Issues and Options Document

(2) 7 Supporting Commercial Development

(11) Strategic Priority 2: The provision of retail, leisure and other commercial development

Introduction

7.1 We have three individual town centres located to the west of our district, each providing for the local shopping and leisure needs of their communities. These are complemented by a number of smaller village and neighbourhood centres. Our area is steeped in history which provides a unique setting for each of our town, village and neighbourhood centres. The environment within which we live, work and socialise can have a positive impact on the health and well-being of our residents.

7.2 Changes of use from retail to other uses within town centres in particular was raised as a concern through the early community engagement in 2016,, as well as ensuring that shop frontages respect the Conservation Area status of many of our town and village centres. However, given our location close to larger commercial centres in South Essex, including Southend, Basildon and intu Lakeside, Chelmsford City in Mid Essex and our easy access to London, this poses challenges for ensuring that our more local-serving centres, which meet the needs of our communities, continue to not only survive, but thrive.

Retail, Leisure and Town Centres

Where are we now?

7.3 The district's town centres of Rayleigh and Hockley contain a good range of shops, services and facilities to meet the needs of our local communities. Generally empty units do not pose a big issue across the district, and in the main, empty units are not empty for long before being brought back into use. However, more recently Rochford has experienced a decline in services, including the loss of the town's two banks and supermarket.

7.4 Rayleigh is our principal town centre as identified in the Core Strategy with the most comprehensive range of facilities and an established night time economy. Hockley and Rochford's town centres are classed as smaller town centres catering for local needs. The Airport Retail Park to the south of London Southend Airport is also located in the district. The Core Strategy sets out a number of policies to strengthen the role of our town centres whilst ensuring that our village services are sustained. Policies RTC1 and RTC2 promote a sequential approach to retail development in the district to support our town centres. Each of our town centres is supported by an Area Action Plan which provides a planning framework to guide their evolution and security their future prosperity.

7.5 The NPPF and PPG requires Local Planning Authorities to assess the needs for retail and leisure to inform Local Plans, and to meet these needs as far as possible. Existing evidence in the Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014 highlights that the amount of expenditure retained for goods that we do not  often buy (comparison goods, such as cars) is generally lower than for goods that are bought frequently (convenience goods, such as food) in the three town centres. This reflects the tendency of customers to do food shopping locally; whilst for comparison shopping, customers are more likely to shop around and/or travel longer distances to visit larger centres that have more choice. The study found that our district's ability to increase its comparison goods market share will be constrained by larger centres in South Essex.

7.6 This 2014 Study forms the basis of a more strategic study commissioned for South Essex. A South Essex Retail Study has been prepared to provide a broader overview of retail and leisure needs across the sub-region. The Retail and Leisure Needs Topic Paper 2017 draws out the key findings from the emerging South Essex Retail Study for Rochford District. This study confirms that the district has the highest rate of convenience expenditure leakage of all the South Essex authorities. Similarly, expenditure leakage for comparison shopping is the second highest in South Essex. 

7.7 Rayleigh is the main shopping centre in the district. The town serves its own residents and nearby villages, and competes primarily with the other medium sized town centres, such as Wickford in Basildon Borough and Hadleigh in Castle Point Borough. Just under half the floorspace in the town is for convenience goods. The Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014 highlights that theretention of convenience goods expenditurein the town is reasonable, and has the highest comparison goods average sales density, which reflects the stronger presence of national chain stores, compared to Hockley and Rochford. The studyrecommends that Rayleigh should continue to be designated as a town centre. Core Strategy policy RTC4 sets out the high-level principles for the Rayleigh Centre Area Action Plan. This Area Action Plan was adopted in 2015 and establishes a detailed planning framework for the town, defined by identified character areas given the town's heritage.

7.8 Rochford is a smaller town centre that serves a more localised catchment than Rayleigh, including the town itself and smaller rural catchments providing a range of shops and non-retail services. Around two-thirds of floorspace in the town is for convenience goods as noted by the Retail and Leisure Study Update in 2014, although spending retention for convenience goods is relatively low; and the town's principal supermarket closed in early 2017. The Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014 recommends that Rochford should continue to be designated as a town centre based on the number, scale and type of shops and services available. Rochford has a thriving community led Town Team which was awarded Heritage Lottery Funding in 2016 to develop a heritage trail and promote the town and its heritage. The Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan 2015 is heritage led and sets out the principles that any future schemes in the town should follow. 

7.9 Hockley is a small town centre which serves the town and some smaller rural catchments. The majority of floorspace in Hockley is for convenience goods, although spending retention for these goods is lower than Rochford. The Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014 howeverrecommends that Hockley should continue to be designated as a town centre. The Hockley Area Action Plan 2014 seeks to strengthen the retail role of the town; this is an approach which is supported by the Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014. This Area Action Plan builds on the existing strengths of Hockley and sets out the key planning principles for its future. 

7.10 The planning framework for our town centres recognises that people make town centres vibrant and seeks to encourage people to visit the town centres by ensuring that they are attractive, accessible and contain a variety of uses. The Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014 recommends that the district should seek to increase its market share of comparison retail expenditure; however, it is limited by developments in neighbouring areas. Improvements to future provision could help to claw back some additional expenditure leakage out of our district and to retain its current market share.

7.11 More recent projections set out in the Retail and Leisure Needs Topic Paper 2017 suggest that by 2037 there is likely to be a need for at least 10,792 square metres (net) of comparison floorspace in the district, with at least 880 square metres (net) of convenience floorspace. The exact provision is likely to depend on the number of new homes the district is able to accommodate over the new plan period; aligning retail provision with population will have a positive impact on the sustainability of settlements.  

7.12 In terms of commercial leisure uses, the Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014 considers potential demand for cinema, tenpin bowling, bingo, nightclubs, private health and fitness clubs, casinos and catering, pubs and bars.

• Cinema – The study considers that there is theoretical scope for a small, independent niche cinema, if the district can attract 20% of cinema trips from within the district itself, as echoed in the Retail and Leisure Needs Topic Paper 2017. The commercial viability of a cinema is questionable given the proximity of large cinemas in Basildon and Southend however.
• Tenpin bowling – The study suggests that current provision should meet the future needs of residents over the next 20 years. Bowling facilities in Southend and Basildon will also limit the commercial potential in the district.
• Bingo – The study considers that in theory the district could support one bingo hall, however existing facilities in Basildon, Canvey Island and Southend are likely to reduce the commercial viability of new facilities in the district.
• Nightclubs – The study highlights that there are two nightclubs in Rayleigh, and residents also have access to a large number of nightclubs in Southend. This suggests that there is limited potential for large nightclubs in the district.
• Private health and fitness clubs – The study suggests that there is an adequate supply of gyms and health clubs within the district for the foreseeable future.
• Casinos – The study notes that there are no casinos in the district, but Southend has two casinos, and so it is unlikely that the district would have a catchment population large enough to support a casino. It is also likely that casino operators would prefer to locate in Basildon or Southend.
• Catering, pubs and bars – The study recommends that there is a potential requirement for an additional 3,000 square metres (gross) of Class A3/A4/A5 floorspace in the district up to 2034, with the priority for Class A3 (restaurant/café) within Rayleigh and Hockley.

7.13 Paragraph 23 of the NPPF states that planning policies should be positive, promote competitive town centre environments and set out policies for the management and growth of centres over the plan period. The Area Action Plans have been adopted following the publication of the NPPF. These plansare considered to meet the requirement of national policy in promoting vibrant and viable town centres, building on the individual characters and strengths of our towns.

What are the identified issues?

7.14 The district is in proximity to a number of significant neighbouring town centres which act as a draw for those looking for a specific retail or leisure experience as recognised by the Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014, for example Southend and Basildon have a wide range of shops and have other attractors such as cinemas and ten-pin bowling. Just two venues within the district reach the top 2,500 venues in the UK – Rayleigh and London Southend Airport Retail Park – based on the number of leading multiple retailer brands present (as ranked by Venuescore).

7.15 Southend, Chelmsford and Basildon town centres are at the top of the shopping hierarchy in Mid/South Essex with significant competition from intu Lakeside shopping centre. Whilst it is beneficial for our residents to have good access to a choice of larger retail and leisure centres, this however means that the outflow of retail expenditure from the district, particularly comparison goods, is significant and this is likely to remain high in the future. To complement the district-wide Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014, the emerging South Essex Retail Study explores the relationship between the different retail centres and will provide a broader context on the retail needs of the sub-region.

7.16 Future improvements to comparison retail provision within the district could help to claw back some additional expenditure leakage. However, major developments in neighbouring authorities will limit the ability of shopping facilities in the district to increase their market share of expenditure. Some retail development will be necessary in the district however in order to maintain existing market share in the future.

7.17 We found during the early community engagement in 2016 that residents would like to see their town centres protected from any change of use that may occur, replacement shops should be a 'like-for-like' swap. Some changes of use can also have a potential impact on public health; for example, clustering of fast food outlets (Class A5 uses) located near schools. It has also been brought to our attention through the early engagement that the visual appearance of some shop frontages is not up to Conservation Area standards. Whilst we can manage the visual appearance of frontages within these areas, without the co-operation of landowners, there are limitations on rectifying past developments which can undermine the character of Conservation Areas. In terms of changes of use there are also limitations on our control due to permitted development rights which enable certain changes of uses without the need to apply for planning permission.  

7.18 Small supermarkets in the district have an important role to play in providing day-to-day top-up shopping to residents in villages and more rural parts of the district less accessible by public transport, especially for our ageing population. Larger supermarkets that are located both within town centres and on the outskirts still provide an option for weekly shopping and are generally well used. Although it is worth acknowledging that shopping habits have changed and many residents make use of online food shopping with it either being delivered to the home or click and collect from the store without going inside. Nationally this has seen a decline in the large scale out of town major supermarket developments and more recently a reduction in 24 hour opening.

7.19 Transport infrastructure capacity is also limited within our town centres in the district which could have a detrimental impact on businesses. Parking is important within the town centres, although there is limited free parking available. Subsequently out of town shopping areas can act as a draw away from traditional town centres through offering extensive free parking where land is more widely available.

What are the realistic options?

7.20 There are five options that have been identified for the district's town centres.

Option	Justification
(3)Retain current Core Strategy policies	The broad town centre policies within the Core Strategy are considered to be appropriate in directing retail development to the district's town centres through the sequential approach supported by the NPPF.
(1)Retain current policies in the Rayleigh Centre Area Action Plan	The area specific policies within the Rayleigh Centre Area Action Plan are considered to strike an appropriate balance between promoting the vibrancy and vitality of the town and facilitating appropriate development opportunities whilst respecting the historic character of Rayleigh.
(2)Retain current policies in the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan	The area specific policies within the Rochford Town Centre Area Action Plan are considered to strike an appropriate balance between promoting the vibrancy and vitality of the town and facilitating appropriate development opportunities whilst respecting the historic character of Rochford.
(1)Retain current policies in the Hockley Area Action Plan	The area specific policies within the Hockley Area Action Plan are considered to strike an appropriate balance between promoting the vibrancy and vitality of the town and facilitating appropriate development opportunities whilst respecting the individual character of Hockley.
Review the town centre Area Action Plans	These plans were adopted post-publication of the NPPF and PPG and are considered to be fit for purpose. In addition, opportunity sites and employment land identified in the plans have been assessed within our evidence base.
Do not have policies on town centres	This approach is considered to be contrary to the NPPF and is not considered to be appropriate.

(15) Villages and Local Neighbourhood Centres

Where are we now?

7.21 Local centres generally include a small range of shops of a local nature, such as a small supermarket, newsagent, post office and pharmacy, which serve the local community.  The Core Strategy sets out a number of policies to strengthen and ensure our village services are sustained. We have many more shops and services located outside of the established town centres, dotted throughout residential areas in our towns and villages. Local centres in the district have an important role to play in providing day-to-day shops and services that are available to residents in villages and more rural parts of the district less accessible by public transport, especially for our ageing population. The Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014 recognises that the facilities at Hullbridge, Great Wakering, Canewdon and other villages are more limited and serve local catchment areas. The study recommends that other village centres should continue to be designated as local centres.

7.22 The NPPF recognises the importance of maintaining a network of retail centres in areas. The smaller centres in the district should – as recommended in the Retail and Leisure Study Update 2014 – continue to perform a more local function meeting day-to-day shopping and service needs. Core Strategy policy RTC3 seeks to protect retail uses within residential areas and will only permit the loss of such retail uses where it has been clearly demonstrated that a retail use in the location is not viable and that the proposed alternative use will still offer a service to the local community that meets day-to-day needs. It also supports the provision of new facilities as part of schemes for new homes coming forward, which do not undermine the current provision nearby. This is an approach which is encouraged through the Allocations Plan within schemes to the north of London Road in Rayleigh (policy SER1), and to the south west of Hullbridge (SER6), which is also supported by the NPPF (paragraph 38).

7.23 Further guidance on the treatment of local shops is set out in Development Management Plan policy DM36. It is recognised that it may be appropriate to change the use of premises to a use that would provide a similar service for local residents or convert a premises for alternatives uses, where a lack of demand for the current use has been demonstrated. Our current policies support the retention and enhancement of small rows and parades of shops. Policy DM36 supports the conversion of units from retail to non-retail in certain circumstances, but not to residential. It does however support the conversion of non-retail units – such as offices, hair dressers, takeaways and pubs – to residential in exceptional circumstances with the aim of retaining these locally important services.

What are the identified issues?

7.24 There is a requirement to deliver new homes to meet needs – and it is important that we look to utilise potentially available land within the existing residential area wherever possible and appropriate. However this should not be to the detriment of local shops and services which perform an important function in meeting the day-to-day needs of local communities. 

7.25 Similar to town centres, the NPPF at paragraph 69promotes strong neighbourhood centres and active street frontages to contribute to healthy communities. In terms of supporting prosperous rural communities, the NPPF promotes the retention and development of local services and community facilities in villages, such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship (paragraphs 28 and 70 in particular).

7.26 We therefore need to ensure that village and neighbourhood shops are protected from changes of use which would undermine their purpose in providing for the day-to-day shopping needs of local residents, particularly proposals to convert shops to residential. Non-retail uses also perform an important function in supporting local shops and should be retained wherever possible. We also need to work in partnership with healthcare providers to ensure that core services such as GP surgeries, dentists and other health facilities can continue to meet the needs of the local population.

What are the realistic options?

7.27 There are three options that have been identified for village and neighbourhood centres.

Option	Justification
(3)Retain existing Core Strategy policy	Core Strategy policy RTC3 which seeks to protect local shops in village and neighbourhood centres is considered to be appropriate, as it promotes more sustainable shopping/travel patterns. Local top-up food shops provide a lifeline for those without access to public or private transport.
(1)Retain existing Development Management Plan policy	Development Management Plan policy DM36 sets out circumstances when conversion from retail to non-retail, and non-retail to residential may be considered appropriate. This policy is considered to be fit-for-purpose in further supporting the retention of local facilities.
Do not have a policy on village and neighbourhood centres	This approach is considered to be contrary to the NPPF and is not considered to be appropriate.