Developers respond to long list of concerns about new M&S food hall at Norcross

Developers behind ambitious proposals to build a new M&S food hall at Norcross have responded to a long list of concerns raised via a huge public reaction.

The plans to build a new ‘first class’ M&S store at Norcross offering ‘6,600 product lines’ were lodged with Wyre planners in January.

This store is intended to replace M&S’s current outlet on Victoria Road West in Cleveleys town centre, as that outlet is deemed to be ‘too small’, and the propsed new branch comes with the prospect of up to 50 new retail jobs being created.

Since the planning application was lodged with Wyre Council, there have been some 145 comments from the public submitted to the planning portal.

Of these, 78 have been objections , there have been 64 supports and three neutral comments.

Main objections

Those objections have highlighted concerns about the impact on local trade and Cleveleys town centre, the effects on the nearby road infrastructure (including the already problematic Norcross roundabout), the inaccessible location of the proposed store and various other issues.

As well as comments from the public, Stantec UK Ltd, engineering, architecture, and environmental consultants, lodged an objection about the impact the development would have on its client, an unnamed retailer.

And Lancashire County Highways has voiced concern in its capacity as a planning consultee.

The application is for the erection of a new retail food store, together with associated car parking, servicing areas and landscaping, including the provision of an electricity substation, and alterations to the highway .

The sizeable new store would have a net sales area of 1,465 sq.m and 145 parking spaces.

Applicants’ response to concerns

Real estate services company Savills (UK) Limited, on behalf of applicants London Metric Retail Limited said: “The application has to date received a total of 145 comments from the public on the Council’s public access website for the application.

“There are more objections at 54% – however the split between objections and support / neutral is fairly even, with 46% of the comments received being supportive or neutral of the proposal.

“ Each issue raised has been explored with commentary from Savills and the wider design team.”

Flooding

The statement says: “Flooding was raised a total of 7 times throughout the comments and as such is considered a minimum concern from objectors. Nonetheless, there were valid concerns relating to recent flooding at the time the application was submitted which affected existing residents on White Carr Lane. The planning application is accompanied by a Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy which confirms that the site is at a low risk of flooding from all sources, and that it would not increase the risk of flooding from any sources and as such accords with all relevant national and local planning policies.

Pollution

The statement says: “There were a small number of comments concerned with various sources of pollution including noise and exhaust fumes from increased traffic. An Air Quality Assessment was submitted alongside the planning application, which takes into account the exhaust emissions from additional road traffic generated from the development and finds that the long term impacts are ‘negligible’

Highways Matters Traffic / Congestion

The statement says: ”Traffic and Congestion are common concerns throughout the public comments, with specific references to Norcross Roundabout. The applicant understands and appreciates that these are valid concerns, and to ensure a robust proposal is put forward, the application included a Transport Assessment with the planning application pack, which includes thorough assessments of forecasted trip generation, and impact on the local highways.

“The Transport Assessments set out that the effect of the wider network has already been tested and capacity built in given the planning history of the site and the site included as an allocation. The trip generation has actually reduced given that the housing : commercial ratio has materialised as being heavier on the housing than originally intended. On balance the network has been strengthened with spare capacity, over and above what would now be generated by this holistic site. “

Car Park Management / Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB)

The statement says: “It is appreciated that there are concerns relating to Anti-Social Behaviour in the car parks after hours and if there is enough parking in general. To provide assurances, the Transport Assessment includes commentary on the proposed level of parking which is sufficient for the proposed use and in accordance with planning policy guidance. This has been agreed with the Highways Officer.

“ With regards to anti-social behaviour, M&S as the operator are keen to avoid this as it is in their interests to curb any such behaviours. As such it is intended that the inappropriate use of the car park is something that will be constantly considered and assessed, and if necessary, management systems will be implemented to address any potential anti-social behaviour. M&S is happy to work with the immediate neighbours in this regard and welcomes the reporting of any inappropriate behaviour on the premises.”

Deliveries

The statement says: “Some comments refer to concerns surrounding the frequency of deliveries and potential disturbance as a result. The Planning Statement sets out that the operator and applicant anticipate that there will be no more than two deliveries a day. This is the minimum required to ensure the smooth operation of the store.

“ As set out in the accompanying plans, the layout of the site is designed so that any potential disturbance as a result of deliveries is minimised, by placing it the furthest away from sensitive receptors as possible.”

Retail Matters

The statement says: “The proposal is for a new retail food store in an out-of-centre location and as such, in accordance with local and national planning policy, an impact assessment was carried out as part of the planning application. This demonstrated that there would be no significant impact on existing town centres.

“The applicant submitted a robust application in this regard and demonstrated that the proposed new store would not impact the vitality and viability of the existing designated centres within its catchment, in accordance with the NPPF (National Planning policy Framework), and carried out a sequential assessment of any potential alternative sites as well as Town Centre health checks to inform the impact assessment. The Sequential Assessment found that there were no suitable or available alternative sites within the catchment area, and assessed multiple sites in detail.

“ The Local Authority commissioned Nexus to carry out an independent planning appraisal of the retail impact assessment, whose conclusions largely agreed with the applicants with regards to retail impact and the sequential test. “

Loss of Existing Store

The report continues: “The most prevalent concerns in the objection relate to the loss of the existing store in Cleveleys Town Centre.

“ It is agreed that the loss of the store itself is not a planning matter. The relevant consideration is the policy framework, namely the sequential and retail impact tests. As set out above and throughout the application document, we have met the requirements of these tests.

“Nonetheless, the concerns of the loss of the existing store are not taken lightly and the level to which residents and shoppers support M&S as a retailer is understood and appreciated. Furthermore, the existing site is in a desirable location with high footfall, and it is the applicants understanding that the landlord has had significant interest in the unit and we understand that the landlord has agreed terms with a new tenant.”

Impact on the Town Centre

The statement says: ”As aforementioned, the applicant carried out sufficient assessment of the existing centres and concluded that there would be no significantly adverse impact as a result of the proposed development, in line with planning policy. This was supported in a professional, independent appraisal by Nexus.

“ However, it is noted that this concern has been raised by members of the public. With regards to the existing store, as set out above the unit will be let as soon as possible so as to minimise any impact of the loss of M&S. 2.23. It is noted M&S are keen to maintain their presence in the area and ensure continuity in their investment, and the only way to do this is by expanding and enhancing their offer, via a new planning permission. “

Accessibility of the Proposed Store

The statement says: “The application site is sustainably located within an existing residential area, on previously developed land with connectivity to public transport (bus routes) and the highways network. Mitigation will be implemented where necessary, to ensure the site is safe and accessible for all. This is set out in more detail in the Transport Assessment which was submitted as part of the planning application. “

Alternative Sites

It says: “In the objection comments, other sites have been suggested. However it has been agreed between the applicant and the Council that none of these are viable alternatives.

“The Hesketh (Car Sales) site is situated within the designated Town Centre area of Cleveleys Town Centre, on Bispham Road.

“However the site measures approximately 0.32 ha. The application site is 0.89 hectares and on this basis the Hesketh site is too small to accommodate the proposals

“The Natwest site is situated on Victoria Square / 89 Victoria Road West and comprises a building on a corner plot facing Victoria Road West and Brighton Avenue. The site is less than 0.1 hectares in site, with no parking, or servicing. It is not suitable for M&S’s needs and is smaller than even its existing store. It is therefore ruled out as an option. “

If given the go ahead, the project will be developed alongside new proposals to bring more houses to those already on the former DWP site, located on the edge of Thornton and Anchorsholme.

Plans to build 93 homes on a neighbouring piece of land off Norcross Lane were resubmitted to planners in December and are still pending consideration.