, it is vital that the net sales area of the superstore is conditioned in such a way that the convenience/comparison split is fixed. Again, it is understood that Liverpool City Council are content to accept a condition to this effect. The achievement of both the above conditions are considered necessary to provide the appropriate control over the impact of the development proposed.

Regatta House, Clippers Quay, Salford Quays, Manchester, M50 3XP Tel: +44 (0)161 872 3223 Fax: +44 (0)161 872 3193 Email: info@wyg.com www.wyg.com

In assessing the application, it is important to reflect upon the fact that the wider area (referred to as the St Modwen Scheme) does benefit from outline planning permission for a new district centre which includes a foodstore totalling 10,519 sq m. The store already permitted is therefore bigger than that now proposed by Tesco. Although concerns were raised by Sefton Council as to the scale of the store at the time the previous application was submitted, no formal objection was made subject to specific conditions being attached to control the scale of retail development proposed. Therefore, put simply, if the store now proposed is smaller than that already permitted it would be inconsistent and inappropriate, in our view, if Sefton were to object to the Tesco store now proposed. In fact, in their Planning and Retail Statement, DPP are at pains to remind the reader that the proposed foodstore now before the Council is smaller than that permitted as part of the wider district centre and therefore planning permission should be granted. In simple terms we would agree with the argument put forward by DPP. Clearly a need has previously been accepted for a larger store in this part of Liverpool and the trading impact of that store was not deemed to have any deleterious impacts on established centres elsewhere. However, we are concerned that the DPP assessment assumes that a foodstore at Great Homer Street could only be delivered in the location of the proposed Tesco store. DPP have assumed that if the Tesco store is permitted then the foodstore element of the St Modwen’s scheme cannot be implemented. This is demonstrated by the fact that DPP have undertaken their retail assessment on the basis that the existing commitment at Great Homer Street cannot be delivered. When assessing the need for the superstore, DPP have referred to the previous work undertaken by MT Town Planning which justified a need for the St Modwen’s proposals. DPP have updated this work and suggest that there is an even greater need than identified before but this is predicated on the fact that only one store will be delivered at the new district centre. Whilst we have some concerns with the methodology presented and the fact that paragraphs 5.28 and 5.31 of the need assessment appear to contradict themselves, the fundamental issue in consideration of this proposed development is whether or not the proposed foodstore previously granted could be implemented in addition to the Tesco scheme now before the Council. If the granting of planning permission for the Tesco foodstore would result in a situation whereby two foodstores could be delivered within the new district centre then clearly the Tesco foodstore is unjustified. All of the evidence prepared and submitted by DPP has assumed that although there is an existing commitment for a foodstore this cannot be delivered by St Modwen. Overview WYG are unclear at this stage as to whether the location of the proposed Tesco store will prevent the foodstore already permitted from being delivered or that there is sufficient flexibility in the outline permission granted which means that two stores could be implemented. We would recommend that Sefton Council seek clarification from Liverpool City Council as to the current position with the existing outline consent and whether or not both foodstores could, in theory, be implemented. If this is the case then it is evident that the analysis undertaken by DPP totally ignores this situation and does not address the issue of the consented foodstore in either the need assessment or the cumulative impact assessment. On this basis, we would recommend that Sefton Council should object to

Regatta House, Clippers Quay, Salford Quays, Manchester, M50 3XP Tel: +44 (0)161 872 3223 Fax: +44 (0)161 872 3193 Email: info@wyg.com www.wyg.com

the proposed development as it has not adequately addressed the key tests set out in PPS6 including need and impact. If Liverpool City Council confirm that the position presented by DPP in preparing their Planning and Retail Statement is correct and only one store can be implemented, then we believe that no objection should be advanced as the store is smaller than that previously accepted by Sefton Council. Although we are aware that Sefton Council’s concerns in relation to the acceptability of the previous large foodstore were balanced against the wider benefits that were associated with the new district centre which cannot be applied to this application, it must be noted that the need for, and impact of the foodstore element has been accepted. We trust this advice is helpful. However, if you wish to discuss the matter further please do not hesitate to contact us. Keith Nutter Director WYG PLANNING & DESIGN