RETAIL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL SUPERSTORE ... · RETAIL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL...

RETAIL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF

POTENTIAL SUPERSTORE

DEVELOPMENTS IN

BARNSLEY

England & Lyle Ltd Chartered Town Planners Gateway House 55 Coniscliffe Road Darlington DL3 7EH Tel: 01325 469236 [email protected]

MAY 2011

CONTENTS

Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. BACKGROUND 4 - Purpose of the Study - Existing Foodstore Provision in Barnsley - Potential Superstore Developments 2. PPS4 ADVICE ON ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF PROPOSED RETAIL DEVELOPMENTS 6

- Policy EC10 Considerations - Policy EC14 Requirements - Policy EC16 Retail Impacts - Policy EC17 Policy Evaluation

3. FRAMEWORK FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT 10

- Methodology - Catchment Area - Expenditure Flows and Existing Turnover - Design Year and Future Turnover - Current Trading Performance

4. IMPACT ANALYSIS 15 - Superstore Development Scenarios - Quantitative Need for a New Superstore Development - Trade Draw - Trade Diversion - Cumulative Impact - Residual Turnover

5. INTERPRETATION OF IMPACTS 25

- Vitality and Viability of Barnsley Town Centre - Impact on Smaller Centres - Effect on Investment in Centres - Potential Benefits

6. EMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS 29

- Employment Potential in Superstore Developments - Net Employment Benefits

7. EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL SUPERSTORE DEVELOPMENTS 31

- Evaluation Criteria - Site Evaluation - Retail Factors - Advice on Development Scenarios

8. APPROACH TO REVIEWS OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS 37 - PPS4 Impact Assessment - PPS4 Sequential Assessment - Implications for Barnsley Town Centre

9. THRESHOLDS FOR RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 39

- PPS4 Advice - Suggested Floorspace Thresholds for Barnsley - Locally Important Impacts

10. BARNSLEY TOWN CENTRE BOUNDARIES 44 - Town Centre Boundary - Primary Shopping Area 11. CONCLUSIONS 46 MAPS FIGURE 1 - POTENTIAL SUPERSTORE DEVELOPMENT SITES (after page 5) FIGURE 2 - BARNSLEY TOWN CENTRE: SUGGESTED TOWN CENTRE BOUNDARY AND PRIMARY SHOPPING AREA (after page 45) TABLES See Overleaf

TABLES 1. Existing Expenditure Flows, Convenience Goods, 2008

2. Existing Expenditure Flows, Comparison Goods, 2008

3. Expenditure Flows, Convenience Goods, 2016 including Commitments

4. Expenditure Flows, Comparison Goods, 2016 including Commitments

5. Capacity Analysis, Convenience Goods

6. Capacity Analysis, Comparison Goods

7. Retail Impact Assessment, Convenience Goods 7A: Scenario 1 – Peel Centre 7B: Scenario 2 – Gala Bingo/YEB site 7C: Scenario 3 – New Street site 7D: Scenario 3 – B&Q site, Stairfoot 8. Retail Impact Assessment, Comparison Goods 8A: Scenario 1 – Peel Centre 8B: Scenario 2 – Gala Bingo/YEB site 8C: Scenario 3 – New Street site 8D: Scenario 3 – B&Q site, Stairfoot 9. Retail Impact Assessment, Convenience and Comparison Goods 9A: Scenario 1 – Peel Centre 9B: Scenario 2 – Gala Bingo/YEB site 9C: Scenario 3 – New Street site 9D: Scenario 3 – B&Q site, Stairfoot 10. Cumulative Impact Assessment

10A: Convenience Goods 10B: Comparison Goods 10C: Convenience and Comparison Goods

11. Residual Turnover of Superstores

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. England & Lyle Limited have been appointed by Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council to advise the Council on the impact of potential superstore developments outside the town centre. Barnsley MBC Officers have had pre-application discussions with a retailer proposing to develop a new superstore in Barnsley. Four potential sites have been discussed, two on the edge of the town centre and two in out-of-centre locations. The following scenarios have been assessed. The locations are shown in Figure 1. Scenario

Site Indicative Net Sales

Area (sq.m.) Location

1 Peel Centre 5,574 Out-of-centre 2 Gala Bingo/YEB site 4,645 Edge-of-centre 3 New Street 4,645 Edge-of-centre 4 B&Q, Stairfoot 6,503 Out-of-centre

2. The report summarises the advice in PPS4 on assessing the impact of proposed retail developments. It applies particularly to proposals for major retail developments outside existing centres (edge or out-of-centre locations) and not in accordance with an up-to-date development plan. 3. A framework is put forward for assessing proposals for large-scale retail development in Barnsley, based on the requirements for impact assessment set out in PPS4 and the accompanying Practice Guidance. 4. Although PPS4 has removed the requirement to demonstrate need for a proposed retail development, an assessment of quantitative need forms the starting point for assessing impact. Our capacity analysis to 2016 shows that there is no quantitative need for the additional floorspace in a new superstore development in convenience or comparison goods. A lack of evidence of quantitative need is an indication that some adverse trading impact is likely to take place. 5. Trade diversion to a superstore will be directly related to the turnover of the potential developments but trade diversion will also depend on the location of the different developments. The predicted overall trade diversions in convenience and comparison goods combined are as follows: 1

Peel Centre 2

Gala Bingo/ YEB site

3 New Street

4 B&Q site, Stairfoot

Morrisons, Barnsley 9.5% 9.9% 11.9% 11.1% Other town centre shops 2.1% 1.7% 1.7% 2.2% Markets scheme 0.9% 0.7% 0.7% 1.0% Asda, Old Mill Lane 12.3% 8.6% 6.8% 9.6% Tesco/Wombwell Lane 7.9% 7.0% 7.0% 16.2% Peel Centre Retail Park - 3.2% 3.2% 4.4% Catchment Area Total 3.9% 3.3% 3.3% 4.6%

1

6. Scenarios 2 and 3 would have the lowest overall trade diversions. Scenario 4, the largest scheme, would have the highest overall trade diversion. Scenario 3 is predicted to have the highest trade diversion from Morrisons on the edge of Barnsley town centre because of its location immediately adjacent to Morrisons. Scenarios 2 and 3 would have the lowest overall impact on town centre shops and the Markets scheme. Scenario 2 would have the lowest overall trade diversion from the town centre and Morrisons of 2.7%. In terms of its effect on the vitality and viability of the town centre, Scenario 2 (Gala Bingo/YEB site) is the most acceptable site. 7. Scenarios 1 and 4 would have the highest impacts on the out-of-centre Asda and Tesco stores and Wombwell Lane Retail Park. However, impacts on Asda and Tesco are not a material consideration, as these are out-of-centre stores not protected by planning policy. 8. The cumulative impact of one edge-of-centre and one out-of-centre superstore would be significant because trade diversion from Morrisons would have an adverse effect on linked trips to the town centre. 9. Trade diversion from the district and local centres and from small out-of-centre supermarkets would be negligible. Large foodstores will tend to compete with existing similar stores on the basis that ‘like affects like’. Any possible impact from smaller centres can be discounted. 10. The four potential superstore developments would have trading impacts on the Markets scheme varying between 0.7% and 1.0% of the additional turnover in the scheme. A trading impact of this magnitude is not likely to cause any harm to the Markets scheme. Investment in the Markets scheme should proceed despite the opening of a new superstore development. Spin-off benefits for the town centre and the Markets scheme will be greatest if the store is well related to the town centre through pedestrian linkages. 11. The range of scenarios could result in the creation of between 273 and 383 jobs, according to the scale of floorspace proposed. Allowing for a reduction of retail jobs in the town centre as a result of trade diversion, the potential net increase in employment is between 195 and 286 jobs. 12. A simple evaluation of the four sites shows that Scenario 2, the Gala Bingo/YEB site, is the most preferable site in terms of retail factors. The New Street site scores well in terms of location but it is less preferable in terms of linkages and trade diversion. Its location next to Morrisons is not a particular advantage, compared to the excellent location of the Gala Bingo/YEB site next to the Transport Interchange and the new Markets redevelopment site. 13. The Peel Centre and Stairfoot sites are less acceptable because they are out-of-centre and they have difficulties in terms of accessibility. The Stairfoot site has the highest predicted trade diversion from the town centre and its location close to Tesco

2

would expand the scale of out-of-centre superstore provision. 14. Our assessment of capacity and impact is that there is only scope for one new superstore in the Barnsley catchment area of up to approximately 5,000 sq.m. net floorspace. 15. The report proposes an approach to reviewing future planning applications for major retail development in Barnsley. It is recommended that independent reviews should be carried out in relation to PPS4 advice on Impact Assessments and Sequential Assessments. 16. As a basis for assessing future proposals for large-scale retail developments in Barnsley, floorspace thresholds are suggested for impact assessments. We recommend that the following thresholds are used by the Council in deciding whether a proposed development requires an impact assessment. Area for Application of Floorspace

Thresholds

Floorspace Threshold for Impact Assessment

Barnsley Town Centre Barnsley urban area, outside the

primary shopping area

over 2,500 sq. metres gross

District Centres Catchment areas of the District Centres, outside the primary

shopping areas


Local Centres Within 800 metres of the boundary of a Local Centre

over 500 sq. metres gross

17. Because of the importance of the Barnsley Markets Project in the draft Core Strategy, we recommend that impact on the Markets Project should be adopted by the Council as a “locally important impact” for the purposes of the application of PPS4 policies. 18. The report proposes boundaries for Barnsley town centre and the primary shopping area, and the primary and secondary frontages. They are shown in Figure 2.

3

1. BACKGROUND Purpose of the Study 1.1 In December 2010 England & Lyle Limited were appointed by Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council to undertake a Retail Capacity Update for Barnsley town centre and to advise the Council on the impact of potential superstore developments outside the town centre. The Town Centre Retail Capacity Study was completed in March 2011. 1.2 This report is the second stage of the commission, to assess the impact of potential superstore developments. Following this Background section, the report summarises PPS4 advice on assessing the impact of proposed retail developments. A framework for impact assessment is then set out. A detailed impact analysis is undertaken and an interpretation of impacts is presented. An analysis is made of the employment potential of superstore developments. An evaluation is made of the alternative potential superstore developments. Finally advice is given on an approach to reviewing a planning application for a superstore development and floorspace thresholds for retail impact assessments in Barnsley are suggested. Existing Foodstore Provision in Barnsley 1.3 There are three existing superstores in the Barnsley urban area. Store Floorspace Location

sq.m. net Morrisons, Westway, Barnsley 3,380 Edge-of-centre Asda, Old Mill Lane, Barnsley 3,901 Out-of-centre Tesco, Wombwell Lane, Barnsley 7,421 Out-of-centre

1.4 The town centre contains other small supermarkets – two Iceland stores and the Marks & Spencer Food Hall. A new Lidl supermarket is under construction at Peel Street on the edge of the town centre. There are supermarkets and discount foodstores in the district and local centres in Barnsley. District Centres Store Local Centres Store

Cudworth Co-op Athersley Co-op, Netto Goldthorpe Co-op, Netto Bolton upon Dearne Co-op Hoyland Co-op Darfield Co-op Penistone Tesco Darton Co-op Royston Co-op, Netto Dodworth Budgens Wombwell Tesco Express Grimethorpe Netto Hoyland Common Co-op Lundwood Netto Mapplewell Co-op Stairfoot Aldi Thurnscoe Netto

4

1.5 In addition, there are several freestanding supermarkets outside these centres – Netto and Tesco Express in Monk Bretton; Netto in Worsborough; Tesco Express in Hoyland; and Co-op in Great Houghton. Potential Superstore Developments 1.6 Barnsley MBC Officers have had pre-application discussions with a retailer proposing to develop a new superstore in Barnsley. Four potential sites have been discussed. Based on these discussions the Council has requested England & Lyle to assess four superstore development scenarios. The four scenarios are as follows. Scenario


Area (sq.m.)Location


1.7 The locations of these four sites are shown on the map in Figure 1 overleaf. 1.8 It is assumed that the split of the net sales area for each scenario would be 60% for convenience goods and 40% for comparison goods. Further details of these scenarios are given in Section 4. 1.9 PPS4 Annex B defines a “superstore” as a self-service store selling mainly food, or food and non-food goods, usually with more than 2,500 sq. metres trading floorspace, with supporting car parking. Each of the scenarios assessed in this report has a trading floorspace of more than 2,500 sq. metres. Therefore it is appropriate in this report to refer to the potential developments as “superstores”.

5

1

A

B

C

D

E

5

4

3

2

6

X

Drawing:

Supermarket Options

1

.Sc

.Sb

This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.100022264. (2010)

Planning and Transportation Service

20/10/2010

DS Project:Scale 1:13000

Date:

Drawn by:

Drwg No: 1

BARNSLEY METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCILPLANNING & TRANSPORTATION SERVICE


Assistant Director: Stephen Moralee BA(Hons) MBAPO Box 604, Barnsley. S70 9FETel: (01226) 772601 $

Existing Supermarkets

Potential Sites

Granted Application

1. Peel Site2. Gala Bingo Site3. New Street Site4. B&Q Site5. Wombwell Lane Site6. Old Mill Lane Site

A. Morrisons, WestwayB. Asda, Old Mill LaneC. Tesco, Wombwell LaneD. Aldi, StairfootE. Netto, Monk Bretton

X. Lidl, Peel Street

mike

Rectangle

mike

Rectangle

mike

Oval

mike

Oval

mike

Text Box

FIGURE 1 - POTENTIAL SUPERSTORE DEVELOPMENT SITES

2. PPS4 ADVICE ON ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF PROPOSED RETAIL DEVELOPMENTS 2.1 This Section summarises the advice in PPS4 on assessing the impact of proposed retail developments. It applies particularly to proposals for major retail developments outside existing centres (edge or out-of-centre locations) and not in accordance with an up-to-date development plan. Polices on development management are not stated in full. We present a concise summary of the main policy requirements relevant to impact assessments. Policy EC10 Considerations POLICY EC10: DETERMINING PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EC10.1 Local planning authorities should adopt a positive and constructive approach towards planning applications for economic development. Planning applications that secure sustainable economic growth should be treated favourably. EC10.2 All planning applications for economic development should be assessed against the following impact considerations:

a. whether the proposal has been planned over the lifetime of the development to limit carbon dioxide emissions, and minimise vulnerability and provide resilience to, climate change; b. the accessibility of the proposal by a choice of means of transport including walking, cycling, public transport and the car, the effect on local traffic levels and congestion; c. whether the proposal secures a high quality and inclusive design which takes the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of the area and the way it functions; d. the impact on economic and physical regeneration in the area including the impact on deprived areas and social inclusion objectives; and e. the impact on local employment.

2.2 This policy reflects the objectives of PPS4 to achieve sustainable economic growth and promote the vitality and viability of town centres. It also shows that retail and other town centre uses are regarded by the Government as a form of economic development. The considerations of sustainability, accessibility, design, regeneration and employment must be assessed for all applications, and these criteria must be satisfied for a proposed development to be acceptable. Policy EC14 Requirements POLICY EC14: SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR MAIN TOWN CENTRE USES EC14.1 References in this policy to planning applications for main town centre uses include any applications which create additional floorspace, including applications for internal alterations where planning permission is required, and applications to vary or remove conditions changing the range of goods sold.

6

EC14.2 The town centre policies in this PPS apply to planning applications for the ‘town centre uses’ defined in PPS4 unless they are ancillary to other uses. EC14.3 A sequential assessment (under EC15) is required for planning applications for main town centres uses that are not in an existing centre and are not in accordance with an up to date development plan. EC14.4 An assessment addressing the impacts in policy EC16.1 is required for planning applications for retail and leisure developments over 2,500 square metres gross floorspace or any local floorspace threshold set under policy EC3.1.d not in an existing centre and not in accordance with an up to date development plan. EC14.5 In advance of development plans being revised to reflect this PPS, an assessment of impacts in policy EC16.1 is necessary for planning applications for retail and leisure developments below 2,500 square metres which are not in an existing centre and not in accordance with an up to date development plan that would be likely to have a significant impact on other centres. EC14.6 An impact assessment dealing with the impacts set out in policy EC16.1 is also required for planning applications in an existing centre which are not in accordance with the development plan and which would substantially increase the attraction of the centre to an extent that the development could have an impact on other centres. EC14.7 Assessments of impacts should focus in particular on the first 5 years after the implementation of a proposal and the level of detail and type of evidence and analysis required in impact assessments should be proportionate to the scale and nature of the proposal and its likely impact. Any assumptions should be transparent and clearly justified, realistic and internally consistent. EC14.8 Local planning authorities should respond positively to approaches from applicants to discuss their proposals before a planning application is submitted and seek to agree the type and level of information that needs to be included within an impact assessment. 2.3 Impact assessments are required for all proposals for retail development outside centres, other than extensions of less than 200 sq. metres, unless a threshold is set in an up-to-date development plan. The impact of large retail developments within centres also needs to be assessed. The level of detail required depends on the scale and type of development proposed. Policy EC16 Retail Impacts POLICY EC16: THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR MAIN TOWN CENTRE USES THAT ARE NOT IN A CENTRE AND NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN UP-TO-DATE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

7

EC16.1 Planning applications for main town centres uses that are not in a centre (unless EC16.1.e applies) and not in accordance with an up to date development plan should be assessed against the following impacts on centres:

a. the impact of the proposal on existing, committed and planned public and private investment in a centre or centres in the catchment area of the proposal; b. the impact of the proposal on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and the range and quality of the comparison and convenience retail offer; c. the impact of the proposal on allocated sites outside town centres being developed in accordance with the development plan; d. in the context of a retail or leisure proposal, the impact of the proposal on in-centre trade/turnover and on trade in the wider area, taking account of current and future consumer expenditure capacity in the catchment area up to five years from the time the application is made; e. if located in or on the edge of a town centre, whether the proposal is of an appropriate scale (in terms of gross floorspace) in relation to the size of the centre and its role in the hierarchy of centres; and f. any locally important impacts on centres under policy EC3.1.e.

2.4 The key issues to be addressed in impact assessments are concerned with impact on investment, vitality and viability, trade in centres and scale of development. Impact on allocated sites only applies to those local authorities which have allocated sites outside centres, and ‘locally important impacts’ only apply where a local authority has identified them in its development plan. In practice it is necessary to assess impact on trade in centres first because trading impact will have an important bearing on investment and the vitality and viability of centres. Policy EC17 Policy Evaluation POLICY EC17: THE CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MAIN TOWN CENTRE USES NOT IN A CENTRE AND NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN UP-TO-DATE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. EC17.1 Planning applications for main town centre uses that are not in an existing centre and not in accordance with an up to date development plan should be refused planning permission where:

a. the applicant has not demonstrated compliance with the requirements the sequential approach (policy EC15); or b. there is clear evidence that the proposal is likely to lead to significant adverse impacts in terms of any one of impacts set out in policies EC10.2 and 16.1 (the impact assessment), taking account of the likely cumulative effect of recent permissions, developments under construction and completed developments.

EC17.2 Where no significant adverse impacts have been identified under policies EC10.2 and 16.1, planning applications should be determined by taking account of:

a. the positive and negative impacts of the proposal in terms of policies EC10.2 and 16.1 and any other material considerations; and

8

b. the likely cumulative effect of recent permissions, developments under construction and completed developments.

EC17.3 Judgements about the extent and significance of any impacts should be informed by the development plan (where this is up to date). Recent local assessments of the health of town centres which take account of the vitality and viability indicators in Annex D of PPS4 and any other published local information (such as a town centre or retail strategy), will also be relevant. 2.5 A proposal must satisfy the sequential approach. Failure to do so can in itself be a reason for refusal. There must also be evidence that a proposal would not have a “significant adverse impact” on any of the factors listed in Policy EC10.2 and EC16.1. A significant adverse impact can also be a reason for refusal. If it is judged that an application satisfies the sequential approach and would not have a significant adverse impact, it is necessary to balance the positive and negative effects of the proposals against the criteria in Policies EC10 and EC16 together with any other local considerations and other wider material considerations in reaching an overall planning judgement. 2.6 The PPS4 Practice Guidance states that it will be for the decision maker to determine what constitutes an ‘acceptable’, ‘adverse’ or ‘significant adverse’ impact, based upon the circumstances of each case, having regard to national and local policy objectives. It also states that there are no meaningful benchmarks of what constitutes an ‘acceptable’ level of trade diversion. 2.7 The Practice Guidance also states that in balancing positive and negative impacts, it may be appropriate to devise a matrix as a means of evaluating different impacts against national and local policy objectives and priorities.

9

3. FRAMEWORK FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT Methodology 3.1 This Section establishes the framework for assessing proposals for large-scale retail development in Barnsley. It is based on the requirements for impact assessment set out in PPS4 and the accompanying Practice Guidance and it draws extensively on the experience of England & Lyle in undertaking impact assessments in support of proposed retail developments and in reviewing retail assessments for local authorities in advising on planning applications for retail development. 3.2 The scope of this report is concerned with advising the Council on the impact of potential superstore developments in Barnsley in edge-of-centre and out-of-centre locations. The methodology we have adopted is intended to provide a robust assessment of the likely trading impacts of various proposals against the criteria in PPS4 Policy EC16. In particular it focuses on assessing impact on the turnover or trade of existing centres and other retail destinations, and then assessing the implications of trade diversions on the other criteria in Policy EC16 relating to investment, vitality and viability, and scale of development. 3.3 The PPS4 Practice Guidance notes that it is inevitable that new retail development will have some impact on the turnover of existing facilities within the catchment area. It states that: The starting point for the assessment is a realistic assessment of current consumer spending and shopping patterns, based on modelling supported by survey evidence. Against this ‘baseline’ position, it will be necessary to assess likely changes at the ‘design year’ arising from ongoing trends, other ‘committed’ developments, and the effects of the proposals. This task inevitably involves subjective judgements about the likely turnover, and trading pattern of the development, and the centres most likely to be affected. If there are details about the type of development proposed and its market position etc. this may assist in such judgements, but unless the proposal is to be conditioned accordingly it may be necessary to test the sensitivity of different forms of development. Having established the likely catchment area, market position and turnover potential of the proposal, the key factors affecting judgements about where it will draw its trade from will be determined by: -

• The intended market sector/role, on the basis that ‘like affects like’; so the centres currently serving the intended catchment population will experience the greatest impact; and

• Distance, on the basis that consumers will generally use the nearest centre/facility which meets their needs in terms of quality/convenience etc.

10

3.4 Interpreting this guidance, and following the experience of best practice, the key steps involved in assessing trading impact are as follows:

1. Define the catchment area of the proposed development. 2. Analyse existing shopping patterns in the catchment area in the form of

expenditure flows between subareas and different centres and stores. 3. Estimate the existing turnover of centres and stores. 4. Decide on an appropriate design year and project the future turnover of centres

and stores. 5. Make allowance in the design year for the turnover of approved retail floorspace

that is likely to be developed in the next few years. 6. On the basis of existing shopping patterns, consider where the trade to a new store

is likely to be drawn from, as percentages of the turnover of the proposed development. This trade draw may include clawback of leakage currently going out of the catchment area and inflow of trade into the catchment area that may be attracted to a new development.

7. Estimate the turnover of the proposed development in convenience and comparison goods.

8. Calculate the trade diversion from existing centres and stores based on the turnover of the proposal and the percentage trade draws. This would normally be done for convenience and comparison goods separately.

9. Combine the convenience and comparison goods trade diversions to make an assessment of overall trading impact on the total turnover of centres and stores.

10. In the case of existing supermarkets and supermarkets, where data is available, compare the residual turnovers of these stores with their actual survey-based turnovers to make a judgement about the effect on the trading performance of large stores.

3.5 This Section discusses the key elements of this methodology. The data and analysis used in the impact assessment can be compiled into a concise impact table or matrix. In this report we have prepared impact tables for the various potential retail developments in Barnsley in a form that is intended to be as clear as possible to be understood by non-specialist readers. These tables form the framework for assessing impact. The remainder of this Section sets out the key assumptions underlying the assessment framework. Catchment Area 3.6 The PPS4 Practice Guidance Appendix B on Quantifying Retail Need sets out the basis for defining catchment areas. The factors to be considered are:

• What is the scale and type of development proposed? • Where are the competing facilities? • What is the settlement pattern in the area, taking account of the road network and

ease of access? • Drivetime isochrones can be a useful guide to how far people may travel but

isochrone-based catchments should be modified to take account of the settlement pattern and competing facilities.

11

3.7 Essentially a large development will have a larger catchment area than a small development because of its attraction. Also, in rural areas travel distances will be longer than in urban areas. Therefore, a supermarket in a rural area may attract shoppers from a 10-15 minute isochrone but its catchment will overlap with that of existing stores within that area. In a densely developed urban area a supermarket will attract shoppers from a smaller area. Its catchment may be fairly localised and may lie within the catchment area of a larger superstore which draws trade from a wide area. 3.8 The catchment area of Barnsley town centre was initially defined in the 2003 Retail Study, based on the results of a telephone household survey and analysed by postcode sector. The catchment area closely approximates the Borough boundary, but also includes postcode areas immediately over the boundary in Wakefield and Rotherham Boroughs. The same area was defined as the catchment area of Barnsley town centre in the 2007 Retail Study Update. The Town Centre Retail Capacity Study (March 2011) confirms that the catchment area defined in 2003 and 2007 remains a realistic definition of the catchment area of Barnsley town centre. 3.9 Data is not available to define the areas from which the main foodstores in Barnsley draw their trade. The household interview carried out in 2007 only covers those households living in the Barnsley study area, that is the catchment area of the town centre. However, we would expect that the vast majority of the turnover of the Morrisons, Asda and Tesco stores in Barnsley is drawn from the town centre catchment area. In this report we assume that the town centre catchment area will be an accurate representation of the catchment areas of all the potential superstore developments, in edge-of-centre and out-of-centre locations. However, a small allowance is made for inflow of trade from beyond the catchment area. Expenditure Flows and Existing Turnover 3.10 Appendix 3 of the Town Centre Retail Capacity Study (March 2011) sets out the expenditure flows in the study area in 2008 for convenience and comparison goods derived from the results of the household survey combined with base data on expenditure. We have summarised these expenditure flows in Table 1 and 2 of this report. 3.11 Table 1 shows the amount of convenience goods expenditure going from each of the five study zones to different centres and stores in Barnsley and the leakage to stores outside Barnsley Borough. It includes spending going to the larger foodstores (Morrisons, Asda and Tesco), other town centre shops, the district centres and all local shops. The main leakage is to Morrisons, Cortonwood and Tesco, Wath upon Dearne. 3.12 Table 2 shows the amount of comparison goods expenditure going from each of the five study zones to different centres and stores in Barnsley and the leakage to centres outside Barnsley Borough. It includes spending principally to Barnsley town centre and also to the district centres, Peel Centre Retail Park and Wombwell Lane Retail Park. The

12

main leakage is to Meadowhall, Cortonwood Retail Park, Sheffield, Wakefield, Rotherham and Doncaster. 3.13 Based on these expenditure flows the final column in Tables 1 and 2 shows the survey-based estimates of total turnover in centres and stores. Total turnover within the catchment area in 2008 is estimated to be £302.7m in convenience goods and £360.0m in comparison goods. These totals represent overall market shares or retention levels of expenditure of 76% in convenience goods and 61% in comparison goods. Design Year and Future Turnover 3.14 PPS4 Policy EC14.7 states that impact assessments should focus on the first 5 years after the implementation of a proposal. It is also conventional to adopt a design year which corresponds to the five year periods used for forecasting retail expenditure. For the purposes of this report the most appropriate design year is 2016. Testing impact against the retail system in 2016 will allow for any new superstore development to have a settled pattern of trading and it will also allow sufficient time for the Markets project in Barnsley to be developed and for changes in shopping patterns in the town centre to take effect. 3.15 Tables 3 and 4 show the projections of expenditure flows and turnover for the design year of 2016. The expenditure flows take into account:

• the growth of expenditure to 2016 by zone in convenience and comparison goods, and

• recent retail developments and commitments in different centres, including Tesco in Penistone, several supermarket developments and extensions, and the Markets scheme.

3.16 The turnover of recent developments and commitments has been added on to the turnover of the respective centres. In distributing future available expenditure between centres, we have taken account of the projected changes in market shares that would occur arising from new developments up to 2016. The following table shows the projected market shares of expenditure retained in the Barnsley catchment area by zone. These figures do not take account of any further increases in market shares that could occur if a new superstore is developed.

Market Shares Convenience goods Comparison goods

Zone 2008 2011 2016 2008 2011 2016

1 Barnsley Central 95.3% 97% 100% 73.7% 75% 84% 2 Penistone/West 77.6% 93% 93% 59.8% 62% 71% 3 Wombwell/Hoyland 57.7% 60% 62% 54.2% 55% 62% 4 Royston/North 84.5% 86% 88% 59.8% 62% 71% 5 Goldthorpe/Cudworth 58.4% 61% 67% 49.6% 51% 57%

Catchment Area Total 76.1% 80% 83% 60.6% 62% 70%

13

3.17 Table 3 for convenience goods reflects an increase in overall market share to 83% in 2016. This implies a reduction in leakage to 17% of convenience expenditure. Table 4 for comparison goods reflects an increase in overall market share to 70% in 2016. This implies a reduction in leakage to 30% of convenience expenditure. The estimated turnovers of centres in 2016 are summarised below. Full details are given in Tables 3 and 4. Turnover 2016 (£m) Convenience

Comparison Total

Morrisons, Barnsley 70.18 - 70.18 Town centre shops 30.89 359.64 390.53 Markets scheme, Barnsley 4.60 57.40 62.00 Asda, Old Mill Lane 81.37 - 81.37 Tesco/Wombwell Lane 42.93 27.76 70.69 Peel Centre Retail Park - 5.95 5.95 Other centres/shops 100.52 16.76 117.28 Catchment area total 330.49 467.51 798.00 Current Trading Performance 3.18 In order to interpret the significance of the trading impact of a new superstore development that may occur on existing superstores in Barnsley, it is necessary to compare the actual survey-based convenience turnovers of these stores with their company average or benchmark turnovers. The table below shows the benchmark turnovers excluding petrol and restaurant sales, taken from Mintel’s UK Retail Rankings 2010.

Store net company benchmark survey-based survey c/f

floorspace average turnover turnover benchmark sq.m. turnover £ million 2008 performance £ per sq.m. £ million Morrisons, Westway 3,380 £11,554 39.05 75.53 193% Asda, Old Mill Lane 3,901 £11,040 43.07 88.20 205% Tesco, Wombwell Lane 4,508 £11,222 50.59 46.13 91%

3.19 These figures should be used with caution because the survey-based estimates of turnover of larger stores can be exaggerated. This commonly happens because survey respondents are asked to name the store they mostly use for food shopping, which can under-estimate the extent to which smaller stores are used. The effect is to inflate the market shares of the larger stores. The actual extent of over-trading could be lower than shown above. Nevertheless, the figures suggest that both Morrisons on Westway and Asda on Old Mill Lane are over-trading by a significant amount, but that Tesco on Wombwell Lane is slightly under-trading. It should be noted that the household survey also under-estimates the turnover of the Peel Centre Retail Park, probably as a result of the dominance of the town centre for comparison goods shopping.

14

4. IMPACT ANALYSIS Superstore Development Scenarios 4.1 Barnsley MBC Officers have had pre-application discussions with a retailer proposing to develop a new superstore in Barnsley. Four potential sites have been discussed. Based on these discussions the Council has requested England & Lyle to assess four superstore development scenarios. The four scenarios are as follows. Scenario




4.2 It is assumed that the split of the net sales area for each scenario would be 60% for convenience goods and 40% for comparison goods. Based on these ratios we have estimated the convenience and comparison goods turnovers of the potential stores. The actual sales density of the stores will depend on the operator. The leading foodstore operators have company average sales densities in the range £10,000 to £12,000 per sq.m. net. In the Town Centre Retail Capacity Study (March 2011) we estimated floorspace capacity in Barnsley using generic sales densities of £10,000 per sq.m. for convenience goods and £5,000 for comparison goods. For consistency it would be appropriate to use the same sales densities. They are at the lower end of the possible range of turnover per sq.m. but this is a robust approach because it avoids any suggestion that we may have over-estimated the turnover of the potential superstore developments in assessing their impact. The estimated turnover estimates of the four scenarios are as follows. Convenience Goods Scenario

Site Convenience Sales

Floorspace (sq.m.) Convenience

Turnover (£m) 1 Peel Centre 3,344 £33.44m 2 Gala Bingo/YEB site 2,787 £27.87m 3 New Street 2,787 £27.87m 4 B&Q, Stairfoot 3,902 £39.12m

Comparison Goods Scenario

Site Comparison Sales

Floorspace (sq.m.) Comparison

Turnover (£m) 1 Peel Centre 2,230 £11.15m 2 Gala Bingo/YEB site 1,858 £9.29m 3 New Street 1,858 £9.29m 4 B&Q, Stairfoot 2,601 £13.01m

15

Quantitative Need for a New Superstore Development 4.3 PPS4 has removed the requirement to demonstrate need for a proposed retail development. However, an assessment of quantitative need forms the starting point for assessing impact, taking account of future expenditure capacity in the catchment area up to five years ahead. Evidence of quantitative need is an important indicator of whether a proposed development may have an impact on existing centres. If there is evidence of need for the amount of floorspace and turnover proposed, there is less likely to be a significant impact on existing centres. Conversely, a lack of evidence of quantitative need could be an indication that some adverse trading impact may take place. 4.4 A detailed analysis of quantitative need for additional shopping floorspace in Barnsley was undertaken in the Town Centre Retail Capacity Study report, March 2011. In the current report we have used the capacity tables for the Barnsley catchment area as a whole up to 2016 in convenience and comparison goods as the base. These tables take account of commitments that should be built by 2016, including the Markets scheme. We have assessed the potential for a further increase in retention levels if a new superstore development takes place. 4.5 Any new superstore development will have the potential to increase trade retention in the Barnsley area by clawing back some of the leakage of spending that is taking place. The existing levels of leakage from the Barnsley catchment area in 2008 are 24% of convenience goods expenditure and 39% of comparison goods expenditure. The retention levels in 2008 are 76% in convenience goods and 61% in comparison goods. It is estimated that recent developments will have increased the retention levels to 80% in convenience goods and 62% in comparison goods. It is also estimated that commitments, particularly the Markets scheme, will increase the retention levels in 2016 to 83% in convenience goods and 70% in comparison goods. 4.6 We believe there is potential for a new superstore development to increase the retention level further. However, there is a limit to how high the retention level or market share could be in the Barnsley catchment area. There is a relatively high leakage from the Wombwell/Hoyland and Goldthorpe/Cudworth zones representing over 40% of convenience spending and up to 50% of comparison spending. Leakage from the Barnsley Central zone is relatively low – just 5% of convenience spending and 26% of comparison spending. Convenience leakage from the Penistone zone is also relatively low and will have reduced further since the opening of Tesco in Penistone, probably down to 7%. The potential is to reduce leakage from the Wombwell/Hoyland and Goldthorpe/Cudworth zones goes mostly to Morrisons at Cortonwood and Cortonwood Retail Park, Tesco in Wath upon Dearne, and to Meadowhall. 4.7 Three of the four scenarios for superstore development being assessed are all in relatively central locations in Barnsley and the fourth, at Stairfoot, is also within the main Barnsley urban area. In our view, in convenience goods the potential for a new superstore to attract trade from the Wombwell/Hoyland and Goldthorpe/Cudworth zones in competition with Morrisons, Cortonwood and Tesco, Wath upon Dearne is fairly limited.

16

There is likely to be greater competition with the existing large foodstores in Barnsley urban area – Morrisons, Asda and Tesco. In comparison goods the potential for a new superstore to attract trade from the Wombwell/Hoyland and Goldthorpe/Cudworth zones in competition with Cortonwood and Meadowhall is also fairly limited. There is likely to be greater competition with shops in Barnsley town centre, including the Markets scheme, and the Peel Centre and Wombwell Lane Retail Parks. 4.8 We believe the retention level in convenience goods could increase by a further 2 percentage points to 85% in 2016. However, in comparison goods we believe it is very unlikely that the retention level could increase above 70%, the market share that is likely to be achieved following the development of the Markets scheme. For the purposes of our analysis of the potential superstore developments, we consider that in each scenario it would be reasonable to assume that 25% of the turnover of the superstore would be drawn from clawback of leakage. 4.9 Table 5 shows the capacity analysis for convenience goods and Table 6 shows the capacity analysis for comparison goods. In convenience goods there is a negative residual capacity in 2016 after allowing for commitments. The higher retention level of 85% we have assumed still does not provide any surplus capacity for additional convenience goods floorspace. In comparison goods there is also a negative residual capacity in 2016 after allowing for commitments. Assuming a retention level of 70% there would not be any surplus capacity for additional comparison goods floorspace. Trade Draw 4.10 The analysis of convenience goods expenditure flows in Table 1 shows that the existing (2008) trade draws of the major foodstores in Barnsley are as follows. Zone Morrisons Asda Tesco 1 Barnsley Central 47% 41% 38% 2 Penistone/West 19% 10% 6% 3 Wombwell/Hoyland 11% 2% 24% 4 Royston/North 13% 30% 8% 5 Goldthorpe/Cudworth 11% 16% 24%

4.11 Morrisons draws almost half of its trade from the Barnsley Central zone and it draws the remainder from across the Borough. Asda has its highest trade draw from the Barnsley Central zone but its location to the north of the town centre is also attractive to shoppers in the Royston/North zone. Tesco also has its highest trade draw from the Barnsley Central zone but its more eastern location attracts a relatively high trade draw from the Wombwell/Hoyland and Goldthope/Cudworth zones. It is significant to note that residents of the Wombwell/Hoyland zone shop at Morrisons, Cortonwood to a greater extent than at Tesco or Morrisons in Barnsley. Very few visit Asda. Similarly residents of the Goldthorpe/Cudworth zone shop to a greater extent at Morrisons, Cortonwood at Tesco, Wath upon Dearne than at Morrisons, Asda or Tesco in Barnsley.

17

4.12 We have used the information on existing shopping patterns to the superstores in Barnsley to assess the likely trade draw to the four potential superstore developments. For each scenario we assume that 25% of the turnover of the store in convenience and comparison goods would be drawn from clawback of leakage. No catchment area is completely self-contained and we assume that for each scenario a further 5% of turnover would be drawn from inflow of trade from beyond the catchment area. 4.13 The remaining 70% of turnover would represent trade diversion from existing stores within the catchment area. The pattern of trade draw from existing stores will be influenced mostly by the location of the potential superstore developments. The table above shows that the trade draws to existing superstores from different parts of the catchment area vary according the location of the stores. Our judgement is that the pattern of trade draw will be as shown below in convenience and comparison goods. 4.14 We anticipate that all the trade diversion from within the catchment area will be from the three existing superstores, from Barnsley town centre and from the existing retail parks. We anticipate that any trade diversion from the district and local centres or from small out-of-centre supermarkets would be negligible and have discounted it from the analysis. In the case of comparison goods, we have assessed the trade draw for existing town centre shops and the Markets development separately.

Convenience Goods Trade Draws

Scenario 1 Peel Centre

Scenario 2 Gala Bingo/

YEB site

Scenario 3 New Street

Scenario 4 B&Q site, Stairfoot

Morrisons, Barnsley 20% 25% 30% 20% Town centre shops 5% 5% 5% 5% Asda, Old Mill Lane 30% 25% 20% 20% Tesco, Wombwell Lane 15% 15% 15% 25% Clawback 25% 25% 25% 25% Inflow 5% 5% 5% 5% Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Comparison Goods Trade Draws



YEB site



Barnsley town centre 60% 55% 55% 50% Markets scheme 5% 5% 5% 5% Peel Centre Retail Park - 2% 2% 2% Wombwell Lane Retail Park 5% 8% 8% 13% Clawback 25% 25% 25% 25% Inflow 5% 5% 5% 5% Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

18

Trade Diversion 4.15 The predicted trade diversions for convenience goods are shown in Table 7 and for comparison goods in Table 8. Each table is presented separately for each of the four scenarios. The percentage trade draws shown above are applied to the estimated turnover of the potential superstores to calculate the trade diversions and these trade diversions are then expressed as percentage impacts by dividing by the turnovers of centres and stores in 2016. The final column of each table is the residual turnover after trade diversion has been subtracted. 4.16 For convenience goods the trade diversions are shown in the following tables. Table 7A: Scenario 1 – Peel Centre Table 7B: Scenario 2 – Gala Bingo/YEB site Table 7C: Scenario 3 – New Street Table 7D: Scenario 4 – B&Q site, Stairfoot 4.17 The trade diversions for each scenario are summarised below.

Convenience Goods Trade Diversions



YEB site



Morrisons, Barnsley 9.5% 9.9% 11.9% 11.1% Town centre shops 5.4% 4.5% 4.5% 6.3% Asda, Old Mill Lane 12.3% 8.6% 6.9% 9.6% Tesco, Wombwell Lane 11.7% 9.7% 9.7% 22.7% Catchment Area Total 7.1% 5.9% 5.9% 8.3%

4.18 The overall trade diversions in the catchment area are directly related to the turnover of the potential developments. Hence Scenario 4, which is the largest scheme, has the highest trade diversion and Scenarios 2 and 3, which are the smallest and the same in size, have lower and equal overall trade diversions. However, the pattern of trade diversion varies depending on the location as well as the size of the different developments. 4.19 Scenarios 3 and 4 are predicted to have the highest trade diversions from Morrisons on the edge of Barnsley town centre – Scenario 3 (New Street) because of its location immediately adjacent to Morrisons and Scenario 4 (Stairfoot) because of the size of the development. Scenario 1 (Peel Centre) would have a relatively high trade diversion from Asda because of its location close to Asda. Scenario 1 would also have a relatively high trade diversion from Tesco because of its location to the east of the town centre. Scenario 4 (Stairfoot) is predicted to result in a significantly high trade diversion from Tesco which is adjacent to the B&Q site.

19

4.20 Although they are the same in size, Scenarios 2 and 3 would have different patterns of trade diversion. Scenario 2 (Gala Bingo/YEB) is likely to have a lower trade diversion from Morrisons but a higher trade diversion from Asda because it would be more likely to attract shoppers from the northern part of the catchment. 4.21 From the point of view of quantitative impact on convenience goods shopping, Scenarios 2 and 3 would have the lowest impact on the town centre. Scenarios 1 and 2 would have the lowest impact on Morrisons. Scenarios 1 and 4 would have relatively high levels of trade diversion from Asda and Tesco but these are both out-of-centre stores and impact on their trade is not a material planning consideration. 4.22 For comparison goods the trade diversions are shown in the following tables. Table 8A: Scenario 1 – Peel Centre Table 8B: Scenario 2 – Gala Bingo/YEB site Table 8C: Scenario 3 – New Street Table 8D: Scenario 4 – B&Q site, Stairfoot 4.23 The trade diversions for each scenario are summarised below.

Comparison Goods Trade Diversions



YEB site



Barnsley town centre 1.9% 1.4% 1.4% 1.8% Markets scheme 1.0% 0.8% 0.8% 1.1% Peel Centre Retail Park - 3.1% 3.1% 4.4% Wombwell Lane Retail Park 2.0% 2.7% 2.7% 6.1% Catchment Area Total 1.7% 1.4% 1.4% 1.9%

4.24 Clearly the levels of percentage trade diversion in comparison goods are significantly lower than they are for convenience goods. This is because the comparison turnovers of the stores are lower (in each case only 40% of the turnover would be in comparison goods) and because the comparison goods turnovers of the competing centres are much higher than they are in convenience goods. Most of the trade diversion would be from Barnsley town centre which has a high level of comparison turnover. The overall trade diversions in the catchment area again vary according to the turnover of the potential developments. 4.25 Scenarios 1 and 4 are predicted to have the highest trade diversions from the town centre but amounting to only 2% on the town centre’s comparison turnover. The highest trade diversions would be in Scenario 4 which would tend to compete strongly with the Peel Centre and Wombwell Lane Retail Park. However, these are out-of-centre retail parks and impact on their trade is not a material planning consideration. From the point of view of quantitative impact on comparison goods shopping, Scenarios 2 (Gala Bingo/YEB) and 3 (New Street) would have the least impact on Barnsley town centre and

20

the least overall impact. Scenarios 2 and 3 would also have the lowest predicted trade diversion from the Markets scheme. The pattern of trade diversion in Scenarios 2 and 3 is predicted to be the same in comparison goods. 4.26 Because PPS4 advises that impact should be assessed not only for convenience and comparison goods, but also for all retail trade in order to judge the overall impact on the vitality and viability of centres, we have prepared a set of combined tables for convenience and comparison goods in Table 9. The columns showing trade diversions in Tables 7 and 8 have been added together and divided by total turnover in centres and stores. The combined trade diversions are shown in the following tables. Table 9A: Scenario 1 – Peel Centre Table 9B: Scenario 2 – Gala Bingo/YEB site Table 9C: Scenario 3 – New Street Table 9D: Scenario 4 – B&Q site, Stairfoot 4.27 The trade diversions for each scenario are summarised below.

Overall Trade Diversions



YEB site



Morrisons, Barnsley 9.5% 9.9% 11.9% 11.1% Town centre shops 2.1% 1.7% 1.7% 2.2% Markets scheme 0.9% 0.7% 0.7% 1.0% Asda, Old Mill Lane 12.3% 8.6% 6.8% 9.6% Tesco/Wombwell Lane 7.9% 7.0% 7.0% 16.2% Peel Centre Retail Park - 3.2% 3.2% 4.4% Catchment Area Total 3.9% 3.3% 3.3% 4.6%

4.28 Scenarios 2 and 3 would have the lowest overall trade diversions in the catchment area because they have the lowest turnovers. Scenario 4, the largest scheme, would have the highest overall trade diversion. Scenario 3 is predicted to have the highest trade diversion from Morrisons on the edge of Barnsley town centre because of its location immediately adjacent to Morrisons. Scenarios 2 and 3 would have the lowest overall impact on town centre shops and on the Markets scheme. Scenarios 1 and 4 would have the highest impacts on the out-of-centre Asda and Tesco stores and Wombwell Lane Retail Park. 4.29 From the point of view of quantitative impact on retail trade overall, Scenario 2 (Gala Bingo/YEB) would have the least impact on town centre shops and the Markets scheme. Adding together the total trade diversions from Morrisons, town centre shops and the Markets scheme, Scenario 2 would have an overall trade diversion of 2.7% compared to 2.9% in Scenario 3.

21

Cumulative Impact 4.30 The impact analysis in this Section has been based on an assessment of each scenario individually. However, there is a possibility that proposals may come forward for more than one superstore development. In order to advise the Council on the implications of more than one superstore being developed in Barnsley, we have also considered the cumulative impact of two schemes. The assumption we have tested is that there is one edge-of-centre superstore development and one out-of-centre development. Both of the proposed edge-of-centre schemes are the same size; for the out-of-centre development we have selected the smaller of the two potential schemes. The total floorspace of the two schemes is 10,219 sq.m. net, of which 60% or 6,131 sq.m. is assumed to be for convenience goods sales and 40% or 4,088 sq.m. is assumed to be for comparison goods sales. The total estimated floorspace is £61.31m in convenience goods and £20.44m in comparison goods. 4.31 Although we have assumed that this floorspace and turnover would be in two stores, the assessment we have carried out would apply equally to a single very large superstore development of the same overall size. A total net floorspace of 10,219 sq.m. would represent a gross floorspace in the order of 15,000 sq. metres. 4.32 We assume that 25% of the total turnover of the stores in convenience and comparison goods would be drawn from clawback of leakage and a 5% of turnover would be drawn from inflow of trade from beyond the catchment area. The remaining 70% of turnover would represent trade diversion from existing stores within the catchment area. The estimated distribution of the overall trade draw is shown below. Trade Draw Convenience

goods Comparison

goods Morrisons, Barnsley 25% - Town centre shops 5% 55% Markets scheme - 5% Asda, Old Mill Lane 25% - Tesco, Wombwell Lane 15% - Wombwell Lane Retail Park - 8% Peel Centre Retail Park - 2% Clawback 25% 25% Inflow 5% 5% Total 100% 100%

4.33 The cumulative impact of these schemes is assessed in Table 10. Table 10A is the cumulative impact assessment for convenience goods, Table 10B is the cumulative impact assessment for comparison goods, and Table 10C is the cumulative impact assessment for convenience and comparison goods combined. The predicted trade diversions are summarised in the following table.

22

Cumulative Trade Diversions Convenience

goods Comparison

goods All Retail

goods Morrisons, Barnsley 21.8% - 21.8% Town centre shops 9.9% 3.1% 3.7% Markets scheme - 1.8% 1.6% Asda, Old Mill Lane 18.8% - 18.8% Tesco/Wombwell Lane Retail Park 21.4% 5.9% 15.3% Peel Centre Retail Park - 6.9% 6.9% Catchment Area Total 13.0% 3.1% 7.2%

4.34 The cumulative trade diversions are significant. Most of the cumulative impact would be on the existing out-of-centre stores and retail parks, rather than on Barnsley town centre. However, although the direct impact on trade in the town centre and the Markets scheme may not be significant in itself, there would be a significant adverse impact on the Morrisons store which would have a knock-on effect on the town centre because of the reduction in linked trips to Morrisons and the town centre. In our view the levels of trade diversion arising from two new superstore developments, or one very large development of a similar overall size, would be sufficiently large to result in a significant adverse impact on Barnsley town centre, contrary to PPS4 Policies EC16 and EC17. Residual Turnover 4.35 The final columns of Tables 7 and 8 show the residual turnovers of centres and stores in convenience and comparison goods after trade diversion has taken place. A good indicator of the significance of trading impact is to compare the residual turnovers in the design year with existing turnover in the base year, in this case 2008, and in the design year, 2016, before any trade diversion takes place. The data on existing turnover in Tables 1 and 2 has been aggregated into totals for Barnsley town centre and the existing superstores and retail parks. The data on existing turnover in Tables 3 and 4 has then been aggregated for 2016. The 2008 and 2016 turnovers are compared below with the residual turnovers derived from Tables 7 and 8.

Residual Turnover 2016 (£m)

Changes in Total Turnover

Total Turnover

2008 (£m)

Total Turnover

2016 (£m)

Scenario 1 Peel

Centre

Scenario 2 Gala

Bingo/ YEB site



Morrisons, Barnsley 75.5 70.2 63.5 63.2 61.8 62.4 Other town centre shops 349.2 390.5 382.2 384.0 384.0 382.1 Markets scheme - 62.0 61.4 61.5 61.5 61.4 Asda, Old Mill Lane 88.2 81.4 71.3 74.4 75.8 73.6 Tesco/Wombwell Lane 61.8 70.7 65.7 65.8 65.8 59.3 Peel Centre Retail Park 5.4 6.0 6.0 5.8 5.8 5.7 Other centres and shops 78.6 117.3 116.7 117.3 117.3 117.3 Catchment Area Total 658.7 798.0 766.8 772.0 772.0 761.6

23

4.36 The effect of expenditure growth and new retail developments, including the Markets scheme, is expected to be an increase in total turnover in the catchment area between 2008 and 2016 of £139.3m or 21%. The four scenarios for potential superstore development would all result in a reduction in the total residual turnover of centres and stores in 2016 of between 3.3% and 4.6%. Even with a new superstore development, the total residual turnover in the Barnsley catchment area would still be significantly higher than it was in 2008. 4.37 Another valuable indicator of the significance of trading impact is the impact on the residual turnover of the three existing superstores in Barnsley. In Section 3 we noted that the Morrisons and Asda stores are significantly over-trading and the Tesco store is slightly under-trading. The effect of trade diversion from these stores as a consequence of the opening of a new superstore is set out in Table 11. 4.38 The trading performance of the existing superstores would be reduced as a result of competition with a new store. However, the Morrisons and Asda stores would continue to trade at a level well above their company averages (Morrisons 158-163% and Asda 166-176%). Trade diversion from Tesco would reduce its sales density to a level well below the company average (between 66% and 77%). 4.39 The final section of Table 11 also shows the likely cumulative impact of the two potential superstore developments we have assessed. The Morrisons and Asda stores would be likely to continue trade at level above their company averages (Morrisons 140% and Asda 153%). As in the other scenarios, trade diversion from Tesco would reduce its sales density to just 67% of its company average. 4.40 Impacts on Asda and Tesco are not a material consideration, as these are out-of-centre stores not protected by planning policy. Morrisons is an edge-of-centre store but it is located within the Barnsley Town Centre Area Action Plan boundary (although not in the UDP Town Centre Retail Area), and there are clear spin-off benefits to the town centre from linked trips by shoppers to Morrisons. As part of the judgement of the acceptability of a new superstore development, the Council should have regard to the overall impact on the town centre, including the edge-of-centre Morrisons which is the anchor store for convenience goods shopping for visitors to the town centre and will continue to be even after the development of the Markets scheme. The overall impact on the vitality and viability of the town centre, including Morrisons, is a material consideration in any planning decision on a potential superstore development.

24

5. INTERPRETATION OF IMPACTS Vitality and Viability of Barnsley Town Centre 5.1 Impact must be interpreted against the level of vitality and viability of centres. The higher the vitality and viability, the better a centre will be able to withstand any possible trading impact from a new, competing retail development. England & Lyle’s report ‘Town Centre Retail Capacity Study’ (March 2011) includes an up-to-date health check appraisal of Barnsley town centre, which is summarised below. The overall score obtained in the health check is 3.3 which represents a moderately better than average index of vitality and viability (an average score is 3.0). 5.2 Barnsley’s strengths are its overall capacity for growth and change, including major redevelopment opportunities to consolidate and expand the centre; a good representation of street markets; the relative lack of undeveloped sites; good pedestrian flow; good accessibility by public transport; the security offered by the CCTV system; and the quality of open spaces/landscaping. All other factors in the town centre were rated as ‘fair’ with particular opportunities for the town centre to improve in terms of its overall diversity of uses, retailer representation, car parking, ease of pedestrian movement, customer satisfaction, and the potential for linked trips to the town centre. 5.3 Overall Barnsley is a centre which has continued to perform relatively well during the current economic climate and there are good opportunities for growth and change in the centre. In our judgement the centre is sufficiently robust to withstand the introduction of the planned new shopping development in the Markets scheme. This scheme should bring about a positive improvement in the vitality and viability of the town centre and make it more attractive to shoppers. However, the town centre remains vulnerable to competing retail developments which could hinder the centre’s regeneration when the retail economy is already fragile. There is limited potential for further retail development in Barnsley in the short to medium term. The potential that does exist should be concentrated in the town centre to ensure the success of the Markets redevelopment scheme. 5.4 The ‘Town Centre Retail Capacity Study’ report also assesses qualitative retail need in Barnsley town centre, as follows.

(1) The town centre has a qualitative ‘gap’ in terms of the choice and provision of main food retailing and a new supermarket may make the town centre more attractive to shoppers. There is also a deficiency in the type and range of non-food shopping provision in the town centre, particularly the lack of a major department store and leading multiple retailers. Barnsley needs a greater range of higher quality, multiple retailers.

(2) The Markets project provides an important opportunity to address the town centre’s existing deficiencies and enhance its ability to attract and retain spending from within the Barnsley catchment and further afield. It will increase consumer choice and ensure that the town centre becomes more competitive and attractive as a retail and leisure destination.

25

(3) The Morrisons store on the edge of the town centre is over-trading. The new Lidl store under construction will increase choice in terms of discount food shopping, but a lack of choice in major food shopping is likely to remain.

(4) Lidl will also help to meet the food shopping needs of those living in deprived areas of Barnsley. The Markets scheme will also help the local economy and provide new employment. Both of these developments will promote social inclusion as well as addressing deficiencies in shopping provision.

(5) There is a lack of quality of existing provision in the town centre, particularly a lack of choice in higher quality non-food retailing. Modern, high quality retail and other facilities are needed in order for the town centre to remain competitive, innovative and efficient. The Markets redevelopment scheme provides the most significant opportunity to deliver these qualitative improvements to existing provision in the town centre.

5.5 The town centre is performing reasonably well at present. It does not have any notable weaknesses in its vitality and viability. The Markets scheme should make a significant difference to the attractiveness of the town centre. However, there is also a need for a new large foodstore development. It is important that the scale and location of a new large foodstore development complements and enhances the role of the town centre. The four development scenarios must be assessed from the point of view of their contribution to the vitality and viability of the town centre. 5.6 The impact analysis in Section 4 shows that in terms of overall trading impact on the town centre Scenario 3 (New Street) would have the highest trade diversion from the edge-of-centre Morrisons because of its location immediately adjacent to Morrisons. Scenarios 2 (Gala Bingo/YEB site) and 3 would have the lowest overall impact on other town centre shops and on the Markets scheme. Scenario 2 would have the least impact on Barnsley town centre, Morrisons and the Markets scheme, with an overall trade diversion of 2.7% slightly lower than in Scenario 3 (New Street) with an overall trade diversion of 2.9%. In terms of its effect on the vitality and viability of the town centre, Scenario 2 (Gala Bingo/YEB site) is the most acceptable. The evidence of the impact analysis is that Barnsley could not support more than one new superstore without a significant adverse impact on the town centre and the edge-of-centre Morrisons which plays an important role in the function of the town centre. Impact on Smaller Centres 5.7 In Section 4 we noted that we anticipate that any trade diversion from the district and local centres or from small out-of-centre supermarkets would be negligible. The ‘Smaller Centres Study’ (November 2010) shows that the district centres in Barnsley have a localised role, meeting the day-to-day shopping needs of population living within a relatively short distance on the centres. Most of their trade is drawn from the zone within which they are located. The supermarkets in the district centres and other freestanding supermarkets in the Barnsley area outside the district centres have a different role from the larger superstores – Morrisons, Asda and Tesco. These are the stores which

26

would compete with a new superstore development, drawing trade from a wide catchment area. 5.8 The PPS4 Practice Guidance acknowledges that new large foodstores will tend to compete with existing similar stores on the basis that ‘like affects like’, so the centres and stores currently serving the intended catchment population will experience the greatest impact. Although there may be a small trade diversion from some of the supermarkets in the smaller centres it is very difficult to quantify and within the levels of uncertainty inherent in this type of analysis, we are confident that any possible impact from smaller centres can be discounted. Effect on Investment in Centres 5.9 PPS4 Policy EC16.1 requires that planning applications for retail use outside a centre should be assessed against several criteria including the impact of the proposal on existing, committed and planned public and private investment in centres. The Practice Guidance advises that, where the local planning authority and/or the private sector has identified town centre development opportunities and is actively progressing them, it will be highly material to assess the effect of proposals on that investment. Policy EC17 makes it clear that a significant adverse impact on planned investment in a centre can be a reason for refusal of a planning application. 5.10 In Barnsley the key planned investment is the Markets redevelopment scheme. The Markets scheme is a high quality town centre mixed use project consisting of a new department store, large retail units, a wide range of other shop units and A3 uses, a multiplex cinema and a new market. The Markets project was granted planning consent by the Council in 2006. Since that time the scheme has been revised. The scheme to be built is smaller than that approved in 2006 with a total retail and leisure floorspace of 41,430 sq.m. gross. The project is due to commence towards the end of 2012 and will be developed in two phases by the end of 2015. The Market Hall will be completed early in 2014. 5.11 The successful development of the Markets scheme is essential to the future vitality and viability of Barnsley town centre. Any new development outside the town centre that could prejudice the implementation of the scheme or delay its construction should be resisted. The findings of the impact analysis in Section 4 are that the four scenarios for potential superstore development in Barnsley would have trading impacts on the Markets scheme varying between 0.7% and 1.0% of the additional turnover in the scheme. These are not significant differences but the lowest impacts would arise in Scenario 2 (Gala Bingo/YEB site) and Scenario 3 (New Street). Some competition between a new superstore development and the Markets scheme is inevitable, but in our view a trading impact of up to 1.0% of the turnover of the Markets scheme is not likely to have any harm to trade in the scheme. A new superstore would be likely to be developed and opened before the Markets scheme is completed. Investment in the Markets scheme should proceed despite the opening of a new superstore development. However, it is

27

important that the location for a new superstore brings about the greatest benefits to the town centre including linked trips between the store and the Markets scheme. Potential Benefits 5.12 One new superstore development would have benefits to Barnsley. For instance:

• It would meet a deficiency that has been identified in the convenience retail offer in the town, as demonstrated by the extent of over-trading in the existing superstores.

• It would improve the overall retail offer in the town, increasing choice and competition for shoppers.

• It would have benefits in terms of economic and physical regeneration in the area including the impact on deprived areas and social inclusion objectives.

• It would increase employment in the local area. 5.13 The nature of these benefits will depend mostly on the location of a potential superstore development. Spin-off benefits for the town centre will be greatest if the store is well related to the town centre through pedestrian linkages. Out-of-centre locations would not make any contribution to the town centre through linked trips. 5.14 Regeneration could be a key factor in deciding where it would be appropriate to locate a new superstore. Retail-led regeneration is often a major benefit of large-scale superstore developments. Site-specific considerations are beyond the scope of this report but in general it can be established that redevelopment of a brownfield site should carry weight in the selection exercise. 5.15 Employment benefits are also important. Retailing is acknowledged in PPPS4 to be a form of economic development and job creation from retail development could be significant in areas of high unemployment, particularly in combination with the benefits of social inclusion in deprived areas. But job creation has to be considered against the possible effects of job losses resulting from retail impact on existing shops and services. An analysis of employment impacts is made in Section 6.

28

6. EMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS Employment Potential in Superstore Developments 6.1 The Town Centre Retail Capacity Study (March 2011) makes an assessment of the potential number of jobs to be created as a result of the new Markets development in Barnsley town centre and further capacity for retail floorspace in the town centre in the longer term. The report takes the floorspace information for the Markets project and estimates of floorspace capacity in the town centre and applies employment densities to estimate the number of jobs that could be created. 6.2 The source of data on employment densities is a report entitled ‘Employment Densities Guide” produced by Drivers Jonas Deloitte for the Homes and Communities Agency in 2010. The report includes a table of employment densities for different use classes – industrial, warehouse and distribution, office, retail and leisure and visitor attractions. 6.3 In the current report we use the same approach to estimate retail employment in each of the superstore development scenarios based on employment densities applied to the estimated floorspace of the potential developments. For the purpose of this study we are concerned only with jobs in food superstores. The average employment density to be applied is 1 job per 17 sq.m. net internal area, expressed as full-time equivalents. The employment potential for each scenario is shown below. Scenario 1

Peel Centre Scenario 2




Floorspace (sq.m. net) 5,574 4,645 4,645 6,503 Jobs 328 273 273 383

6.4 Therefore the range of scenarios could result in the creation of between 273 and 383 jobs. Net Employment Benefits 6.5 The PPS4 Practice Guidance advises that the employment benefits derived from a proposal need to be balanced against any possible reduction in employment opportunities in town centres as illustrated by the potential impact on trading levels in existing facilities and/or possible prejudice to investment and new employment opportunities. In other words, a proposal’s localised benefits need to be weighed against overall employment benefits. 6.6 In estimating net employment potential we have assumed that the percentage trade diversion in terms of total turnover in the town centre will be reflected in the same percentage reduction in employment. Information provided by the Council indicates that

29

in 2010 a total of 2,373 people were employed in the retail sector in Barnsley town centre. The percentage trading impacts have been applied to this total, as follows. For the purposes of this analysis it is assumed that the trade diversions are from existing shops in the town centre only. We have not taken account of the additional jobs that will be created in the Markets scheme. Scenario 1





Retail employment in town centre

2,373 2,373 2,373 2,373

Trading impact on existing shops

3.4% 3.3% 3.9% 4.1%

Potential for loss of jobs 81 78 93 97 6.7 The net increase in employment in the various scenarios is shown in the following table. Scenario 1





Job creation (gross) 328 273 273 383 Jobs lost 81 78 93 97 Net increase in employment

247 195 180 286

6.8 The range of scenarios could result in a net increase of between 195 and 286 jobs. The net employment benefit is greatest in Scenario 4 but this does not take account of the jobs that would be lost from demolition of the existing B&Q store. The other scenarios would also involve redevelopment of some existing uses. Therefore it is likely that the job creation benefits of any superstore development would be similar.

30

7. EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL SUPERSTORE DEVELOPMENTS

Evaluation Criteria 7.1 To assist the Council in making a judgement about the four superstore development scenarios, this Section sets out a schedule of criteria that are relevant to the evaluation of the potential developments. The evaluation is based on retail factors only. The Council has already provided pre-application advice to the consultants representing the proposed retail operator in relation to:

• National and local planning policy • Planning history of the sites • Highway issues • Residential amenity • Flood risk • Sustainability • Environmental impact • Landscaping, and • Other factors eg. land assembly, green belt, ecology

7.2 A schedule has been prepared for each site which summarises the key retail factors, based on information contained in this report and observation of the sites on the ground. These key factors are considered to be as follows:

• Location (edge- or out-of-centre) • Distance from the primary shopping area • Floorspace proposed • Site factors eg. • Accessibility by car, public transport, walking and cycling • Linkages between the site and the town centre • Trade diversion from the town centre (convenience, comparison and total) • Employment (gross and net) and • Other relevant considerations.

7.3 Where possible an evaluation is made of each factor according to whether we consider its impact to be good (acceptable), neutral or poor (not acceptable). Site Evaluation – Retail Factors 7.4 The evaluation sheets are included on the following pages.

31

SITE EVALUATION – RETAIL FACTORS SCENARIO 1: PEEL CENTRE

Evaluation

Location

Out-of-centre Poor

Distance from primary shopping area

800 metres Poor

Floorspace

5,574 sq.m. net -

Site factors

Land north of the Peel Centre. Includes cleared site of 1.8 acres, Booker Cash and Carry, Comet, former Powerhouse warehouse (vacant), Howdens Joinery and Plumb Center.

-

Accessibility

Access via Twibell Street from Harborough Hill Road / Old Mill Lane gytarory. Access is separate from the Peel Centre. Bus stop nearby on Old Mill Lane with frequent bus services to the town centre.

Neutral

Linkages between site and town centre

Not an easy walking distance Poor

Trade diversion from town centre (including Morrisons)

Convenience goods: 8.3% Comparison goods: 1.7% Retail trade overall: 3.0%

Neutral

Employment

Gross: 328 Net: 247

Good

Other relevant considerations

Busy traffic on the gyratory system. Could be significant access and highways problems.

Poor

32

SITE EVALUATION – RETAIL FACTORS SCENARIO 2: GALA BINGO/YEB SITE

Evaluation

Location

Edge-of-centre Good


Immediately adjacent Good

Floorspace

4,645 sq.m. net -

Site factors

Occupied by the Gala Bingo premises and adjacent car park. Also cleared land to the north on former YEB site consent for retail development. Adjacent to Barnsley Transport Interchange.

-

Accessibility

Access from Schwabish Gmund Way Excellent public transport access through the adjacent transport interchange (bus and rail).

Good


Pedestrian linkages very good. Good relationship with the Markets site.

Good



Good

Employment

Gross: 273 Net: 195

Neutral


Extant planning consent for retail development including one food retail unit and bulky goods on the YEB site. Site would become functionally part of the town centre with linkage improvements.

Good

33

SITE EVALUATION – RETAIL FACTORS SCENARIO 3: NEW STREET

Evaluation

Location

Edge-of-centre Good


Immediately adjacent Good

Floorspace

4,645 sq.m. net -

Site factors

Located around New Street to the east of the Morrisons store on Westway. Sites and premises in this area include the vacant former Gala Bingo premises, the former Homestyle Furnishers showroom, a Unipart warehouse, the John Street car park, other car parking areas and disused sites. Possibility of CPO for land assembly.

-

Accessibility

Access from New Street at roundabout that serves Morrisons. Bus stops on Westway adjacent to Morrisons. Traffic-signal controlled pedestrian routes across Westway from Morrisons and at junction of Westway / New Street.

Good


Linkages fairly good but Westway is a barrier to pedestrian movement.

Neutral



Neutral

Employment

Gross: 273 Net: 195

Neutral


Outline consent for mixed use development including retail on part of site. Proximity to Morrisons is duplication of provision.

Neutral

34

SITE EVALUATION – RETAIL FACTORS SCENARIO 4: B&Q SITE, STAIRFOOT

Evaluation

Location

Out-of-centre Poor


3 km Poor

Floorspace

6,503 sq.m. net -

Site factors

Large site occupied by B&Q Warehouse and car park. Neighbouring Floors 2 Go warehouse and Blakemore Wholesale.

-

Accessibility

Road access from Stairfoot roundabout. Adjacent bus stop on Bleachcroft Way – half hourly services to town centre.

Neutral


None. Pedestrian linkages to Stairfoot local centre and Aldi.

Poor



Poor

Employment

Gross: 383 Net: 283

Good


Traffic congestion on Stairfoot roundabout is a serious highways issue. Proximity to Tesco is duplication of out-of-centre provision.

Poor

35

Advice on Development Scenarios 7.5 In summary the alternative sites are assessed below on the basis of a simple classification of seven criteria. Good Neutral Poor 1. Peel Centre 1 2 4 2. Gala Bingo/YEB site 6 1 - 3. New Street 3 4 - 4. B&Q site, Stairfoot 1 1 5 7.6 On this simple evaluation it is clear that Scenario 2, the Gala Bingo/YEB site, is the most preferable site in terms of retail factors. It scores well on all criteria except employment, because it is relatively small in scale. The New Street site scores well in terms of location but it is less preferable in terms of linkages and trade diversion. Its location next to Morrisons is not a particular advantage, compared to the excellent location of the Gala Bingo/YEB site next to the Transport Interchange and the new Markets redevelopment site. 7.7 The Peel Centre and Stairfoot sites are less acceptable because they are out-of-centre and they have difficulties in terms of accessibility. The Stairfoot site has the highest predicted trade diversion from the town centre and its location close to Tesco would expand the scale of out-of-centre superstore provision.

36

8. APPROACH TO REVIEWS OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS

8.1 The pre-application discussions that have been held between Council Officers and the consultants for the prospective applicant have established a number of important matters which will have to be addressed in any planning application for superstore development on one of the alternative sites. These matters include:

• Relevant planning policies (local and national) • The requirements of PPS4 which is a material consideration • The Barnsley Markets project • The need to prepare a Planning Statement including a Retail Impact Assessment

and Sequential Test. 8.2 In addition the Council has advised that the comments in the pre-application consultations will be treated as a material consideration in relation to any planning application submitted in the next two years for a scheme that reflects the pre-application advice. 8.3 This Section briefly discusses the way that the retail policy implications of any planning applications should be considered by the Council. It is based on the experience of England & Lyle in providing advice to other local authorities on planning applications for major retail development. PPS4 Impact Assessment 8.4 It will be expected that a planning application will address fully the requirements of PPS4 in relation to the retail impact considerations covered by Policy EC10, the general impact factors, and Policy EC16, the key retail impact criteria. These matters should be assessed in appropriate detail in the Planning Statement. We would suggest that the Council commissions an independent review of the Planning Statement to help Officers to make an informed judgement about whether the proposals comply with the requirements of Policies EC10 and EC16. 8.5 In particular the review should advise on:

• The overall adequacy of the applicant’s impact assessment • The acceptability of the data and assumptions used in the assessment • The extent to which the assessment has regard to available sources of information

on the retail system in the Barnsley area • The assessment of vitality and viability of Barnsley town centre • The adequacy of the assessment of impact on Barnsley town centre including the

Markets project • Any implications for investment in the Markets project • The appropriateness of the scale of development proposed, and • The possible benefits of the proposals in terms of regeneration and local

employment.

37

PPS4 Sequential Assessment 8.6 To be acceptable in PPS4 terms, any planning application will have to comply with the requirements of Policy EC15, the sequential approach. The independent review of the Planning Statement should include a review of the sequential assessment. In particular it should advise on:

• Is the proposal site ‘edge-of-centre’ or ‘out-of-centre’? • Have all more central opportunities been identified and considered? • Have the alternatives been thoroughly tested, having regard to their suitability,

viability and availability? • Has the sequential assessment adopted a sufficiently flexible approach?

Implications for Barnsley Town Centre 8.7 The Council should make an evaluation of the potential impacts of the proposed development in line with PPS4 Policy EC17. It needs to be satisfied that there would not be any significant adverse impacts and that the development would meet the sequential approach. Having done so, the Council should balance the positive and negative impacts of the proposal before coming to a judgement on the planning merits. The independent review would focus on the implications of the proposals for Barnsley town centre. It will be important to assess the possible positive and negative impacts on trade in the town centre, on the vitality and viability of the town centre, and on investment in the town centre, particularly in the Markets project.

38

9. THRESHOLDS FOR RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

PPS4 Advice 9.1 PPS4 Policy EC3 on Planning for Centres states that local planning authorities should, as part of their economic vision for their area, set out a strategy for the management and growth of centres over the plan period. As part of their strategy local planning authorities should consider setting floorspace thresholds for the scale of edge-of-centre and out-of-centre development which should be subject to an impact assessment under (EC16) and specify the geographic areas these thresholds will apply to (Policy EC3.1d). 9.2 Policy EC14 on Supporting Evidence for Planning Applications for Main Town Centre Uses requires applicants to prepare impact assessments in Policy EC16.1 in support of planning applications for retail and leisure developments over 2,500 square metres gross floorspace or any local floorspace threshold set under policy EC3.1.d not in an existing centre and not in accordance with an up to date development plan. 9.3 In advance of development plans being revised to reflect PPS4, an assessment of impacts in policy EC16.1 is necessary for planning applications for retail and leisure developments below 2,500 square metres which are not in an existing centre and not in accordance with an up to date development plan that would be likely to have a significant impact on other centres. 9.4 These requirements can be interpreted as follows:

(1) All retail and leisure proposals of more 2,500 sq. metres must be accompanied by an impact assessment. (2) Where local planning policy sets floorspace thresholds below 2,500 sq. metres gross, these thresholds will apply. Floorspace thresholds in Barnsley are proposed in this Section. (3) Until such time as the LDF is adopted, PPS4 supports the Council asking for retail assessments for developments smaller than 2,500 sq. metres gross where there would be likely to have a significant impact on other centres. It would be reasonable for the Council to use the proposed thresholds prior to the LDF being adopted.

Suggested Floorspace Thresholds for Barnsley 9.5 The LDF Core Strategy Submission Document (September 2010) states in paragraph 9.8.9 that: “Proposals for main town centre uses that are not in a centre should be assessed against their impact on centres. PPS4 requires such an assessment particularly for developments over 2,500 sq.m. It also allows local authorities to set a local threshold for the scale of edge-of-centre and out-of-centre development which should be subject to an impact assessment. We will require impact assessments for developments over 2,500 sq.m in accordance with PPS4, but will give consideration to setting a local threshold in the

39

future.” 9.6 Core Strategy draft Policy CSP 31 on Town Centres identifies the following hierarchy of centres: Town Centre – Barnsley Town Centre District Centres – Cudworth, Hoyland, Wombwell, Goldthorpe, Penistone, Royston Local Centres – Athersley, Bolton on Dearne (St Andrew's Square), Darfield, Darton, Dodworth, Grimethorpe, Hoyland Common, Lundwood, Mapplewell, Stairfoot, Thurnscoe (Houghton Road), Thurnscoe (Shepherd Lane). 9.7 Any local floorspace threshold for impact assessment should be appropriate to the role and function of centres in each level of the hierarchy. In the case of proposed retail developments outside Barnsley Town Centre we would suggest a threshold that a threshold of 2,500 sq.m. gross floorspace is appropriate for proposals within the Barnsley urban area. A proposed supermarket of more than 2,500 sq.m. gross in the Barnsley urban area could have an impact on the Town Centre which needs to be assessed. 9.8 This threshold of 2,500 sq.m. gross would apply to any proposal outside Barnsley Town Centre that is edge-of-centre or out-of-centre. However, a proposal that is located within the catchment area of one of the District Centres should be subject to a different threshold that is more applicable to district centres. The catchment areas of the District Centres are defined on the map in Figure 3 of the Smaller Centres Study, November 2010. They extend across most of the geographical area of the Borough outside the Barnsley urban area. 9.9 The draft Core Strategy (paragraph 9.8.6) states that the District Centres have a vital role to play in providing shops and services to the people who live near them. The aim is to support and improve the role of these centres and in particular to support and enhance them to enable them to have the capacity to fulfil their important roles as Principal Towns. 9.10 We suggest that an appropriate threshold for proposals within the catchment areas of the District Centres would be 1,000 sq.m. gross floorspace. This smaller threshold would ensure that proposals for medium sized supermarkets which could have an impact on District Centres are fully assessed. 9.11 The extent of the defined centres in the Borough will be shown on the Proposals Map that will accompany the Development Sites and Places DPD. For the purposes of applying floorspace thresholds in Barnsley Town Centre and in the District Centres, the centres should be defined as the Primary Shopping Areas of each centre. The proposed Primary Shopping Area of Barnsley Town Centre is shown in Figure 2 at the end of this Section. The Primary Shopping Areas of the District Centres are proposed in the Centre Maps in the Figure 4 of the Smaller Centres Study. 9.12 Outside the Town Centre and District Centres, proposals for small local shops will be considered in the context of draft Policy CSP32 on Small Local Shops. The policy

40

states that outside existing centres the Council may allow small convenience shops that meet the daily shopping needs of a local community if the shops are of a type and in a place that would meet local needs and this need is not already met by existing shops, and the shops are located and designed to encourage trips by pedestrians and cyclists and would not encourage car trips. 9.13 The draft Core Strategy recognises (paragraph 9.8.11) that local shops perform an important role in meeting the day-to-day needs of communities. They are a vital part of creating sustainable communities, reducing the need for people to travel. The Council will encourage small shops where it can be shown that they meet a local need. The network of Local Centres will be the focus for small scale local shops and services. 9.14 We suggest that an appropriate threshold for proposals outside Local Centres would be 500 sq.m. gross floorspace. In the draft Core Strategy ‘small shops’ are defined as units having a gross floor area of 500 sq.m. or less. This would be an appropriate threshold to apply to Local Centres. It is a figure that is appropriate in relation to local needs. Above 500 sq. metres the impact of a proposed retail development should be assessed. 9.15 The Smaller Centres Study report (November 2010) suggested lower thresholds for the district and local centres of 500 sq.m. and 100 sq.m. gross respectively. We have reviewed this advice in the light of two factors:

• the relative sizes of centres in the hierarchy across the Borough as a whole, taking account of the adoption of a threshold of 2,500 sq.m. gross for the town centre, and

• consistency with the reference in the Core Strategy to small shops having a floorspace of less than 500 sq.m.

9.16 An Addendum report (May 2011) has been prepared to the Smaller Centres Study which is a replacement of Section 14 on Other Policy Advice. The Addendum report revises the originally suggested floorspace thresholds for the district and local centres of 500 sq.m. and 100 sq.m. gross. The thresholds now proposed are 1,000 sq.m. gross for district centres and 500 sq.m. gross for local centres. These figures will maintain an appropriate differential between the thresholds for the town centre, district centres and local centres, and provide a sound basis for the Council to assess the implications of proposed retail development outside centres at different levels of the hierarchy. 9.17 The boundaries of Local Centres are defined on the Centre Maps in Figure 4 of the Smaller Centres Study. Local Centres do not have Primary Shopping Areas. Local Centres also do not have a defined catchment area. The Smaller Centres Study (paragraph 7.6) states that: “It is conventional to assume that most of the people using a Local Centre will live within 5 minutes walking distance from the centre. This represents a radius of approximately 800 metres. The map in Figure 3 shows the 800 metre catchments for each Local Centre.” 9.18 For the purposes of applying the proposed floorspace threshold for Local Centres

41

we suggest that it should apply to sites within 800 metres of a Local Centre. Proposals for small-scale retail developments within Local Centres would be acceptable in terms of retail policy where they are below 500 sq. metres gross floorspace. 9.19 It should be emphasised that, despite establishing appropriate floorspace thresholds, in formalising these thresholds the Council should retain the discretion to request a retail impact assessment for proposals for retail development below 2,500 sq.m. gross within Barnsley Town Centre and below 1,000 sq.m. gross within the District Centres if the Council considers that they may have an impact on particular centres, depending on the relative size and nature of the development in relation to the centre. 9.20 Therefore we recommend that the following thresholds are used by the Council in deciding whether a proposed development requires an impact assessment. Area for Application of Floorspace

Thresholds

Assessment Required

Barnsley Town Centre Barnsley urban area, outside the primary shopping area



shopping areas




9.21 With reference to these thresholds, impact assessments in support of planning applications for retail development should be prepared with a level of detail and type of evidence and analysis that is proportionate to the scale and nature of the proposal and its likely impact. The type and level of information that needs to be included within an impact assessment should be discussed and agreed between the applicant and the Council. Locally Important Impacts 9.22 PPS4 Policy EC3.1 on Planning for Centres requires that, in preparing development plans, local planning authorities should “define any locally important impacts on centres which should be tested” (Policy EC3.1e). Policy EC16.1 on Impact Assessments states that planning applications for main town centres uses that are not in a centre and not in accordance with an up to date development plan should be assessed against various criteria regarding impacts on centres. One of these criteria is “any locally important impacts on centres under Policy EC3.1.e (Policy EC16.1f). 9.23 ‘Locally important impacts’ are not defined in PPS4 or in the Practice Guidance. The Council will be able to adopt its own policy on this matter. In our view the most

42

important policy consideration locally is the possible adverse impact of any proposed retail development outside Barnsley Town Centre (over 2,500 sq.m. gross floorspace) on the Barnsley Markets Project in the town centre. The importance of the Markets Project is already recognised in the draft Core Strategy. Barnsley Town Centre will be the prime focus for growth of retail and town centre uses. It has a important role to play in serving the needs of local residents, and also in the context of the region. The aim is to transform Barnsley Town Centre into a 21st Century Market Town, with a unique offer based on individual retail development supported by good quality leisure and cultural facilities. The Council wants to attract visitors to Barnsley and improve the Borough as a place to live, encouraging investment in the town centre. A Town Centre Area Action Plan (AAP) will be produced for Barnsley Town Centre as part of the LDF. The Barnsley Markets Project is a key part of creating a 21st Century Market Town which will be considered further in the Town Centre AAP. 9.24 In the context of the importance attached to the Markets Project in the Core Strategy, and in the forthcoming Town Centre AAP, we recommend that impact on the Markets Project should be adopted by the Council as a “locally important impact” for the purposes of the application of PPS4 policies.

43

10. BARNSLEY TOWN CENTRE BOUNDARIES 10.1 PPS4 requires that a local planning authority should define the extent of the main centres and the primary shopping area in its Proposals Map having considered distinguishing between realistically defined primary and secondary frontages in designated centres and set policies that make clear which uses will be permitted in such locations. 10.2 Annex B of PPS4 states the following definitions: The primary shopping area is the defined area where retail development is concentrated (generally comprising the primary and those secondary frontages which are contiguous and closely related to the primary shopping frontage). The extent of the primary shopping area should be defined on the Proposals Map. Smaller centres may not have areas of predominantly leisure, business and other main town centre uses adjacent to the primary shopping area, therefore the town centre may not extend beyond the primary shopping area. Primary frontages are likely to include a high proportion of retail uses. Secondary frontages provide greater opportunities for a diversity of uses. 10.3 Figure 2 at the end of Section 10 shows the proposed town centre boundary for Barnsley town centre, the primary shopping area and the primary and secondary frontages. Town Centre Boundary 10.4 The boundary of Barnsley town centre was defined in the UDP. The definition of the town centre is fairly broad, extending up to the railway in the north, to the Metrodome leisure complex in the east, beyond Morrisons in the south, and beyond the Town End roundabout in the west. The town centre area includes areas that are predominantly residential, notably west of Sackville Street, north of Victoria Road and north/east of Pontefract Road. It does not exclude any areas that have any significant town centre uses. 10.5 The draft Town Centre Area Action Plan (AAP) defines a similar town centre boundary in the north, west and south but in the east the boundary is less extensive, excluding the Metrodome leisure complex and the Pontefract Road area. 10.6 We have made a detailed review of the town centre area, including the fringes of the area defined in the UDP and in the AAP. Although there are instances where the town centre boundary could be adjusted, e.g. to exclude areas that are predominantly residential in character, on balance we believe that the AAP boundary is the most appropriate definition of the town centre for planning policy purposes. The AAP boundary meets with the following principles that should guide the definition of a town centre:

• The town centre boundary should include all ‘main town centre uses’ as defined in PPS4. These include retail, leisure, entertainment facilities, the more intensive sport and recreation uses, offices and arts, culture and tourism development.

44

• Areas that are functionally related to town centre uses such as car parks, transport infrastructure and public open space should also be included.

• Sites occupied for community uses such as schools, colleges and health centres should be included.

• Sites that are clearly intended for town centre development or redevelopment should logically be included.

• Areas used for predominantly industrial or commercial uses such a car showrooms should be excluded.

10.7 The town centre boundary is shown on the map in Figure 2. Primary Shopping Area 10.8 PPS4 defines a ‘primary shopping area’ as generally comprising the primary and those secondary frontages which are contiguous and closely related to the primary shopping frontage. The main importance of defining a primary shopping area is that, for shopping purposes, it is the area from which to measure distance in assessing whether a site can be classed as ‘edge-of-centre. For retail purposes, an edge-of-centre location should be well connected to and within easy walking distance (ie. up to 300 metres) of the primary shopping area. For all other main town centre uses, this is likely to be within 300 metres of a town centre boundary. 10.9 Therefore, the key to defining the primary shopping area is to identify the primary and secondary frontages. The UDP Proposals Map does not define primary and secondary frontages but it does define the ‘principal shopping frontage’ which is an area fairly narrowly defined as Queen Street, Cheapside and May Day Green. In our view this area is defined too narrowly. It excludes important primary shopping frontages in the Markets Centre, The Mall (Alhambra Centre) and Peel Street. We propose that primary shopping frontages should be as shown in Figure 2, comprising both sides of Cheapside, the shops in the Markets Centre (but not the Market Hall), all of The Mall (Alhambra Centre) and part of the northern side of Peel Street. The primary shopping frontages should exclude parts of May Day Green shown on the UDP Proposals Map which are now mostly in non-retail uses. 10.10 We propose that the secondary shopping frontages should include shops and service uses in Shambles Street, Peel Street/Peel Parade, Church Street, Market Hill, The Arcade, Eldon Street, Kendray Street, May Day Green, the Market Hall, New Street, Market Street, Peel Square, Wellington Street and Pitt Street. The secondary frontages are also shown in Figure 2. 10.11 The primary shopping area shown in Figure 2 encompasses all of the primary and secondary shopping frontages together with adjacent areas to the rear of these frontages. It forms a compact and contiguous area centred on Cheapside and Queen Street, extending to Town End roundabout in the west, the Transport Interchange in the east and Westway in the south.

45

RAVENNA CLOSE

NOVARA CLOSE

GA

RD

EN

S

CALABRIA GROVE

BARNSBRIDGE GROVE

ST J

OSE

PHS

GAR

DENS

PINDAR OAKES COTTAGES

TUSC

ANY

OAKWELL VIEW

SUN

DER

LAN

D T

ERR

ACE

CLO

SE

PONTEFRACT ROAD

CONISTON ROAD

BELGRAVE ROAD

MAR

KET

OAKWELL LANE

GRASMERE ROADTHIR

LME

RE

RO

AD

MILN

ES S

TRE

ET

DONCASTER ROAD

WIL

BY L

ANE

CEMETERY ROAD

HENSHALL STREET

PIND

AR O

AKS STREET

TUNESTREET

VICTO

RIA

TERR

ACE

DRYDEN ROAD

STREETTWIBELL

HAR

BOR

OU

GHH

ILL RO

AD

WH

AR

F ST

REE

T

BRINCKMAN STREET

ST PETER'S TERRACE

CLIFTO

NS

TRE

ET

GOLD STREET

GOLD C

ROFT

GOLD STREET

OAKWELL LANE

CAR

EY A

VEN

UE

ROAD

WIN

DER

MER

E R

OAD

RO

AD

QUEEN'S

CLYDE STREET

AVON

STRE

ET

LANGDALE

HELSTONC

LADO

CK

RIDGE GROVE

EAMING VIEW

TREDIS CLOSE

CLOSE

ROCHE CLOSE

FALMOUTH

CLOSE

NEWLYN DRIVE

BOUNDARY STREET

PORTLAND STREET

DONCASTER ROAD

VAA

L S

TRE

ET

APP

LEH

UR

ST BA N

K

POR

TLAN

D S

TREE

T

LULW

OR

TH C

LOSE

TrackBEEV

OR

COUR

T

GR

OVE

STR

EET

ROAD

PONTEFRACT

DA

LTO

N

OSBORNE MEWS

SETH

TER

RAC

E

CH

ILTO

N S

TREE

T

TER

RA

CE

OSBORNE STREET

OAK

WEL

L TE

RR

ACE

JUN

CTI

ON

STR

EET

PIN

DAR

STR

EET

OAK

WEL

L VA

LE

OAKWELL VIEW

DENISON COURT

ROSEBERY TERRACE

ROAD

SHEFFIELD

BEECH

STREET

WALTHAM STREET

KING STREET

STREET

QUARRY

TAYLOR ROW

WALTHAM

STREET

DO

BIE STREET

YARD

ROAD

DONCASTER ROAD

FREE

MAN

S

LAMBRA ROAD

MALTHOUSE

WESLEY STREET

BURLEIGH COURT

CLOSE

BURLEIGH

CO

PPERC

LOSE

BRITAN

NIA

STREET

STREET

WOOD

COURT

UNION

BUCKLEY COURT

UNION

STREET

PARK ROAD

WAR

REN

QU

ARR

Y

BURL

EIG

H ST

REET

JOSEPH STREET

HEELIS

STR

EET

JOHN STREET

DU

KEC

RES

CEN

T

CLOSE

ALLATT

DU

KE S

T RE E

T

REBECCAROWREBECCA MEWS

PLAC

E

UPPE

R NE

W S

TREE

T

THOMAS STREET

LOWER THOMAS STREET

FLEMING

WOOD STREET

NEW

STR

EET

WELLINGTON STREET

HAYES CROFT

ALBERT STREET

Market Street

WEST WAY

PALL

MAL

L

NEW S

TREET

LOWER CASTLEREAGH STREET

WORTLEY STREET

WALL STREET

COURT

PROVIDEN

CE

POND STREET

DAY STREET

PRINCESS STREET

SILV

ER S

TREE

T

POND STREET

PEASEHILL CLOSE

FOUNDRY

STREE

T

CASTLE

STREET

CHARLES STREET

PARK STREET

ST JOH

N'S R

OAD

MOUNT STREET

PAR

K G

RO

VE

SPR

ING

AGNES ROAD

STR

EET

NURSERY STREET

GEORGE SQUARE

PRINCESSSTREET

MARK STREET

GEO

RGE STREET

CASTLEREAGH STREET

PITT STREET

NELSON STREET

YORK STREET WEST WAY

BLEN

HEIM

AVEN

UE ST G

EOR

GE'S RO

AD

PARK AVENUE

RO

AD

BEACONSFIELD

STREET

HINDLE STREET

HOLDEN COURT

ST GEO

RGE'S R

OAD

HAW

THO

RNE

STRE

ET

LONGCAR LANE

EIM

RO

AD

LOC

KE A

VEN

UE

BLEN

HEIM

COURT

QUEEN'S ROAD

BALA STREET

SH

ERW

OO

DS

TREE

T

PON

TEFRAC

T RO

AD

ROCKINGHAM

OLD MILL

HARBOROUGH HILL ROAD

VER

NO

N STR

EET N

OR

TH

Firth

Stre

et

MEADOW STREET

DENTON STREET

LANE

MOTTRAM STREET

SC

HW

AB

ISH

GM

UN

D W

AY

ELD

ON

STR

EET

NO

RTH

BECKETT STREET

VER

NO

N S

TREE

T

HAR

BOR

OU

GH

HIL

L R

OAD

JAMES STREET

HAR

BOR

OU

GH

KENDRAY STREET

HIL

L R

OAD

L STREET

CANAL STREET

HONEYWELL

STREETWIN

DHAM

CLO

SE

Bridge Gardens

CLOSE

HO

NEYW

ELL

CANAL WAY

KAYE STREET

BRID

GE STR

EET

HO

NEYW

ELL STREET

LEIGHTON CLOSE

ARC

ADE

BUR

LING

TON

ELDON STREET

MID

LAND

STREET

Day

Gre

en

CAXTON STREET

BRID

GE STR

EET

OLD MILL LANE

OLD MILL LANE

EASTGATE

RO

YAL STR

EET

Regent Street South

CO

UN

TY WAY

REGENT STREET

FALCO

N STR

EET

GEORGE YARD

STR

EET

HAN

SON

Queen Street

MAR

KET HILL

Cheapside

SOUTH

QUEEN STREET

Albert Street East

May

WELLING

TON

STREET

Market Street

BLUCHER STREET

Dow

ST MARY'S GATE

CH

UR

CH

LAN

E

CH

UR

CH

STREET

SADLER GATE

ST MAR

Y'S PLACE

Passage

GR

AHAM

'S OR

CH

ARD

LANCASTER GATE

PEELSQUARE

Dog Lane

CRESCENT

LON

GM

AN R

OAD

ROSEHILL COURT

WESTW

OO

D C

OU

RT

HUDDERSFIELD ROAD

WESTERN STREET

HUDDERSFIELD ROAD

REGENT GARDENS

RACE ST

REET

PEEL STREET

FEN

TON

STR

EET

BERNESLAI CLOSE

GREENWOOD TERRACE

CHURCHFIELD

VICTORIA STREET

VICTORIA ROAD

BERNESLAI COURT

PEEL PARADE

SACKVILLE STREET

WESTGATE

STAR LANE

SUMM

ER LANE

SHAMBLES STREET

CLARENDON

LEOPOLD STREET

FIFE STREET

CLA

RE

ND

ON

STR

EET

PITT STREET WEST

RACE

COM

MON

ROAD

GRAFTO

N STREET

STR

EET

PITT STREET WEST

WEL

L ST

REET

RACE

COM

MO

N RO

AD

PLUM

BER STR

EET

OAK STREET

RICH

ARD

STRE

ET

NICHOLAS STREET

HEL

ENA

CLO

SE

AVENUE

FREDERICK

DELLA AVENUE

RACE

COM

MO

N RO

AD

THE

SQUA

RE

LONGCAR LANE

MCLINTOCK WAY

SUMMER LANE

CROOKES

WHARNCLIFFE STREET

STANLEYSTREET

STREET

HAVELOCK STREET

SHAW STREET

ASH

BY C

OU

RT

HARVEY STREET

PARKER STREET

SAN

DFO

RD

CO

UR

T

SHAW LANE

SHAW STREET

WATERLO

O RO

AD

BRADBURY STREET

STANHOPE STREET

WESTFIELD

STREET

SPR

ING

FIELD

STRE

ET

SPR

ING

FIE

LD P

LAC

E

PER

SEVER

AN

CE STR

EET

FARRAR STREET

ASHRAMS COURT

ST EDWARDS AVENUE

CRAN

RALE

Y ST

REET

CROMPTON AVENUE

DE

AN S

TRE

ET

DODWORTH ROAD

RICHMOND ST

LANCASTER STREET

KNOWSLEY STREET

ALM

A S

TRE

ET

DERBY STREET

SHAW LANE

SO

UTH

STR

EET

WES

T BOU

RN

E TER

RA C

E

GROSVENOR DRIVE

DODWORTH ROAD

MAY

TER

RAC

E

RO

SEDALEG

ARD

ENS

SHAW LANE

LANGMERE CLOSE

KERESFORTH CLOSE

KERESFORTH COURT

ME AVENUE

VICTORIA

EARNSHAW TERRACE

HOLW

ICK COURT

ROCK STREET

BUCKDEN ROAD

PROSPECT STREET

AIRETON RO

AD

SACKVILLE STREET

FITZWILLIAM STREET

SOMERSET STREET

SUMMER STREET

SWIFT

HO

PWO

OD

STREET

STREET

LING

AR

D S

T RE

ET

LING

AR

D

STREET

VICT

ORI

A CR

ESCE

NT

LING

ARD

COUR

T

SACKVILLE STREET

SUMMER STREET

KEIR TERRACE

KEIR STREET

LOXDALE

GDNS

CHESHAM ROAD

NEWTON STREET

STATION ROAD

LANE

PRINCE ARTHUR STREET

WEST

VICTORIA CRESCENT

SUMM

ER

CORNFALL PLACE

GAWBER

WE

LLFI

ELD

RO

AD

CARRINGTON STREET

GU

EST R

OA

D

HAVERDALE RISE

SYKE

S AV

ENUE

ROAD

WEL

BEC

K ST

SOU

THW

ELL STREET

HOPE STREET

QUEEN'S AVENUE

BLACKBURN LANE

BINGLEY STREET

WELBEC

K STREE

T

SPRINGFIELD STREET

WHEATCROFTS

HILTO

N STR

EET

SYCAM

OR

E STR

EET

MYR

TLE STREET

STOCK'S LANE

THE BLOSSOMS

STOCK'S LANE

JOH

NSO

N S

T RE

ET

DA

RL EY

T ER

RA

CE

MED

LAR

CROFT

BRIERFIELD

SUMMER LANE

GRE

ENFO

OT

LANE

CLOSE

CLU

MB E

R S

TRE

ET

WINTER ROAD

WINTER TERRACE

POGMOOR ROAD

POLLITT STREET

WESTVILLE ROAD

SS STREET

KENSINGTON ROAD

CUTTY LANE

SCHOOL STREET

PALM STREET

THORNTREE

PAULS ROAD

LANE

ROAD

GAWBER

STANHOPE GARDENS

27

2b 2a

2d 2c

34 toFlats

Flats2 to 32 (evens)

38

2111 151

15

21

23

8

14

16

24

10

22

2 to

18

2

24

29

1

36

2

Tuscany Villas

16

1 to 6

43122

7

14

11

8

1 to 19

25

15

19

21

5017

31

5

119

41

30

42

12

20

25

28

26

Ravens House

23

21

53

17

31

Agnes Terrace

1

2

15

14

34

1

5a

42

PO

1

5

5b

14

19

2

31

54

13

43

32

57

32

31

22

92

25

80

74a

14

44

18

91

52

43

92

70

78

33

66

122

13

2

125a

128

127

1

22

1018

120a

25

19

9

Bungalow

89

90

25

16

32

11

1

13

13

14

2

1 to 16

177

St Josephs

22

and Pre-School

16

Private Day Nursery

219

34

9

11 15

2

13

316

1

324306

24

189

209

199

28

29 3735 44

304

284

8

282

302

7

278

266

War

ehou

se

El Sub Sta

1

254

Wes

leya

n

248

2

Chu

rch

252

264

PC

1

64

2

8

10

9

El Sub Sta

2

11

35

2

34

1

15

2

17

1

19

11

24

1

23

2729

16

19

33

12

11

6

22

1

11

9

24

27

2

12

2

22

14

1

18

21

19

16

2224

14

20

12

2

26

1

8

9

1

4

Brewery

Stan

d

78

68

Oakwell

(Football Ground)

Stand

Warehouse

81

79

Works

19

26

3925

1438

FB

El Sub Sta

Centre

1 to 29

Mount Osborne Industrial Park

Oakwell Business

Mount Osborne

1 to 3

8

McGuiness Works

& Youth Enterprise

Business Centre

King George Terrace

Works

2

13

14

Junc

tion

12

Burton Terrace

10

27

5

1

2

36

Terrace

1a

Jubilee

5a

246

244

Ref

orm

Terra

ce

13

1

14

2

4

Terrace

1

2

5

22

24Evelyn

El Sub Sta

Stan

d

Stan

d

104

114

Lodge

26

82a

66

El

56

Stand

Sub Sta

2

77

84

26

82

1

2

80

69

Juni

or S

choo

l

20

39

32

29

Gro

ve S

treet

70

12

1

24

2

72

Ryda

l Ter

race

2

44

1

40

16

14

16

28

26

1610

52

164

1513

42

62

2

14

7

13

1

30

25

6

2

23

15

65a

64

7

11

2

11

15

1

39

7

1

55

11 13

35

292539

1

31

11

Sports Centre

23

13

Warehouse

Warehouse

15

3

2

15

18

Wan

sfell T

erra

ce

27

43

2

47

65

Hall

36

41

27

48

Kingdom

21

Gas Holder

Warehouse

32

23

1

a

14

18

13

b23

Warehouse

2

6

14

11

Osb

orne

Ho

PH

32

1

34

1

34

Garage

Works

15

39

62

Warehouse

115

113

House

Works

Queens

5646

33

47

632

8

910

11

12

14

21

2

7

Works

26

23

25

15

Cliff

Terra

ce1

37

49

48

24

11

2618

50

29

41

30

18

26

24

16

28

14

4

1

5

Works

32

10

Surgery

178

Barnsley Youth Development Association

Riding School

43

59

13

40

26

39

25

12

228

53

10

236

2

160150

173

242

1

Ivy Terrace

39

13

25

13

151

210

139

14

163

25

1

3

16

2

14

Vict

or

13

1

94

East Dene

Working Men'sClub and

84

7282

102

Doncaster Road

164

Medical Centre

99

20

89

31

62

76

Works

109

2

11

105

50

1

10

11

16 31

TerraceRhodes

14

13

24

1

1a

122

71

77

2

69

Sub Sta

El

7573

1

33

1828

2

3

Depot

46

54

56

64

37

51

38

7

1

15

25

1617

6

1

48

36

91

90 80

42

64 to 78

to

62

791 to 4

122110

100

30

21

35

27

67

51

6

1 to 12

Junction House

126

138

1

17

2

12

Terra

ce

15

24

28

2

5767

29

2

36

4

Primary School

18

24

6

2

63

45

12 40

10

3234

2

1

2

5

12

8

52

7751

49

40

El

26

3

32

24

34

26

1

15 to 2537

1

26

2830

32

46

39

1

Council Office

Oakwell House

214

226

25

188

202

30

6

18

73 12

18

Acorn House

174

113

2

Vicarage

125

11

9

166

158

Nursing Home

103

4

Institute

140

40

54

15 to 2324 25Fl

ats

1 to

4Fl

ats

5 to

10 Flats

Flats

11 to 14

25

132

79

Hall

124

102

Works

79

St Peter's Church

65

1

25

Surgery

61

4

3

59

1

12

57

65

67

3

22

26

13

16

19

201a

to

18

61

73

29

29

1153

7

21

52

9

41

38

50

14

97

26

TerraceAlbion

11

1517

26

2

28

18

1

2717

20

192

190

1

1519

9

1117

132

8 to 30

158 156

150 148

146

144154

11

6

2

1

3

4

6

Warehouse

Depot

12

61

1

46

58

83

23

44

109b

17

Depot

25

23

13

12

36

27

St

1

Works

96

Hal

l

25

2

11

24

138

136

10

134

22

PH

158

20

7

122

48

23

46

104

110

124 to 132

106

50

112

52

78

70

84

76

85

73

21

Buckley

SundayMeth Ch

5

School

61

4

Church

21

68

60

47

House

Albion

8

1 to 56

Buckley

33

2

24

2

1

12 41

45

Joseph Court

3

26

3

19

28

1

2

11

1

11

9

21

PH

2

28

195

209

18

Bakery

1

1

13

8

122

10

St Bart's Terrace

Beckett Hospital

Terrace

1

2

68

2

40

82

12

1

The

1215

11

2230

6 36

14

34

77

90

98

54

33

Gardens

105

64

103

45

3634

18

3533

20

46

19

36

30

21

40

25

51

2 - 3

6

Langdale Court

38 -

80

2 to 8

7

1 to 7

13

29

17

20to

69

41

80

8

72

10

58 to 62

78

64

76

15

92

7

Baptist

(PH)The Outpost

Sheffield

3

Road

56

52

24

1

El Sub Sta

2

23

2224

3

1

House

31

Britannia

1 to 55

29

19

5

16

20a

11

29

44

PH

Depo

t

Club

Garage

PH26 to 32

11

1

108

114

PH

42

70

74

2

2

2

1

4

49

22

3

31

4

Warehouse

1 to 39

70

3220

5644

8

44

Warehouse

25 to 31

148

38

13

21

13

20

Works

28

2

23

10

44

30

43

29

70

18

2

69

52

2

32

46

50

46

14

2

74

27

N k

126

132

1

12

130

138

Surgery

to 124

114

94

87

69

4

2

1

37

86

141

26

94

107

92

1

1

36

10

22

19

40

15

25

29

14 to 17

31

18

Warehouse

23

13

2

Spa Well

52

1

Centre

51

Terrace

48

76

94

102

2

116

10

15

9

6

15

20

914 to 16

8

10

2 to 4

6

26

14

20

922

to

7

50

33

38

3

6163

84

to71

6562

5759

75

67

70

74

6892

88

90

96

72

1

1

112

99

88

101

111

11

1

76

80

787

98

25

102

82

32

65

66

31

77

74

86

8246

35

1

10

28

1

12

3

Western

Lodge3

l to 2 4

23a

26

18

1 & 2

3

Western

Mews

53

27

House

23

21

12

County

Court

Offices

14Club

1

Warehouse

3

El S

ub S

ta

2

3

117

8

Town Hall

1715

1

Sta

3

Office

Police

13 Bank Offices)(Council

HouseRegent

2 to 8

19

7

and Design

623 to 27

2

Building

College of Art

1

Sackville Heights 8 to 114 & 5

Cooper Art Gallery

Plaza

Quarter 4

Plaza Quarter 1

Hotel

1 Health Centre

PH

Plaza Quarter 2

Hall

12

PH

Plaza Quarter 3

1 to 189

2

23 21

98

Depot

8

1

1

12

2

21

10

9

26

1

24

54

62

13

5

1

2

75

Silkstone(PH)

1 to 55

96

121 108

29

48

15

50

10

14

12

26

12

17

27

1

15

22

1

10

3

53

19

41

38

29

40

Works

65

67

13

10

15

2

32

13

15

125

2

65

30

69

35

24

58

28

44

60

40

67

57

84

1

Saville Terrace

79

12

21

142

144 11

The

2

113

104

18

116

2

4

101

13

134

122

2a

The

1

65

45

146

84

63

20

Marlborough Terrace

12

77

188

4

49

95

83

King Edward'sGardens

14

79

1

51

11

Grove

Blenheim

10

26

11

23

19

10

7

21

18

20

73

16

427

1

130

16

2

106

51 85

61

34

65

43

15

50

30

Bellevue

161

18

24

Hall

31

Sub Sta

3

2

4

28

2 to 22

10

1

15

5

2

39

38

30

90

19

11

80

28

Livingstone Terrace

1

Health Centre

36

Bank

3234

18 to 30

PH

Bank

Works

7 to 17

Sub Sta

El

91

105

102

10

27

54

66

18

22

23

77

63

64

78

Magistrates'

49

47

16

Offices

Warehouse

38

45

3364

15

26

14

21

ParkAvenue

Court

1 to

4

5

6

2

44

49

14

16 22

25

39

26

38

21

43

34

31

67

55

50

62a

120

77

108

62

96

84

105

70

129

93

117

56

21

13

Fairfield

53

42

60

72

48

81

67

32

44

30

3

16

47a

4935

33

49

57

45

28

40

26

35

1

13

14

5

19

2

23

20

45

47

2

26

35

37

29

1

(PH)

Keel Inn

66 86

16

7

El Sub Sta

8

2 to 8

10to

9

1

El Sub Sta

Peel Centre

2

8

9

5

Pipers Grove

Primary School

109c

107

52

9

109

1

109a

29

58

54 to

34

17

6

12

18

Tank

2

Depot

24

17

42

14

32

22

38

33

Club

8

30

13

24

3

11

2

14

10

1

El Sub Sta

13

8

2

Youth

59

62

54

60

122

124

49

53

88

PH

134

7

62a

1

49

50

2

40

28

27

39

47

17

22

24

12

13

22

39

33

25

12

8

11 to 13

6

5

24

5

625

Hall

31

Barnabas

24

84

27

43

55

48

to

2

PH

53

64

45

21

14

57

5

8

4

2

10

21

23

56

64

8179

13

62

54

64

16

10

94

100

28

2

118

to 1

28

100

104

15

1

13

12

2

1a

ESS

35

Barnsley College

45

25

15

24

34

2426

22

1

3

2

37

27

8

1

17

Meeting House

5

15

7

1912

5

Stoneylea Court

1 to 6

Surgery

6to

3a

4

3b

2

2a

5

23

Surgery

14

10

to

25

6

to8

25

18

20

2

23

Bungalow

1 to 5

15 to

18

6 to 14

Churchfield Court

22

12

10

1

14

9

Fairfield House

12

24

22

16

23

to20

to

7

17

21

to 12

to15

5

13 11

16

7

2

33

50

35

59

44

25

51

42

30

25

39

13

23

34

23

15

Church

49

14

4

76

74

3

34

36a

4545a

28

35

7

16

262

26

Hillder House

Church of England

St Mary's

Voluntary Aided

Primary School,

Barnsley

28

1

75

1

85

1

81

16 88

11

69

100

71

109

111 33

83

53

2

83

59

2330

97

86

15 to 37

104112

96

Vicarage

Nursery

Grove

snor

Hou

se

100

96

78

76

68

21

60

66

5658

7072

la

44

4850

46

5254

34 to 38 9 to 15

PH

PH

4042

50

46

48

38

1

32

18

16

24

26

Warehouse

Club

Tarn House

69

Joseph Locke House

Government Offices

8 to 14

5

6

14

7

10

29

31

33

27

Roof Car Park

31

El Sub Sta

45

43

41

Club

2

2

24

6

The Old Bakery

95

105

Works

36

43

2736

2

34

Clinic

1

4

15

10

29

27 29

42

24

30

15

29

20

122

6

10

18 12

43

8

15

El Sub Sta

Bootham Terrace

14 11

139

32

Club

31

29 5

16

18a

8

Works

12

9

19

15

Sub Sta

9

1113

21

Alhambra Shopping Centre4

El

78

62

50

4648

SubSta

36a

27

Sub

15

El

5

54

7

SubSta

Roof Car Park

El Sub Sta

744

70

6

76

31

72

1

Cinema

Civic Hall

53

52

Depot

64

47

45

29

39

12

32

22

10

11

6

49

30

32

28

59

37

2

40

7

18

11

116

Mot

tram

100

2

8

The Core

County C

ounc il

22

South Y

orkshire

PH

20

Bank

8

13

8

8a

4

10

Churchfields C

lose

14

6

1 to 22

2426

29

33

10

3135

Barnsley College

Telephone Exchange

11

14

Deputy

House

Works

39

43

2

44

2226

46

Gas Gov

54

36

Court H

ouse

Govt17

PermanentCourt

PC

St Mary's Church

Barnsley College

1

2

2

2

Surg

ery

Friends'

District C

ouncil Offices

18

2

4

County

3

Council

9

106

5

El

21

Charter Arcade

Market Hall

1 to 11Car Park

Roof

PCs

Cham

bersC

ouncil

2

ArcadeEldon

PH

3

11

84

10

PH

133

Roof Car Park

Council Offices

11

13

Market Parade

5

9

15

21

7

13

17

15

Green Arcade

May Day

1

15

El

42

50

2

9

1

3

1

11

1334 to

40

58

4244

44a

4648

52

a58

60

25

Shelter

20 to

22

23 to 27

2

1412

1610

82

to 6

18

13

36

4139

38

40

TCBs

Multi-storey Car Park

2 to 8 6

10

4

10

1816

14

1210

8

64

2

Bank

2119

26

25 293127

12

24

10

2624

22

10

1

7

9

1

11

1010a

7

42

97

Bank

8

32

20

13

3

Fellowship House

School

Barnsley Christian

51

33 35

26 to 3248

32

34

18

Council Offices

9

10

8

21

District

59

3

614

16

13

18

1511

20

El Sub Sta

8 10

17

GarageHotelRoyal11

11

5

1 3

2

1

6

4

5

2

24

1218

22

2

PH

PH

PCs

16

8

3

11

Bank

1

5

PH

68

Buildings

Exchange

PH

19

13

Bank

BankEl Sub Sta

7

2822

13 to 17

11

12 to 18

24

9

Library

Shambles30

18a

(PH)

20

The

(Government Offices)Yorkshire House

3 to 11

13 to 1719

1

19

21

Peel S

treet

Arcade to 2723

Three Travellers

38

42 44

(PH)

34

The

32

36b

3636a

Methodist Church

32

Pitt Street

6

27

37

4

33

5

10

35

1

1315

Govt

46 to 56

Offices

17

13a

47

41

37

53

43

41

3335

25

19

29

PH

9

26

El Sub Sta

21

16

10

11

12 to 16

6

Head

2

The Theatre Royal

PH

Office

Post

PH

7

2

1

1 to 9

Elim

Mews

WesleyanSalem

Warehouse

ReformSchoolSunday Church

22

Sorting Office

YMCA

El Sub Sta

6

18

16

18a

3

El Sub Sta

11

19

2

16

8

2

29

36

Presbytery

Club

Holy RoodChurch of the

74

84

9

1

11

8

12

2

21

2

96

9Roof Car

George's

Park

El Sub Sta

Church

St

Depot

Council Offices

Headquarters

John Rideal H

ouse

(Governm

ent Offices)

District

Council Offices

1

42

38

6

9

10

Convent

15

1

Holden House

1 to 30

El Sub Sta

Church

7

15

12

12

5

14

6

8

11

Warehouse

16

3

36

48 1

47

11a

44

11

10

3

50

24

38

40

8

5

42

1

27

49

63

46

2

44

37

Works

12

85

22

3

1

12

42

1

2

Works

33

Warehouse

20

War

ehou

se

20b

2

Works

HQ

25

13

14

24

9

El Sub

Sta

Chapel

(private)

Garage

Shelter

Shelter

PC

Keresforth

12

167

2

7

12

2

1

4

1140

82

75

ATC

50

10

12

7

12

3

6

1

520a

1

30

22

2321

1719

Wor

ks

32

PC12

21

2

84

Shaw

15

Inn

2

1

Longcar

110

14

108

105

131

2

123

118

103

2

12

1

24

25

2

11123

35

25

14

24

1

34

20

1

13

141

139

153

4

1 191

13

2

Clay

cliffe

Ter

race

23

2

12

68

13

58

18

10

2

16

25

24

13

3129

30

9

27

1

94

11

3

13

3

92

101

128

Inn(PH)

7

165

11

144

1

19

2

24

34

11

121

113

15

17

44

24

14

130

10

2

6

25

183

181

32

1

22

1

15

29

5

46

56

32

18

39

79

80

16

19

2

15

Centre

14

15

7

El

19 to 28

13 to

18

6

Fire Headquarters

1

Sub Sta

12

Development Centre

Longcar Professional

2

ESS

ATC HQ

HQ

Sea Cadets

42

38

44

36

40

5553

48

42

2a

79

91

4

Club

20

15

9

5

18

14

12

2

71

81a

60

2

81

73

13

30

14

23

33

2

1

Garage

23

10

11

12

57

1

18

52

45

57

40

16

Lancaster Court

1 to 6

77

1

27

13

14

3518

38

28

45

Town

13

Mills

24

Works

1

12

53

55

18

44

30

41

31

21

41 42

30

Works

51

34

1

29

15

91 83

7880

68

56

33

17

67

2515

16

46

16

43a43b

2

57

43

31

15

2

Vicarage

3

99

The Gables

4

79

1

49

68

70

84

Wellington Place

15

22

29

1

20

13

38

91

52

24

13

25

1

37

115

45a

47

45

69

103

96

67

55

1

2

12

81

11

93

22

127

130

15

12

14 21

Holgate City Learning Centre

Holgate School

and Sports College

(Secondary)

El Sub Sta

115

95

16

105

SchoolHouse

2

31

23

Garage

39

36

PH

35

24

Gymnasium

4

1

41

38

Units 1 to 4

PH

Warehouse

60

Modern House

38

5

41

30

53

27

2

Trinity United

20

1648

Tank

22

30

23

12

5

Works

29

15

17

23

11

4

Works

El Sub StaESS

El Sub Sta

4 to 10

49

2

74

37

47

33

25

45

1

22

11

26

14

11

33

23

21

106

1 to 8of

78

1

11

70

16

2

(PH)

276

21

23

29

2519

3

Holy Rood RC Primary and

Nursery School

Shawlands Primary School

45

33

Joseph Locke Primary School

ESS

Trinity Mews56

Pavilion

1617

20

40

PH

40

Wellfield House

1 to 3

3 7

34

2826

242214 18 16 20

38

32

711

3

1059

18

12

133

62 4

139

17

54

19

25

23

21

42

24

22

67

55

2

2

45

51

1

53

65

3222

Pavilion

12

35

47

46

50

56

48

5

12

22 2

10

2

1

16

2

Shelter

24

30

42

11

19

26

14

28a

28

32

34

Club

3640

14

1

21

52

36

2

General HospitalBarnsley District

Orchard Views

39

Pogmoor

Works

51

66

66a

18

20

74

56

68

35

33

40

31

46

29

3921

Keir Cottage

96

94

80

Surgery

14

2

Windsor Court

41

2

37

51

36

61 to

71

75

73

20

12

9

2

1

9

20

12

1

106

Church

100a

100

47

102

29

19

26

27

1

7

2

12

9

11

12

2

29

81

85

31

35

54

21

3

1

42

1b

1a

15

12

2

Surgery

28

16

1

210

86

PO

84

Medical Centre

Nursery

90

31

17a

17

24

14

19

9

26

Court 1

403

16

1

2 82

78

9

11

14

24

24

15

1 to 6

Gable Mews

5

2

12

10

2a

21

20

3

1

291

12

41

31

1

14

4

7

22

35

33

34

33

34

36

54

7

2

1 to 9

64

44

52

49

47

57

El Sub Sta

66

30

6

44b46a

51

2

4036

58

Jordan Hill

Jordan Hill

73

46

53

58

4650

15

25

6674

1923

17

29

21

27

23

12

23

14

34

Southfield

5

1

3

9

Westleigh

18

22

15

34

1

1

32

13

19

27

Southbourne

35

24

39

23

25

Domum

2 20

2

1

48 46

10

9a11

25

9

4

27

21

4947

12

5250

The Courts

6

54

The Lamp

El Sub Sta

(Theatre)Room

372545

9

1

13

6 12

4a

Industry House

29

Club

Garage

2

17

14

19

17

16

Works

Works

PH

46 42

49

4

51

2

63

38

41

53

7

Works

12

32

40

26

16

2

2

Reformed Church

17

14

15

30

1

2

89

11

Surgery

80a

7

23

2 to 30

1 to 11

15

63

119

15

7

44

17

42

3

10098

PH

93

101

13

7

2

9

2

13

1

15

1

38

22

1

5

2

14

11

106

125

110

123 117

2

3

115

1 to 6

The Place

Springfield House

17

28

40

52

62

31

33

2

128

133

120

131

145149

1

9

16

2

Hall

1

5

42

5

11

3

5

12

47

2

49

22

50

18

45

20

1

9

3

7

2

42

3634

18

4

26

2

28

53

64

70

6668

60a

62

2

76

67

40

66

30

49

32

Ambulance HQ74

St John's

1

Works

Warehouse

18

6

9

7 to12

Newton Court

1 to 6

28

11

13

27

40

54

42

21

50

1

66

26

1 t o 4

Oakroyd

Apartments

216

212

15102

111

2a2b

2 to 16

68

91

15 to 17

1 to 11

1 to 11

15 to 17

2

10

78

75

1

58

3

2

4

2937

10

5

The Russets

86

1

Grey

(PH)

Church

11

Horse

The

Methodist

2

Old Town

28

6

14

to5

18

37

23

31

15

The Orchard

16

27

11

(PH)

9

Miners Rest

56

10

to83

4to

21

2

42 44

13

25

11a11

9

50

1

15

5753 a

55

37a

3

30

6

7

4

18

2

87

93

10

2

87a

13

1

8

1

42

38

24

25

37

31a

1

13

1

26

25

3

24 20

109

130

1

101

1329

116

104

2327

22

36121

111

13

144

40

8a8

2

38

27

10

25

34

24

2

12

37

49

61

164

168

158

to

5955

3

51

1

Bingley

Court

1

5

4856

41

66

58

3

42

2

16

4

14

1513

1

41

29

1

15

41

Club

131

30

37

25

16

27

Warehouse 13

48 t o26

2 to 2438 to

36

59

16

49

40 28

71

138144

179

134

177 163

23 to 25

37

44

14 to 1911 to 12

20 to 22

26 to 31

Maple House

15

10

1424

16

2

2

181a

33

183

1

181

7a

7

9

21

195

23

13

10

29

209

7

208

207

28

2 1

2

1

River Dearne

Industrial Estate

Path

Path

Path

Path

Path

Beevor Bridge

Path (um)

DWs

DW

Path

MP

DW

Shaft

Path

MP

Path (um)

MP

Path

Allotment Gardens

Path (um)

Path

(um

)

MEASBOROUGH

DIKE

El

Sub Sta

Drain

El Sub Sta

El Sub Sta

Tank

WB

Path

Chy

Track

Playground

Games Court

Dismantled Railway

Path

Track

Path

Depot

Path

Barnsley Canal (disused)

Dearne Valley Park

Trac

k

Path (um)

Path

Tanks

TCB

L Twr

TCB

L Twr

SM

Chy

FB

MarketOpen

Open Marke

tL Twr

L Twr

Path

(um

)

ElSubSta

Track

Harborough Hill

Posts

Sub Sta

Post

s

El

Allotment Gardens

Meml

Posts

War

SP

Terr

aces

FB FB

TCB

TCB

Red

fear

n St

reet

Sinks

Issues

Issues

Sinks

Path (um)

ElSub

TCB

Sta

Allotment

TrackGardens

LB

GovGas

Subway

Subw

ay

Subway

MP .5

MP 52.75

SP

Car Park

SM

Barnsley Transport Interchange

El Sub StaCar Park

Car Park

SP

Com

munication M

ast

SL

Car Park

MP.5

Area

Play

ESS

Posts

Ps

LB

TCB

War Memorial

TCB

El Sub Sta

Car Park

Gas Gov

El Sub Sta

LB

Area

Play

Walk

Barnabas Walk

Track

El

THE ARCADE

LB

StaSub

Car Park

Path

Sports Ground

Terr

aces

Sports Ground

Track

Track

BarnsleyCanal (disused)

Path

Car Park

Sports Ground

River D

earne

Allotment

Allotment Gardens

Gardens

Allotment Gardens

Track

Trac

k

Depot

Gov

SP

SP

Gas

MP 7

Jumble Lane Crossing

TCPs

MP

.75

TCP

TCPs

TCP

BolsBols

TCP

Allotment Gardens

Car Park

Car Park

Track

Orchard

TCBs

Posts

TCB

The Arcade

Sloping

Car Park

Car Park

Ramp

Ramp

Masonry

TCB

Post

TCBs

FB

Car Park

Depot

Ramp

Sough Dike

FB

Post

BARNSLEY

Gateway Plaza

SM

Park

Town End

Depot

Car Park

Car Park

Walk

Coalby

TCB

s

Car Park

Barnsley Cemetery

GP

Mast

Sub StaEl

ALHAMBRA ROUNDABOUT

Track

SM

LB

LB

LB

Posts

War Meml

LANDSSHAW Car Park

Post

El Sub Sta

El Sub Sta

Church Fold

LB

St Mary's Garden

TCBs

MP.25

SP

Post

Area

El

LB

TCB

Play

Sub Sta

TCB

Post

FB

Post

Victoria Avenue

Memorial

El Sub Sta

Issues

Allotment Gardens

Spreads

LB

WB

TOWNEND ROUNDABOUT

Austwick Walk

Car Park

Eshton Walk

Victoria

Yard

Allotment Gardens

Avenue

Posts

Allotment Gardens

Playground

FB

El Sub Sta

TCBs

LB

FB

Track

Track

Car Park

Path

Allotment Gardens

El Sub Sta

Sugden's Recreation Ground

Maple Estate

TCBs

Play

grou

nd

El

Sub Sta

Walk

Malham

Court

SM

Kilnsea Walk

Langdon Walk

Litton Walk

Ingleton

Gayle Court

Allot

men

t Gar

dens

MP

6

Trac

k

Willow Street

LB

Sinks

Playground

TCBs

TCB

LB

Bridge

Victoria

Industrial Estate

Mona Street

Gillott

Timber

SL

Trac

k

Allotment Gardens

Trac

k

Pond

Shelter

Gardens

Allotment

Bowling Green

WB

Posts

Posts

LB

OLD TOWN

Bowling Green

Posts

Mast

Track

Cricket and Athletic Club

Terraces

Playing Fields

Track

Allotment Gardens

Bowling Green

Bowling Green

Radio Pylon

Track

Sports Ground

82.3m

77.1m

78.0m

58.7m

55.6m

60.7m

100.9m

98.8m

99.5m

63.6m

65.2m

119.0m

115.4m

121.5m

117.7m

123.8m

112.0m

107.9m

81.2m

78.8m

127.1m

131.3m

134.4m

135.4m

137.2m

129.7m

129.2m

130.5m

116.7m

96.6m

103.9m

100.6m

107.0m

110.9m

99.4m

116.4m

123.9m

123.8m

123.4m

118.9m

121.8m

122.6m

113.7m

126.1m

128.

3m

127.8m

128.1m

136.

3m

124.9m

126.9m

126.8m

112.8m

113.7m

117.0m

114.8m

111.9m 109.5m

118.4m

116.6m

108.8m

118 .5m

119.0m

72.5m

75.9m

78.6m

81.1m

88.4m

72.5m

78.0m

75.9m

71.3m

101.8m

107.9m

96.6m

114.9m

114.3m

118.6m

122.8m

114.9m

114.0m

107.6m

115.2m

111.3m

128.6m

121.9m

120.1m

125.0m

127.7m

88.4m

85.9m

86.8m

90.6m

84.7m

74.0m

83.9m

76.4m

79.2m

71.6m

69.3m

81.0m

79.1m

98.5m

91.4m

103.4m

98.8m

93.7m

96.1m

103.0m

101.5m

90.2m

97.2m

84.9m

102.8m

91.2m

103.9m

98.0m

92.6m

83.5m

88.7m

83.1m

82.8m

84.7m

118.6m

123.6m

107.0m

99.7m

99.1m

88.7m

86.3m

83.8m

89.9m

97.5m

99.1m

98.5m

96.9m

95.7m

95.4m

102.4m

103.6m

97.2m

105.5m

103.9m

109.7m

112.5m

100.3m

115.2m

120.7m

105.2m

103.9m

102.1m

117.7m

112.8m

113.1m

118.6m

118.9m

120.4m

104.5m

123.7m

105.8m

112.2m

123.4m

107.1m

124.8m

120.

2m

132.2m

132.8m

118.4m

123.3m

128.3m

136.

0m

133.3m

112.8m

114.9m

116.1m

107.

0m

114.3m

117.3m

110.0m

116.4m

129.6m

128.9m

124.1m

126.5m

129.9m

130.3m122.2m

118.7m

121.2m

120.8m115.4m

118.3m

119.5m

113.9m115.6m

112.1m

125.2m

126.3m

121.2m

123.4m

123.6m

127.1m

129.7m

128.5m

129.8m

124.1m

131.8m

122.1m

126.1m

123.7m

130.6m

134.5m

136.6m

135.1m

133.6m

125.2m

140.1m

136.9m

136.4m

136.9m

139.4m

Drawn by:

Drawing:

This map is reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.100022264. (2011)

Planning and Transportation Service

24/01/2011

AKI Project:Scale 1:

Date:

Drwg No:

2500

Assistant Director: Stephen Moralee BA(Hons) MBAPO Box 604, Barnsley. S70 9FETel: (01226) 772601



0 150

metres

300

mike

Text Box

Map Legend: UDP Town Centre Boundary Primary Shopping Area Primary Frontages Secondary Frontages Area Action Plan Boundary

mike

Text Box

FIGURE 2 - BARNSLEY TOWN CENTRE: UDP TOWN CENTRE BOUNDARY, PRIMARY SHOPPING AREA, SHOPPING FRONTAGES AND AREA ACTION PLAN BOUNDARY

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Polygonal Line

mike

Line

mike

Line

mike

Line

mike

Line

mike

Line

mike

Polygonal Line

46

11. CONCLUSIONS 11.1 Four potential sites have been proposed for the development of a new superstore in Barnsley, two on the edge of the town centre and two in out-of-centre locations. This report assesses the potential developments based on the requirements for impact assessment set out in PPS4 and the accompanying Practice Guidance. The following scenarios have been assessed. Scenario




11.2 A capacity analysis to 2016 shows that there is no quantitative need for the additional floorspace in a new superstore development in convenience or comparison goods. A lack of capacity indicates that a new superstore development would be likely to have a trading impact on existing stores and centres. 11.3 Trade diversion to a superstore will be directly related to the turnover of the potential developments but trade diversion will also depend on the location of the different developments. 11.4 Scenarios 2 and 3 would have the lowest overall trade diversions. Scenario 4, the largest scheme, would have the highest overall trade diversion. Scenario 3 is predicted to have the highest trade diversion from Morrisons on the edge of Barnsley town centre because of its location immediately adjacent to Morrisons. Scenario 2 would have the lowest overall impact on town centre shops and the Markets scheme. In terms of its effect on the vitality and viability of the town centre, we consider that Scenario 2 (Gala Bingo/YEB site) is the most acceptable site. 11.5 Scenarios 1 and 4 would have the highest impacts on the out-of-centre Asda and Tesco stores and Wombwell Lane Retail Park. However, impacts on Asda and Tesco are not a material consideration, as these are out-of-centre stores not protected by planning policy. Impact on the edge-of-centre Morrisons is a material consideration because of its role as the anchor foodstore for the town centre and its importance in generating linked trips to the town centre. 11.6 The four potential superstore developments individually would not have a significant adverse trading impact on the Markets scheme. Investment in the Markets scheme should proceed despite the opening of a new superstore development. Spin-off benefits for the town centre and the Markets scheme will be greatest if the store is well related to the town centre through pedestrian linkages.

47

11.7 The cumulative impact of more than one new superstore development on the town centre and the edge-of-centre Morrisons store would be significant at a time when the role of the town centre needs to be strengthened. A single very large-scale superstore development would also be likely to have a significant adverse impact. 11.8 The range of scenarios could result in the creation of between 273 and 383 jobs, according to the scale of floorspace proposed. Allowing for a reduction of retail jobs in the town centre as a result of trade diversion, the potential net increase in employment is between 195 and 286 jobs. 11.9 Scenario 2, the Gala Bingo/YEB site, is the most preferable site in terms of retail factors. It is well located next to the Transport Interchange and the new Markets redevelopment site. 11.10 As a basis for assessing future proposals for large-scale retail developments in Barnsley, floorspace thresholds are suggested for impact assessments. We recommend that the following thresholds are used by the Council in deciding whether a proposed development requires an impact assessment. Area for Application of Floorspace

Thresholds

Floorspace Threshold for Impact Assessment

Barnsley Town Centre Barnsley urban area, outside the

primary shopping area



shopping areas




11.11 Because of the importance of the Barnsley Markets Project in the draft Core Strategy, we recommend that impact on the Markets Project should be adopted by the Council as a “locally important impact” for the purposes of the application of PPS4 policies. We also recommend that the Council adopts our suggested town centre and primary shopping area boundaries for Barnsley town centre, and the proposed primary and secondary frontages. 11.12 There is only capacity for one new superstore of up to approximately 5,000 sq.m. net floorspace within the catchment area of Barnsley town centre. More than one superstore development would have a significant adverse impact on the town centre likely to justify refusal under PPS4 Policy EC17.

TABLE 1

EXISTING EXPENDITURE FLOWS, CONVENIENCE GOODS, 2008 (£ million in 2008 prices)

Zones 1 2 3 4 5 turnoverBarnsley Penistone/ Wombwell/ Royston/ Goldthorpe/ 2008Central West Hoyland North Cudworth £m

Catchment AreaMorrisons, Barnsley 35.34 14.02 7.98 9.63 8.56 75.53Town centre shops 10.61 3.82 4.19 7.15 2.36 28.13Cudworth 1.68 1.68Goldthorpe 5.71 5.71Hoyland 5.41 0.13 5.54Penistone 0.22 5.39 0.95 0.36 6.92Royston 0.28 0.41 3.99 0.32 5.00Wombwell 0.50 0.73 1.23All local shops 10.33 3.30 1.94 7.77 15.29 38.63Asda, Old Mill Lane 36.57 9.18 1.75 26.41 14.29 88.20Tesco, Wombwell Lane 17.45 2.77 11.23 3.64 11.04 46.13Catchment area total 111.30 38.48 34.59 58.59 59.74 302.70LeakageMorrisons, Cortonwood 2.97 0.69 17.69 0.48 17.59 39.42Tesco, Wath upon Dearne 0.40 0.52 2.74 0.63 14.97 19.26Other stores 2.08 9.90 4.90 9.67 9.94 36.49Leakage total 5.45 11.11 25.33 10.78 42.50 95.17

Total 116.75 49.59 59.92 69.37 102.24 397.87

TABLE 2

EXISTING EXPENDITURE FLOWS, COMPARISON GOODS, 2008 (£ million in 2008 prices)

Zones 1 2 3 4 5 turnoverBarnsley Penistone/ Wombwell/ Royston/ Goldthorpe/ 2008Central West Hoyland North Cudworth £m

Catchment AreaBarnsley town centre 123.93 40.5 37.01 57.97 61.65 321.06Peel Centre Retail Park 1.42 0.52 0.34 1.30 1.85 5.43Wombwell Lane Retail Park 3.44 1.13 5.29 1.65 4.12 15.63Cudworth 0.20 0.06 1.39 1.65Goldthorpe 2.85 2.85Hoyland 1.95 1.95Penistone 4.60 4.60Royston -Wombwell 0.20 1.96 0.06 0.60 2.82Catchment area total 128.79 47.15 46.55 61.04 72.46 355.99LeakageCortonwood Retail Park 8.32 2.94 12.94 3.79 17.77 45.76Meadowhall 19.64 11.55 11.72 8.74 13.31 64.96Sheffield 5.24 9.96 2.47 2.70 3.42 23.79Wakefield 0.72 0.10 0.20 16.14 2.15 19.31Rotherham 1.86 0.87 4.92 0.11 10.42 18.18Doncaster 1.13 0.25 0.19 0.76 15.41 17.74Leeds 2.12 1.24 0.42 2.96 0.63 7.37Other Centres 6.97 4.87 6.50 6.08 10.47 34.89Leakage total 46.00 31.78 39.36 41.28 73.58 232.00

Total 174.79 78.93 85.91 102.32 146.04 587.99

TABLE 3: EXPENDITURE FLOWS, CONVENIENCE GOODS 2016INCLUDING COMMITMENTS (£ million in 2008 prices)

Zones 1 2 3 4 5 Committed turnoverBarnsley Penistone/ Wombwell/ Royston/ Goldthorpe/ Developments 2016Central West Hoyland North Cudworth [1] £m

Catchment AreaMorrisons, Barnsley 33.81 12.58 7.41 8.55 7.82 70.18Town centre shops 10.16 3.43 3.89 6.35 2.16 4.90 30.89Markets scheme, Barnsley [2] 4.60 4.60Cudworth 1.54 1.54Goldthorpe 5.22 7.40 12.62Hoyland 5.02 0.12 5.14Penistone 0.21 4.84 0.88 0.33 26.90 33.16Royston 0.27 0.38 3.54 0.29 4.49Wombwell 0.48 0.68 1.16All local shops 9.88 2.96 1.80 6.90 13.97 6.90 42.42Asda, Old Mill Lane 34.98 8.24 1.63 23.46 13.06 81.37Tesco, Wombwell Lane 16.69 2.49 10.43 3.23 10.09 42.93Catchment area total 106.48 34.54 32.12 52.04 54.60 50.70 330.49LeakageMorrisons, Cortonwood 28.10Tesco, Wath upon Dearne 13.84Other stores 25.69Leakage total 67.63

Total Expenditure by zone 121.19 48.30 60.38 66.86 101.39 - 398.12

[1] Commitments include:Tesco, Penistone (convenience goods) £26.9m Retention level of catchment area = 83% Netto, Lundwood (net increase) £1.8mNetto extension, Goldthorpe £0.9mSupermarket, Thurnscoe £4.4mAldi extension, Doncaster Road £0.7mHarborough Hill Road £4.9mnew supermarket, Goldthorpe £6.5mMarkets project (convenience goods) * £4.6mtotal £50.7m

[2] net increase in turnover of currently proposed Markets scheme

TABLE 4: EXPENDITURE FLOWS, COMPARISON GOODS 2016INCLUDING COMMITMENTS (£ million in 2008 prices)

Zones 1 2 3 4 5 Committed turnoverBarnsley Penistone/ Wombwell/ Royston/ Goldthorpe/ Developments 2016Central West Hoyland North Cudworth [1] £m

Catchment AreaBarnsley town centre 139.93 43.58 41.21 61.69 67.54 5.70 359.64Markets scheme [2] 57.40 57.40Peel Centre Retail Park 1.60 0.56 0.38 1.38 2.03 5.95Wombwell Lane Retail Park 3.88 1.22 5.89 1.76 4.51 10.50 27.76Cudworth 0.22 0.06 1.52 1.80Goldthorpe 3.12 3.12Hoyland 2.17 2.17Penistone 4.95 1.60 6.55Wombwell 0.22 2.18 0.06 0.66 3.12Catchment area total 145.42 50.73 51.83 64.95 79.37 75.20 467.51LeakageCortonwood Retail Park 39.49Meadowhall 56.06Sheffield 20.53Wakefield 16.66Rotherham 15.69Doncaster 15.31Leeds 6.36Other Centres 30.08Leakage total 200.19

Total expenditure by zone 203.73 87.67 98.75 112.4 165.15 667.70

[1] Commitments include:Tesco extension, Wombwell Lane £10.5m Retention level of catchment area = 70% Tesco, Penistone (comparison goods) £1.6mPeel Street, Barnsley £5.7mMarkets project (comparison goods) £57.4m

£75.2m[2] net increase in turnover of currently proposed Markets scheme

TABLE 5: CAPACITY ANALYSIS, CONVENIENCE GOODS

Barnsley Catchment Area (2008 prices)

2008 2011 2016

Residents' Expenditure (£m) [1] 397.83 377.83 398.12

Existing Turnover in Catchment Area (£m) [2] 302.70 - -

Retention level [3] 76.1% 80% 85%

Future Expenditure Retained (£m) - 302.3 338.4

less Future Turnover of Existing Shops (£m) [4] - 302.7 308.8

Surplus Capacity (£m) - -0.4 29.6

less Commitments (£m) [5] - 28.7 50.7

Residual Capacity (£m) - -29.1 -21.1

Sales per sq.m. net in new shops (£) - 10,000 10,000

Floorspace Capacity for new shops (sq.m. net): nil nil

[1] Expenditure excludes non-store retailing

[2] Survey-based turnover 2008

[3] assuming an increase in market share (retention level) of the catchment area because of clawback of leakage as a result of commitments and a potential superstore development

[4] assuming increase in sales density at 0.4% p.a. 2011-2016 and 0.5% per annum from 2016 onwards

[5] Commitments in convenience goods in Barnsley catchment area:net sales turnover

sq.m. per sq.m. £mTesco, Penistone (convenience goods) 2,070 £13,000 26.9Netto, Lundwood (net increase) 280 £6,300 1.8Netto extension, Goldthorpe [6] 150 £6,300 0.9supermarket, Thurnscoe [6] 880 £5,000 4.4Aldi extension, Doncaster Road [6] 140 £5,000 0.7Harborough Hill Road [6] 980 £5,000 4.9new supermarket, Goldthorpe [6] 1,300 £5,000 6.5Markets project (convenience goods) [6] [7] - - 4.6

50.7[6] developments after 2011


TABLE 6: CAPACITY ANALYSIS, COMPARISON GOODS

Barnsley Catchment Area (2008 prices)

2008 2011 2016

Residents' Expenditure (£m) [1] 588.00 575.81 667.69

Existing Turnover in Catchment Area (£m) [2] 356.17 - -

Retention level [3] 60.6% 62% 70%

Future Expenditure Retained (£m) - 357.0 467.4

Visitor Expenditure (£m) [4] - 17.9 23.4

Total Available Expenditure - 374.9 490.8

less Future Turnover of Existing Shops (£m) [5] - 356.2 397.1

Surplus Capacity (£m) - 0.8 70.3

less Commitments (£m) [6] - 12.1 75.2

Residual Capacity (£m) - -11.3 -4.9

Sales per sq.m. net in new shops (£) - 5,000 5,000

Floorspace Capacity for new shops (sq.m. net): nil nil

[1] Expenditure excludes non-store retailing

[2] Survey-based turnover 2008

[3] assuming an increase in market share (retention level) of the catchment area because of clawback of leakage as a result of commitments and a potential superstore development

[4] visitor spending is estimated to be an additional 5% of residents' spending

[5] assuming increase in sales density at 2.2% p.a. 2011-2016 and 2.3% per annum from 2016 onwards

[6] Commitments in comparison goods in Barnsley catchment area:net sales turnover

sq.m. per sq.m. £mTesco extension, Wombwell Lane 1,500 £7,000 10.5Tesco , Penistone (comparison goods) 230 £7,000 1.6Peel Street, Barnsley [7] 1,130 £5,000 5.7Markets project (comparison goods) [7] [8] - - 57.4

75.2[7] developments after 2011


TABLE 7A: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE GOODS

IMPACT TABLE , 2016 (2008 prices)

SCENARIO 1 - PEEL CENTRE

turnover trade trade percentage residual2016 draw diversion impact turnover£m % £m * % £m

Catchment AreaMorrisons, Barnsley 70.18 20% 6.69 9.5% 63.49Town centre shops 30.89 5% 1.67 5.4% 29.22Markets scheme, Barnsley 4.60 - - - 4.60Cudworth 1.54 - - - 1.54Goldthorpe 12.62 - - - 12.62Hoyland 5.14 - - - 5.14Penistone 33.16 - - - 33.16Royston 4.49 - - - 4.49Wombwell 1.16 - - - 1.16All local shops 42.41 - - - 42.41Asda, Old Mill Lane 81.37 30% 10.03 12.3% 71.34Tesco, Wombwell Lane 42.93 15% 5.02 11.7% 37.91Catchment area total 330.49 70% 23.41 7.1% 307.08ClawbackMorrisons, Cortonwood - 15% 5.02 - -Tesco, Wath upon Dearne - 5% 1.67 - -Other stores - 5% 1.67 - -Clawback total - 25% 8.36 - -

Inflow from beyond catchment - 5% 1.67 - -

Total - 100% 33.44 - -

* net floorspace = 5,574 sq.m. of which 60% or 3,344 sq.m. is assumed to be for convenience goods sales3,344 sq.m. @ £10,000 per sq.m. = £33.44m

TABLE 7B: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE GOODS


SCENARIO 2 - GALA BINGO/YEB SITE




Total - 100% 27.87 - -


TABLE 7C: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE GOODS


SCENARIO 3 - NEW STREET SITE




Total - 100% 27.87 - -


TABLE 7D: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE GOODS


SCENARIO 4 - B&Q SITE, STAIRFOOT


Catchment AreaMorrisons, Barnsley 70.18 20% 7.80 11.1% 62.38Town centre shops 30.89 5% 1.95 6.3% 28.94Markets scheme, Barnsley 4.60 - - - 4.60Cudworth 1.54 - - - 1.54Goldthorpe 12.62 - - - 12.62Hoyland 5.14 - - - 5.14Penistone 33.16 - - - 33.16Royston 4.49 - - - 4.49Wombwell 1.16 - - - 1.16All local shops 42.41 - - - 42.41Asda, Old Mill Lane 81.37 20% 7.80 9.6% 73.57Tesco, Wombwell Lane 42.93 25% 9.76 22.7% 33.18Catchment area total 330.49 70% 27.31 8.3% 303.18ClawbackMorrisons, Cortonwood - 15% 5.85 - -Tesco, Wath upon Dearne - 5% 1.95 - -Other stores - 5% - - -Clawback total - 25% 9.76 - -


Total - 100% 39.02 - -


TABLE 8A: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, COMPARISON GOODS




Catchment AreaBarnsley town centre 359.64 60% 6.69 1.9% 352.95Markets scheme 57.40 5% 0.56 1.0% 56.84Peel Centre Retail Park 5.95 - - - 5.95Wombwell Lane Retail Park 27.76 5% 0.56 2.0% 27.76Cudworth 1.80 - - - 1.80Goldthorpe 3.12 - - - 3.12Hoyland 2.17 - - - 2.17Penistone 6.55 - - - 6.55Wombwell 3.12 - - - 3.12Catchment area total 467.51 70% 7.81 1.7% 459.71ClawbackCortonwood Retail Park - 10% 1.12 - -Meadowhall - 5% 0.56 - -Sheffield - 5% 0.56 - -Wakefield - 1% 0.11 - -Rotherham - 1% 0.11 - -Doncaster - 1% 0.11 - -Leeds - 1% 0.11 - -Other Centres - 1% 0.11 - -Clawback total - 25% 2.79 - -


Total - 100% 11.15 - -

* net floorspace = 5,574 sq.m. of which 40% or 2,230 sq.m. is assumed to be for comparison goods sales2,230 sq.m. @ £5,000 per sq.m. = £11.15m

TABLE 8B: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, COMPARISON GOODS




Catchment AreaBarnsley town centre 359.64 55% 5.11 1.4% 354.53Markets scheme 57.40 5% 0.46 0.8% 56.94Peel Centre Retail Park 5.95 2% 0.19 3.1% 5.76Wombwell Lane Retail Park 27.76 8% 0.74 2.7% 27.02Cudworth 1.80 - - - 1.80Goldthorpe 3.12 - - - 3.12Hoyland 2.17 - - - 2.17Penistone 6.55 - - - 6.55Wombwell 3.12 - - - 3.12Catchment area total 467.51 70% 6.50 1.4% 461.01ClawbackCortonwood Retail Park - 10% 0.93 - -Meadowhall - 5% 0.46 - -Sheffield - 5% 0.46 - -Wakefield - 1% 0.09 - -Rotherham - 1% 0.09 - -Doncaster - 1% 0.09 - -Leeds - 1% 0.09 - -Other Centres - 1% 0.09 - -Clawback total - 25% 2.32 - -


Total - 100% 9.29 - -


TABLE 8C: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, COMPARISON GOODS






Total - 100% 9.29 - -


TABLE 8D: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, COMPARISON GOODS






Total - 100% 13.01 - -


TABLE 9A: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE AND COMPARISON GOODS



convenience comparison total convenience comparison total totalturnover turnover turnover trade diversion trade diversion trade diversion percentage

£m £m £m £m £m £m impactCatchment AreaMorrisons, Barnsley 70.18 - 70.18 6.69 - 6.69 9.5%Town centre shops 30.89 359.64 390.53 1.67 6.69 8.36 2.1%Markets scheme, Barnsley 4.60 57.40 62.00 - 0.56 0.56 0.9%Asda, Old Mill Lane 81.37 - 81.37 10.03 - 10.03 12.3%Tesco/Wombwell Lane 42.93 27.76 70.69 5.02 0.56 5.58 7.9%Peel Centre Retail Park - 5.95 5.95 - - - -Other centres/shops 100.52 16.76 117.28 - - - -Catchment area total 330.49 467.51 798.00 23.41 7.81 31.22 3.9%

TABLE 9B: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE AND COMPARISON GOODS




£m £m £m £m £m £m impactCatchment AreaMorrisons, Barnsley 70.18 - 70.18 6.97 - 6.97 9.9%Town centre shops 30.89 359.64 390.53 1.39 5.11 6.50 1.7%Markets scheme, Barnsley 4.60 57.40 62.00 - 0.46 0.46 0.7%Asda, Old Mill Lane 81.37 - 81.37 6.97 - 6.97 8.6%Tesco/Wombwell Lane 42.93 27.76 70.69 4.18 0.74 4.92 7.0%Peel Centre Retail Park - 5.95 5.95 - 0.19 0.19 3.2%Other centres/shops 100.52 16.76 117.28 - - - -Catchment area total 330.49 467.51 798.00 19.51 6.50 26.01 3.3%

TABLE 9C: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE AND COMPARISON GOODS





TABLE 9D: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE AND COMPARISON GOODS





TABLE 10A: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE GOODS

CUMULATIVE IMPACT TABLE , 2016 (2008 prices)

based on cumulative impact of one edge-of-centre development and one out-of-centre development




Total - 100% 61.31 - -

* assuming a total floorspace of 10,219 sq.m. of which 60% or 6,131 sq.m. is assumed to be for convenience goods sales6,131 sq.m. @ £10,000 per sq.m. = £61.31m

TABLE 10B: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, COMPARISON GOODS




Catchment AreaBarnsley town centre 359.64 55% 11.24 3.1% 348.40Markets scheme [2] 57.40 5% 1.02 1.8% 56.38Peel Centre Retail Park 5.95 2% 0.41 6.9% 5.54Wombwell Lane Retail Park 27.76 8% 1.64 5.9% 27.76Cudworth 1.80 - - - 1.80Goldthorpe 3.12 - - - 3.12Hoyland 2.17 - - - 2.17Penistone 6.55 - - - 6.55Wombwell 3.12 - - - 3.12Catchment area total 467.51 70% 14.31 3.1% 453.20ClawbackCortonwood Retail Park - 10% 2.04 - -Meadowhall - 5% 1.02 - -Sheffield - 5% 1.02 - -Wakefield - 1% 0.20 - -Rotherham - 1% 0.20 - -Doncaster - 1% 0.20 - -Leeds - 1% 0.20 - -Other Centres - 1% 0.20 - -Clawback total - 25% 5.11 - -


Total - 100% 20.44 - -

* assuming a total floorspace of 10,219 sq.m. of which 40% or 4,088 sq.m. is assumed to be for comparison goods sales4,088 sq.m. @ £5,000 per sq.m. = £20.44m

TABLE 10C: RETAIL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, CONVENIENCE AND COMPARISON GOODS





TABLE 11: RESIDUAL TURNOVER OF SUPERSTORES (2008 prices)

net company benchmark survey-based survey c/ffloorspace average turnover turnover benchmark

sq.m. turnover £ million 2008 performance£ per sq.m. * £ million

Morrisons, Westway 3,380 £11,554 39.05 75.53 193%Asda, Old Mill Lane 3,901 £11,040 43.07 88.20 205%Tesco, Wombwell Lane 4,508 £11,222 50.59 46.13 91%

Scenario 1 residual benchmark survey c/fPeel Centre turnover turnover benchmark

2016 £ million performance

Morrisons, Westway 63.49 39.05 163%Asda, Old Mill Lane 71.34 43.07 166%Tesco, Wombwell Lane 37.91 50.59 75%

Scenario 2 residual benchmark survey c/fGala Bingo/YEB Site turnover turnover benchmark



Scenario 3 residual benchmark survey c/fNew Street Site turnover turnover benchmark



Scenario 4 residual benchmark survey c/fB&Q Site, Stairfoot turnover turnover benchmark



Cumulative Impact residual benchmark survey c/fof 2 developments turnover turnover benchmark



* excluding petrol and restaurant sales

RETAIL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL SUPERSTORE ... · RETAIL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL...

Documents

Transcript of RETAIL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL SUPERSTORE ... · RETAIL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL...