Charnwood Borough Council
Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Peter Brett Associates November 2017
Office Address: 33 Bowling Green Lane, Clerkenwell, London EC1R 0BJ T: +44 (0)203 824 6600 E: [email protected]
Project Ref 42796
Name Position Signature Date
Prepared by Cathy Hall Senior Associate CH 11.17
Reviewed by Cathy Hall Senior Associate CH 11.17
Approved by Kieran Rushe Equity Director KR 11.17
For and on behalf of Peter Brett Associates LLP
Revision Date Description Prepared Reviewed Approved
1 20.11.17 Final draft CH CH KR
2 23.11.17 Final CH CH KR
Peter Brett Associates LLP disclaims any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of this report. This report has been prepared with reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the contract with the client and taking account of the manpower, resources, investigations and testing devoted to it by agreement with the client. This report has been prepared for the client and Peter Brett Associates LLP accepts no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report or any part thereof is made known. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk. © Peter Brett Associates LLP 2017
THIS REPORT IS FORMATTED FOR DOUBLE-SIDED PRINTING. .
ii Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Retail planning policy and other material considerations ...... 2
2 LIDL APPLICATION REVIEW ...... 5 Summary of the Lidl proposal ...... 5 Sequential test ...... 5 Impact assessment ...... 7
3 ALDI APPLICATION REVIEW ...... 10 Summary of Aldi application ...... 10 Sequential assessment ...... 11 Impact assessment ...... 15
4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...... 18 Method ...... 18 Our findings ...... 19 Conclusions and recommendations ...... 21 TABLES Table 1.1 Proposed retail and other floorspace by planning application (sqm) ...... 1 Table 2.1 Sequential sites review – Lidl application ...... 6 Table 2.2 Assumptions and quantitative inputs to the Rapleys impact assessment ...... 8 Table 3.1 Sequential site review – Aldi application ...... 11 Table 3.2 Assumptions and quantitative inputs to the Turley impact assessment ...... 15 Table 4.1 Assumptions informing the PBA impact assessment ...... 18 Table 4.2 Impact summary for main town centres ...... 19 Table 4.3 Health check review ...... 20
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A QUANTITATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
November 2017 iii
Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
1 INTRODUCTION
Peter Brett Associates LLP (PBA) were instructed by Charnwood Borough Council in November 2017 to provide retail advice to assist in their determination of two foodstore-led planning applications: ° P/16/2141/2 New Retail Store, (1424 m ² net sales floor space) at land north of Station Avenue, Loughborough (Lidl UK) (‘the Lidl application’) ° P/17/0942/2, (1,254m ² of net sales floor space) coffee shop with drive through and take away facility (Class A3/A5), three retail units (Class A1/A2/A3) at Allendale Road, Loughborough (Aldi Stores Ltd) (‘the Aldi application’) We set out a brief summary of the two applications in the table below. Table 1.1 Proposed retail and other floorspace by planning application (sqm)
Gross Gross Convenience Comparison Net sales Application Units external internal goods goods area area (GEA) area (GIA) floorspace floorspace
Lidl Lidl 2,550 2,460 1,424 1,139 285
Aldi 1,254 1,800 1,003 251 Costa Not n/a Aldi 198 n/a n/a Coffee specified None 322 None specified None specified Other units specified
Total 4,870 2,142 636 Source: Rapleys and Turley reports
This report is structured in three main parts: ° Section 2: Review of the Lidl application and submitted retail assessment ° Section 3: Review of the Aldi application and submitted retail assessment ° Section 4: Independent impact assessment and conclusions In preparing this report, we have had regard to the following reports submitted in support of the two applications: ° Planning and retail statement (September 2016) prepared by Rapleys in support of the Lidl application (‘the Rapleys report’) ° Planning and retail statement (May 2017) prepared by Turley in support of the Aldi application (‘the Turley report’). As part of this advice, we were also asked to liaise with the developer of the urban extension at Grange Park, William Davis Homes, to understand the status of any planned investment in the allocated local centre.
November 2017 1 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Retail planning policy and other material considerations Both sites are out-of-centre in retail planning terms 1 and, as a consequence, much of the relevant retail planning policy is common to the determination of both applications. We therefore set out a brief summary here of the retail and town centre policies within the development plan and also the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which sets the context of our assessment of the applications in Parts A and B, and also informs our approach to assessing impact in Part C. Development Plan The development plan for Charnwood comprises the Charnwood Borough Local Plan 2011 to 2028 Core Strategy (2015) and the saved policies of the Borough of Charnwood Local Plan (2004). Policy CS9 Town Centres and Shops confirms the retail strategy for Loughborough town centre, the district centres and local centres. In relation to Loughborough, south east of the town centre and Devonshire Square are identified as the short-term focus for retail development. For proposals outwith defined town centres, the policy confirms that proposals must comply with the sequential approach and that impact assessments are required for proposals in excess of 1,000 sqm (for Loughborough). National Planning Policy Framework The NPPF articulates a town-centre first approach to development. In decision- making terms these objectives are embodied at paragraphs 24 and 26 which relate to the sequential approach and impact respectively. In respect of the sequential test, the NPPF sets out three important considerations which include: ° the sequential status of the application site; ° the extent of connectivity with the town centre; and, ° the extent to which flexibility on format and scale has been demonstrated. The NPPF requires applications for retail development in excess of 2,500 sqm that are ‘outside of town centres which are not in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan’ to include an assessment of: ° ‘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; and, ° the impact of the proposal on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and trade in the town centre and wider area, up to five years from the time the application is made.’
1 We discuss their exact status in in Parts A and B.
November 2017 2 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Finally, paragraph 27 of the NPPF makes it clear that an application can only be refused on retail grounds where it ‘fails to satisfy the sequential test or is likely to have significant adverse impact’. Guidance and recent case law With regard to the sequential test, paragraph 009 of the National Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) states that in order to satisfy the test applications must demonstrate that the following points have been considered: ° The suitability of more central sites to accommodate the proposal with due regards to the requirement to demonstrate flexibility. ° The contribution that more central sites are able to make individually to accommodate the proposal. Paragraph 010 of the PPG states that the application of the sequential test should be proportionate and appropriate for the given proposal. The PPG states that the sequential test is passed if there are no suitable sequentially preferable locations and confirms that where a proposal fails to satisfy the sequential test, it should be refused. A number of recent judgments and call-in decisions are relevant to the application of the sequential approach to site selection: ° In the Dundee judgment 2, it was held that the definition of ‘suitable’ refers to a location being suitable for the development proposed by the applicant rather than suitable to accommodate the need or demand which the proposal is intending to meet. The interpretation of what is ‘suitable’ with regards to the sequential approach was considered to not be a planning judgement but a matter of legal interpretation. Lord Hope observed that ‘the criteria are designed for use in the real world in which developers wish to operate, not some artificial world in which they have no interest in doing so’ (para. 38). ° The Secretary of State’s call-in decision at Rushden Lakes 3 confirmed that there is no requirement to consider disaggregating parts of a proposal in order to demonstrate reasonable flexibility of scale and format (para. 16). ° That decision also confirmed that in relation to availability, the inspector’s report states that the NPPF asks if sites are currently available and ‘ does not ask whether such sites are likely to become available during the remainder of the plan period or over a period of some years ’ (para. 2.77). In relation to impact on planned investment, the PPG confirms the issues that should be considered in this regard: ° the policy status of the investment. ° the progress made towards securing the investment.
2 [2012] UKSC 13 3 APP/G2815/V/12/2190175
November 2017 3 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
° the extent to which an application is likely to undermine planned developments or investments based on the effects on current/forecast turnovers, operator demand and investor confidence. The Secretary of State considered the way in which impact on planned investment should be assessed at Rushden Lakes. The Secretary of State agreed with the Inspector’s finding that impact on planned investment is moot in instances where there is no specific scheme upon which to impact as follows: ‘Legal & General argued that the NPPF does not require there to be a “scheme.” However, that misses the point. In the absence of a scheme, there cannot be a viable scheme and consequently there cannot be “planned” or “committed” investment. At most there can be an intention to invest if, as and when there ever is a viable scheme but, that is not what the NPPF [26] is aimed at.’ 4
4 Para. 8.64
November 2017 4 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
2 LIDL APPLICATION REVIEW Summary of the Lidl proposal As set out in Table 1.1, the proposed development comprises a 1,424 sqm net foodstore. The Rapleys report also confirms the following details: ° The application site is 1ha (para. 2.1). ° It is out of centre in retail planning terms: paragraph 7.4 states that the application site is 450m from Loughborough town centre boundary. The distance of the application site from the nearest primary shopping area is not confirmed in the Rapleys report. ° Section 2 includes a review of the planning history for the application site. The site is currently in D1 and B8 use and there are no extant permissions or previous applications for A1 use on the site. ° The proposal includes 135 car parking spaces (para. 4.5) ° Section 5 provides an overview of Lidl’s trading model. This makes reference to the following ‘key trading characteristics that distinguish Lidl from the mainstream convenience retailers and smaller independent retailers’: o Reduced number of product lines than the main convenience foodstore operators. o Confirmation that Lidl stores do not include fresh meat, fish, delicatessen or hot food counters, pharmacy, dry cleaners, post office, photographic shop, mobile phone shop or café/restaurant. o They refer to a ‘localised’ catchment area which is defined at paragraph 5.30 as between 0-5 minutes’ drive. o More limited opening hours than ‘mainstream food retailers and local convenience stores’. Sequential test The Rapleys report outlines the following parameters in carrying out the sequential test: ° Catchment area: a five-minute drive-time catchment from the application site has been adopted. This is justified with reference to ‘the Lidl locational strategy [which] is based on stores in urban areas that serve an area that broadly equates to a 0-5 minute drive-time of the site’ (para. 7.8). This catchment includes Loughborough town centre, Gorse Covert district centre, Shelthorpe district centre and Sharpley Road local centre. However, the Rapleys report confirms that they have also considered sequential sites in Shepshed district centre, Quorn local centre and Barrow upon Soar local centre, as well as a proposed local centre as part of an urban extension to the west of Loughborough. While we question whether a five-minute drive-time catchment is sufficient for the proposed store,
November 2017 5 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
given the assessment looks at centres beyond this, we are satisfied with this scope. ° Site area: minimum of 0.5ha. Given the application site double this size, we agree that this satisfies the requirement to be flexible. In the following table, we consider the analysis provided in the Rapleys report. Table 2.1 Sequential sites review – Lidl application
Site Rapleys report review PBA review
Loughborough town centre
Baxter Gate: no longer available as redeveloped for leisure-led We agree that the Baxter Gate use and is discounted on this site can be discounted as a basis. sequentially-preferable site. Aumberry Gap: the edge-of- centre site has been cleared for With regard to Aumberry Gap, development so available. While South of Loughborough town the CRTCS identified some it is 0.54ha so falls within the centre (Baxtergate/Aumberry Gap) concern about the prospect of identified parameters of search, developing out this site along the the servicing access lines of the published guidance. arrangements are compromised As such, we agree that the site is and there is not scope to not suitable for the proposed accommodate sufficient adjacent development, even adopting car parking. The site is therefore reasonable flexibility. dismissed as not suitable.
The site is in active use, in multiple ownerships and is not Given the clarity provided in being actively marketed for Rushden Lakes decision as redevelopment. It is therefore outlined in Section 1 of this deemed to be unavailable. review, we agree that the site is not available. The site is dismissed as not being suitable for several While the commentary provided reasons including: the site being on the suitability of the site is Devonshire Square too large (1.35ha, or in the case contradictory (for example, of the separate parcel of land at paragraph 7.54 refers to Lidl’s John Storer House, too small); site area requirement being redevelopment for solely retail between 0.5-0.8ha; however, the use compromising the objectives application site is confirmed as of policy for a mixed-use being 1ha at paragraph 2.1), scheme; and the need to include given the site is not available, the flood mitigation measures which suitability of the site is not might render the proposed relevant. development unviable.
The site comprises a Sainsbury’s foodstore and fully-let retail park. It is not being actively marketed North-west of Loughborough town and is therefore deemed to be We agree that the site is not centre (Sainsbury’s/Regent Place) unavailable for development. available.
No analysis of the suitability of the site is provided.
Shelthorpe district centre
The edge-of-centre site is 0.43ha Former Shelthorpe House, so is below the threshold We agree that the site is neither Farnham Road identified in the parameters of suitable nor available. search.
November 2017 6 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Site Rapleys report review PBA review
There is a permission on the site for residential redevelopment which is being implemented and is therefore not available.
In addition to these, the Rapleys report sets out that there are no potential sites within Gorse Covert, Shepshed, Sharpley Road, Quorn or Barrow upon Soar centres. On the basis of the information provided within the Rapleys report, we agree that the applicant has demonstrated reasonable flexibility in carrying out their sequential assessment and that the proposed development complies with the sequential approach as outlined in local policy and the NPPF. Impact assessment The Rapleys report sets out the approach taken on the impact assessment from paragraph 7.67 onwards. We review it here under the two main NPPF components: impact on planned investment and impact on town centre vitality and viability, with the latter element picked up again in Section 4. Impact on planned investment In assessing impact on planned investment, the Rapleys report refers to the same centres identified with their five-minute drive-time catchment i.e. Loughborough, Gorse Covert, Shelthorpe and Sharpley Road. In relation to Loughborough, Baxtergate is identified as the key consideration in terms of planned investment. Since the Rapleys report was written, the leisure-led scheme is now open. While there is a small component of the site which has yet to be developed out, we understand there are no development proposals in place upon which the Lidl development could impact in investment terms. In relation to Aumberry Gap and Devonshire Square, the Rapleys report makes reference to the differing nature of the offer on those sites as envisaged by policy and concludes that the development would not result in adverse impact on investment in those sites. However, what the Rapleys report does not flag in ruling out adverse impact on these sites is that there is no evidence that there is any committed investment for either of the sites. Following the approach adopted by the Secretary of State at Rushden Lakes as outlined in Section 1, it follows that there can be no impact on those schemes arising from the development. In addition, the Rapleys report also considers the West of Loughborough sustainable urban extension (SUE) which is allocated in the adopted Core Strategy and is expected to have a local centre as part of the development. No reference is made to a planning permission on that site; and CBC have confirmed that there is not a permission in place. Given the nature of the allocation as a large-scale residential-led development and the intention that any retail on site form part of a local centre to serve that development, we agree that the Lidl application is not likely impact on any investment in that site.
November 2017 7 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
The Rapleys report does not consider Grange Park local centre. While this is not explained, we presume this is because it is located outside their catchment area. For the reasons we explain in further detail below, we have reservations over this limited catchment area. We revisit the question of impact on Grange Park again in Section 4. Impact on town centre vitality and viability Together with our comments on the approach taken, we set out below a summary of the assumptions and data inputs to the quantitative assessment provided in the Rapleys report at Section 7 and Appendix 5. This primarily focuses on the convenience impact of proposed Lidl store which we consider to be reasonable given the small quantum of comparison floorspace proposed. Table 2.2 Assumptions and quantitative inputs to the Rapleys impact assessment
Rapleys assumptions/ PBA comment data inputs
While the Rapleys report refers to a five- minute drive-time catchment, which we consider is likely to understate the catchment area of the proposed store, in Catchment Five-minute drive-time practice, because of the approach taken by Rapleys when assessing impact, the chosen catchment area is of limited relevance when reviewing their impact assessment. We explain why below
The application was submitted late in 2016 Base year 2017 so we agree this is reasonable
The PPG clarifies that impact should be Design year 2022 assessed up to five years from submission
Experian MMG3 and Experian Expenditure and Recognised data provider – latest available Retail Planner Briefing Note 13 expenditure growth data at the time of submission (October 2015)
Recognised data provider – latest available Population Experian MMG3 data at the time of submission
£6,995/sqm (convenience and This is in line with the latest Mintel data so Sales density comparison) we agree this is reasonable
Given the low level of convenience growth, while there is no explanation on any floorspace efficiencies between 2017 and Floorspace efficiency No details of any allowance 2022, we do not expect that this omission would have a material effect on the outcome of the assessment
We agree this a reasonable basis upon Convenience turnover (in £7.71m which to assess the impact of the proposed design year) store.
Experian Retail Planner Recognised data provider – latest available SFT Briefing Note 13 data at the time of submission
Existing and future store 2013 Charnwood Retail and This links to the catchment area point: the turnovers in the no- Town Centre Study approach taken in the Rapleys report is to
November 2017 8 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Rapleys assumptions/ PBA comment data inputs
development scenario use the store turnovers derived from the CRTCS; as such, the turnover of those stores is derived from a much wider area than the catchment area defined in the assessment. While the principle of using the CRTCS as the starting point is considered reasonable, because of the way the subsequent impact assessment has then been carried out, we have concerns over the robustness of this approach.
The implication of the assessment is that trade might be drawn from people living within the identified catchment area. However, this is not the case. Because the no-development scenario adopted by the No explanation is given on Trade draw applicant uses turnovers derived from the trade draw whole CRTCS study area, it follows that trade going to the proposed development could be drawn from the whole CRTCS study which covers the whole of Charnwood and extends into several other boroughs.
Linked to the concerns above on trade draw, although the CRTCS area is broken down into a number of zones which would enable Rapleys to provide more Diversion is shown in total transparency in their assessment, trade Trade diversion terms from each of the diversion information is only provided at the relevant stores/centres. total level. Combined with the lack of transparency on the trade draw assumptions, it means that verifying the findings of the Rapleys report in terms of quantitative impact are not possible.
Since the CRTCS was undertaken, the Morrisons at Gorse Covert has been extended and the Budgens at Mountsorrel Commitments None detailed has changed hands. No making allowance for these in the no-development scenario means that the impact conclusions presented are not robust.
Drawing together the points outlined in the table above, we have identified two main areas of concern: the reference to a five-minute drive-time catchment which is misleading in the context of the actual approach taken in assessing impact; and the lack of transparency in the trade draw and diversion assumptions adopted. Added to this, no account has been taken of recent changes in the retail offer within and around Loughborough. For these reasons, we do not provide any further comment on the findings of the Rapleys report in terms of quantitative impacts on Loughborough and the other designated centres. Instead, we revisit the point in Section 4 of this report.
November 2017 9 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
3 ALDI APPLICATION REVIEW Summary of Aldi application As set out in Table 1.1, the proposed development comprises a 1,254 sqm net foodstore, together with several other units: a 193 sqm (GEA) A3 unit to be occupied by Costa Coffee and three other units totalling 322 sqm (GEA) for flexible A1-3 use. The Turley report also confirms the following details: ° Two different areas are provided for the application site: at para. 1.2 it is referred to as 1.28ha, while para. 2.2 it is stated that it comprises ‘a green field parcel of land which extends to approximately 0.64ha’. ° The site is out of centre in planning terms. Para. 2.4 states that ‘the nearest designated centre [town] centre to the subject site is Shelthorpe District Centre, some 0.7km to the north west of the site’. It goes on to state that the site is 2.7km to the south of Loughborough town centre. ° Para. 2.2 confirms that while the application site has an extant permission for redevelopment, this relates solely to residential use. There is no history relevant to the retail or other town centre uses proposed as part of the current application. ° Section 3 provides more detail on the proposed development, including stating that there would be 199 car parking spaces. ° Detail is provided on Aldi’s business model as the proposed main store operator and how that relates to the proposed development: o Restricted product range of c. 1,500 lines, compared to between 2,500-40,000 product lines in other foodstores chosen to ‘reflect the everyday essentials of the weekly shop’ (para. 3.25). o ‘Small range of branded wines and spirits’ and ‘a limited range of breadlines and small number of boxed cakes’ (para. 3.28). o No specialist butcher, fishmonger, bakery, delicatessen or chemist (para. 3.28); no cigarettes or lottery tickets sold. o The comparison offer is limited to 20% and the range of non-food goods ‘mostly contains weekly specials, with the range of goods sold as special purchases varying constantly and widely, often following a seasonal theme’ (para. 3.29). o Opening hours as standard for all Aldi stores: 8am to 10pm Mondays to Saturdays and 10am to 4pm on Sundays (para. 3.20). These are referred to at para. 3.30 as ‘more restricted than those for traditional convenience shops/newsagents, which further limits the scope for direct competition with such outlets’. o Para. 3.40 sets out a number of criteria which are deemed to be ‘core’ the any Aldi store. We refer to these in the context of reviewing the sequential assessment.
November 2017 10 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Sequential assessment At paragraph 5.15, the Turley report outlines the following parameters which have informed their sequential site assessments: ° Size: minimum 0.5 ha in order to be able accommodate a ‘standard full range of goods’ with what is termed ‘adequate levels of car parking’ and servicing. This is not the ‘preferred’ Aldi format, instead reference is made to 0.7ha being the smallest site required in order to accommodate a 1,800 sqm GIA store. ° Configuration: flat sites to enable single-storey sales floor to be developed. ° Access and visibility: ‘direct and/or easy vehicular access to the main road network’, as well as visibility from the main road network. In relation to size, while we note the reference to 0.7ha as the minimum area needed to deliver their preferred 1,800 sqm GIA store, in this instance, para. 3.2 of the Turley report confirms that they are applying for a store of 1,800 sqm GEA together with a number of other units and nearly 200 car parking spaces on a site of potentially only 0.64 ha. We therefore do not place any weight on the reference to 0.7 ha and treat the 0.5 ha as the minimum area, which at c. 75% of the site area 5, we consider to represent reasonable flexibility. We note that Turley have defined the parameters of the site for the purposes of the sequential assessment and these parameters do not refer to other uses in the proposal i.e. they appear to solely relate to the foodstore element of the proposal. This implies that, in adopting a flexible approach to assessing preferable sites, Turley have treated the Costa Coffee and other units as not essential to the proposed development. However, for reasons we discuss later, there are inconsistencies about the way Turley have undertaken their sequential assessment, including the how the mix of uses relates to demonstrating reasonable flexibility. Furthermore, there is no explicit reference to an area of search. Instead the Turley report refers to pre-application discussions identifying Grange Park, Shelthorpe (erroneous referred to as Spelthorne), Quorn, Barrow upon Soar and a number of sites in and around Loughborough town centre (Baxtergate/Aumberry Gap, Devonshire Square and Sainsbury’s/Regent Place). In the following table we consider the evidence provided in the Turley report on these sites: Table 3.1 Sequential site review – Aldi application
Site Turley report review PBA review
Grange Park local centre
Reference is made to the fact that We understand that the reserved matters Grange Park local the marketing strategy submitted in permission for the local centre has now centre support of the reserved matters lapsed. However, in the context of this application has not yielded any application, that does not change the status
5 We assume that the area given at para. 2.2 of the Turley report is correct
November 2017 11 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Site Turley report review PBA review
occupiers and as such, the of the site, which as the Turley report states developer is entitled to bring the is assumed to be available for 0.5ha of land forward for other development. commercial uses.
They consider the reserved matters With regard to suitability, despite the approval for a local centre and also reference to a minimum size of 0.5 ha at a potential further application at para. 5.15 (summarised above at para. 3.2), Grange Park. The site is dismissed the justification provided by Turley to dismiss as being too small to accommodate the Grange Park site (which it states is the proposed development, for 0.5ha) dismisses the site as being too small which it is stated that a minimum to accommodate the whole proposal. 1.27 ha site is needed. Reference is made to potentially the site being able to accommodate the smaller units The site is also deemed to lack the within the layout of the lapsed reserved necessary commercial visibility and matter approval. However, this approach is would only cater to residents of flawed: the reference to disaggregating part Grange Park. It is also argued that the proposal does not comply with the the lack of pass-by trade in such a approach taken in recent judgments and location would undermine the appeal decisions mentioned in Section 1 of viability of the drive-thru element of this report. The main flaw is the lack of the proposal. flexibility: in dismissing the site, there does not appear to have been any compromise on Lastly the site is dismissed as not the proposed development and it the suitable because of servicing approach taken appears to be at odds with compromises: likely objections from the explanation provided several paragraphs residents as a result of servicing previously in the same report. Furthermore, traffic. we note that in considering the Aumberry Gap site (see below), Turley have attempted to demonstrate reasonable flexibility by only looking at whether the Aldi store could be accommodated.
In relation to the commercial visibility, we note the stipulations set out in the parameters of the sequential assessment and summarised above. These related solely to the Aldi. However, it is clear that in dismissing the site as unsuitable, the assessment has factored in the requirements of the drive-thru as needing pass-by trade and long hours of operation in order to sustain it. The implication is that it would be meeting a need far wider than the what would be expected of local centre intended to meet the needs of a local catchment. Its inclusion in the proposal appears at odds then with the assertion at para. 1.10 of the Turley report which states that ‘the proposed development is intended to operate as a local centre, effectively in substitution for a local centre permitted as part of the residential-led mixed-use development at Grange Park’. That said, we acknowledge that the location of Grange Park local centre plot is such that it is entirely surrounded by residential development and accessible by roads more akin to a housing development.
Linked to this, there is reference to the Grange Park local centre based on the small unit scheme not being viable. Again,
November 2017 12 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Site Turley report review PBA review
because the reserved matters scheme has now lapsed, this has limited relevance. Furthermore, while they refer to the ‘lengthy but unsuccessful marketing exercise to attract a developer to deliver the local centre’, they do not provide any evidence of this. In the absence of such evidence, no weight can be attached to this argument.
This commercial visibility point is a difficult point to seek further evidence on: while it may be technically possible to accommodate the Aldi store on the site, it would be a very untypical location for a store of the size and format proposed. Given the time that the site has been available for commercial development, including a substantial period of time when the main convenience store operators were very active in their expansion plans, if convenience retail were of the type proposed was viable at Grange Park, it is likely that some development would have materialised. Therefore, while the evidence provided on this point is sparse, on balance we agree that the site is not suitable in the terms of the sequential test.
Loughborough town centre
Baxter Gate: now redeveloped and no longer relevant in sequential terms Aumberry Gap: the site is 0.54 ha and on that basis, has been dismissed by the Turley report as not being large enough to We agree that the Baxter Gate site can be accommodate the proposed discounted in sequential terms. development. However, in order to With regard to Aumberry Gap, we agree that demonstrate flexibility, Turley have it is not necessary to disaggregate elements considered whether the site could of the proposed development under national accommodate the Aldi store on its policy. However, Turley have stated that in own. A potential layout has been order to demonstrate flexibility, they have South of prepared but a number of assessed the site’s ability to just Loughborough town operational issues are identified as accommodate the proposed Aldi store. centre rendering it unsuitable, including (While they also have considered the drive- (Baxtergate/Aumberry insufficient car parking and thru in isolation, we do not discuss this in Gap) servicing constraints, which are detail here, given it is the foodstore which is likely to compromise the store’s leading the development proposal) viability. Having regard to the sketch prepared as part The principle of a drive-thru unit in of the submission, and the operational isolation is also considered and constraints identified, we agree that there is dismissed as not being suitable. sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the This is because the nature of the site is not suitable. access and surroundings are likely to result in conditions on operation which would prejudice its viability. Added to this, it would only take up part of the site and there is doubt that compatible land uses would
In similar analysis that outlined in Given the clarity provided in Rushden Lakes Devonshire Square the Rapleys report, the site is decision as outlined in Section 1 of this
November 2017 13 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Site Turley report review PBA review
identified as being in active use, in review, we agree that the site is not multiple ownerships and is not available. being actively marketed for redevelopment. It is therefore We agree that, based on the evidence deemed to be unavailable. provided showing a how an Aldi store in isolation might be accommodated, the site is Because of the mix of uses on the not suitable. site and the requirements set out in the development briefs to retain certain elements, while it is acknowledged that the site large enough to accommodate the proposal (1.35ha), the actual developable area is not. A layout has been drawn up which shows that there would not be sufficient car parking to support the proposed store and it would render any prospect of securing a mixed-use scheme not possible. Added to this burdens will be placed on scheme viability due to the need to realign a brook going through the site. For these reasons, the site is deemed unsuitable.
The site comprises a Sainsbury’s foodstore and fully-let retail park. It North-west of is not being actively marketed and Loughborough town is therefore deemed to be centre unavailable for development. We agree that the site is not available. (Sainsbury’s/Regent
Place) No analysis of the suitability of the site is provided.
In addition to the centres above, the Turley report provides analysis of Shelthorpe, Quorn and Barrow upon Soar but, aside from a number of small vacant units which are not of sufficient size to accommodate the proposed development, no preferable sites were identified. The sequential assessment undertaken on behalf of the applicant has significant flaws: despite setting out some parameters to inform the assessment, it is clear that these have not been applied when seeking to dismiss preferable sites. This is particularly apparent in relation to Grange Park which is deemed to be too small on the basis that the whole development cannot be accommodated, while in order to dismiss Aumberry Gap and Devonshire Square, the Turley report is explicit in saying that they have looked at the Aldi store in isolation as a way of demonstrating flexibility. The contradictory information provided by the application appears to suggest that 0.5 ha is the minimum area needed to accommodate the proposed development, adopting reasonable flexibility. The Grange Park site meets this criterion and is available. The issue then is whether the site is suitable and in this instance, the suitability of the site turns primarily on whether it is viable. While we note the references to a marketing campaign as evidence for a foodstore not being viable, no
November 2017 14 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
detail is provided within the submission so no weight can be attached to it. However, the Turley report makes reference to commercial visibility as part of their sequential parameters. In the case of Grange Park, local centre plot is at the heart of the residential development and we agree that it lacks the visibility that would be typical for a foodstore of this scale so that a store in this location would go beyond the bounds of reasonable flexibility as articulated in the Dundee judgment. On this basis, while the argument set out in the Turley report is weak, adopting a pragmatic approach, we agree that the site is not suitable and can be dismissed as a sequentially preferable site. The application therefore passes the sequential test under paragraph 24 of the NPPF. Impact assessment As with Section 2, we consider impact under its two policy test components: impact on planned investment in town centres and impact on town centre viability. Impact on planned investment The first part of this test is dealt with very briefly in the Turley report, at paragraphs 8.16-18. They state that they have not ‘been able identify any committed or planned public or private investment in nearby centres on which the proposal could potential impact’ (para. 8.17). Despite the analysis of Grange Park provided in the sequential assessment, the Turley report does not consider the impact on planned investment at Grange Park. We revisit this point in Section 4. Impact on town centre vitality and viability Section 7 and Appendix 7 of the Turley report sets out the method adopted and the assumptions informing their impact assessment. Because the Aldi application was submitted after the Lidl application, they have also undertaken a scenario which includes the Lidl store within their assessment. We comment below on the assumptions and data inputs adopted. Table 3.2 Assumptions and quantitative inputs to the Turley impact assessment
Turley assumptions/ data PBA comment inputs
We agree that adjustment to the catchment to reflect the attraction of the existing Aldi store is appropriate. However, we Five-minute drivetime – with anticipate that the draw of the proposed adjustment to take account of Catchment store (particularly given the mix of other the current Aldi store to the uses) is likely to be wider than five-minutes’ north of the town centre drive. Further analysis of the Turley report appears to confirm this: we discuss this further in relation to trade draw.
November 2017 15 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Turley assumptions/ data PBA comment inputs
We agree this is reasonable given the May Base year 2017 2017 date of the report
The PPG clarifies that impact should be Design year 2022 assessed up to five years from submission
Recognised data provider – latest available Pitney Bowes data at the time of submission Two scenarios are provided PB trend-based growth rates are based on different per capita significantly higher than Experian’s forecast convenience expenditure growth. PB’s forecast growth, while still Expenditure and growth rates: one based on broadly in line with trend over the period expenditure growth long-term trend (0.4% pa 2015-30, is more conservative in the short growth) and one based on term (to 2020) at only 0.2% pa. We ultra long-term trend (0.5% pa therefore refer from now on to the long-term growth) trend scenario (Turley Scenario B) as the more reliable basis for assessing impact.
Recognised data provider – latest available Population Pitney Bowes data at the time of submission
£10,838/sqm (conv) This is in line with the latest Mintel data so Sales density £8,883/sqm (comp) we agree this is reasonable
Given Pitney Bowes assume a higher convenience growth rate than Experian, we 0.4% (conv) Floorspace efficiency agree that adopting their assumption of 1.8% (comp) some floorspace efficiency or improvements in sales densities is reasonable.
In convenience terms, we agree this a reasonable basis upon which to assess the impact of the proposed store. £11.09m (convenience) In comparison terms, for the reasons set out Turnover (in design year) £2.44m (comparison) in the Turley report on Aldi’s trading model, Total: £13.53m we accept that undertaking a quantitative assessment of the comparison element has limited merit given the changing nature of the offer.
Recognised data provider – latest available SFT Pitney Bowes data at the time of submission
Existing and future store Market shares derived from The approach taken in the no-development turnovers in the no- the CRTCS scenario follows the PPG. development scenario
The Morrisons and Waitrose commitments at Gorse Covert The approach taken to the baseline Commitments and Mountsorrel are both changes in retail offer is considered robust. factored into the no- development scenario.
Table 9 shows a zone-by-zone Given our reservations over the relevance trade draw for the proposed of a small catchment area, and the location development. It is anticipated Trade draw of the application on the main road network, that trade will be drawn from we agree that the extensive catchment residents living across the adopted is reasonable. CRTCS area.
Trade diversion is not This is a shortcoming of the assessment as expressed on a zone-by-zone Trade diversion it is difficult to verify how realistic the basis but on a global level for diversion assumptions adopted are. the whole CRTCS area.
November 2017 16 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Having considered the submission, we regard the Scenario B Sensitivity test to be best starting point for our own assessment. As set out above, because of the lack of transparency on the trade diversion assumptions adopted, we do not as this point make comment on the findings of the Turley report but instead consider it further in Section 4.
November 2017 17 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT Method We have provided an independent assessment of impact at Appendix A. This section provides a brief overview of our step-by-step method and inputs. The table below sets out the assumptions and data inputs: where possible we have sought to use data provided by the applicants. Table 4.1 Assumptions informing the PBA impact assessment
Lidl Aldi
Catchment Whole CRTCS area
Base year 2017 2017
Design year 2022 2022
Expenditure Pitney Bowes – long-term trend
Population Pitney Bowes
£6,995/sqm (convenience and £10,838/sqm (conv) Sales density comparison) £8,883/sqm (comp)
0.4% (conv) Floorspace efficiency 1.8% (comp)
Turnover (in design Convenience: £8.13m Convenience: £11.09m year) Comparison: £2.18m Comparison: £2.44m
SFT Pitney Bowes
Existing and future CRTCS market shares, adjusted to take account of commitments within no- store turnover development scenario.
The Morrisons and Waitrose commitments at Gorse Covert and Mountsorrel are Commitments both factored into the no-development scenario.
In this scenario, it is assumed that the Aldi store would open first because of the Cumulative impact green field nature of the application site.
Our method seeks to align with the PPG and comprises the following steps: ° Step one: identifying the no development scenario The assessment uses the market shares identified in the CRTCS; however, since that survey was undertaken in 2012, there have been a number of changes in the convenience retail offer i.e. the closure of the Budgens at Mountsorrel and its reopening as a Waitrose and an extension to the Morrisons store at Gorse Covert. Table A rebases the market shares to remove the Budgens store and shows that revised implied turnovers in 2017. Table B then adds in the Waitrose turnover and the Morrisons turnover (at 50% of company average, as an extension to an existing store) and shows the revised turnovers in 2017 and resulting market shares. This makes up the new baseline upon which the proposed developments will impact.
November 2017 18 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
° Step two: assessing the solus impact of the Aldi store Table C shows the pre-diversion turnover of the stores in the study area under the no-development scenario in 2022. Diversion to the Aldi store is then shown on a zone-by-zone basis. Impact is shown against the no-development scenario turnover in 2022 and post-impact growth in turnover from 2017 levels is also shown. ° Step three: assessing the solus impact of the Lidl store Table D sets out the same process but assuming the Lidl store comes forward in isolation. ° Step four: assessing cumulative impact of the two stores Table E shows the forecast cumulative impact in 2022 of the two stores coming forward. This assumes that the Aldi store would open first because the site is green field and more straightforward to deliver. In this cumulative scenario, we expect some impact between the two stores and consequently, we assume that the Lidl would only trade at 80% of benchmark. The table then shows cumulative impact against the no-development scenario turnover in 2022 and post-impact growth in turnover from 2017 levels. Our findings In assessing impact, it is how town centres rather than individual stores are affected which is the relevant consideration. The table below summarises the quantitative implications for the main town centres. This shows that the level of diversion from the town centre remains relatively limited. Table 4.2 Impact summary for main town centres Aldi Lidl Cumulative Diversion Impact Diversion Impact Diversion Impact £M % £M % £M % Loughborough £2.19 2.86% £1.69 2.21% £3.47 4.53% Gorse Covert £1.30 2.94% £1.26 2.84% £2.25 5.09% Shelthorpe £3.43 3.79% £1.75 1.94% £4.73 5.23% Shepshed £0.24 1.12% £0.25 1.14% £0.43 1.99% Barrow upon Soar £0.01 0.28% £0.01 0.19% £0.01 0.43% Source: Appendix A
However, it is only in the context of the health of the various town centre the implications of this diversion can be understood. Both the Rapleys report (Appendix 6) and Turley report (Section 6) include health checks of Loughborough, Barrow upon Soar, Shelthorpe and Quorn. The Rapleys report also includes a review of Sharpley Road, Gorse Covert and Shepshed. We have not been instructed to undertake our own health checks so instead review those provided within the submissions. We do however briefly note the conclusions of the CRTCS in relation to each centre.
November 2017 19 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
Table 4.3 Health check review
CRTCS conclusion Applicants’ assessments Centre PBA conclusions (2012/3) (2016/7)
We agree that the Rapleys report: evidence of recent centre appears to be investment with the Baxter Gate in good health. The Overall in good health leisure development, vacancy rates recent investment in but need to improve below national average, strong the Baxter Gate comparison and leisure environmental quality, so centre scheme will have offer highlighted, as found to be in good health. bolstered the Loughborough well as for attraction of the improvement to the Turley report: comparison retail centre. The secondary shopping identified as the main component of importance of the areas. the town, vacancies below national convenience retail average and are dispersed in small offer in the health of units across the centre. the centre should not be understated.
Rapleys report: considered to be in a Well-maintained good state of health. Offer focused despite heavy traffic. towards services. The evidence Reasonable Turley report: while they do not state provided indicates Barrow upon Soar convenience offer and a conclusion, the evidence provided the centre is in good a number of multiples aligns with that set out in the Rapleys health. in the centre. report so it assumed that the centre is deemed to be healthy.
The analysis Rapleys report: found to be in good provided by the health because of high environmental applicants suggests quality and high occupancy. Main Not assessed – local the centre is in good Quorn convenience store: Nisa. centre health. It is clear that Turley report: again, the assessment the convenience offer does not reach a conclusion on the does not anchor the centre’s health. centre.
Rapleys report: centre performing The evidence well against key vitality and viability suggests that there Consistently low indicators. Anchored by a large has not been any vacancy levels and Shelthorpe Tesco Extra. change in role since fulfilling its role but with Turley report: no explicit conclusions the CRTCS but that scope for expansion. but reference is made to the low the centre remains vacancies within the centre. healthy.
Limited number of units Rapleys report: modern district centre We agree that the and low vacancy levels which has benefited from recent centre can be Gorse Covert but functioning investment. High occupancy and regarded to be in effectively as a district good condition so deemed to be good health. centre. healthy.
The analysis provided indicates Need for enhancement Rapleys report: lower quality shops that the centre has to comparison and and vacancy in excess of national Shepshed not improved since service offer improve average but deemed to be the CRTCS was the health of the centre performing moderately well. undertaken but that it remains stable.
Rapleys report: no vacant units and The conclusion that Not assessed – local reasonable offer for scale of centre, the centre is in Sharpley Road centre so despite poorer environmental reasonable health quality deemed to be performing well. appears to be robust.
November 2017 20 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
While we acknowledge that the proposals both include an element of comparison floorspace which has not been assessed in quantitative terms, given this amounts to in the region of £5m, we do not expect that adding this into the quantitative assessment would result in a different conclusion being reached. Particularly because the impact figures set out at Table 4.2 relate only to convenience turnover; adding in the comparison turnover of those centres would serve to dilute impact. Nor does this quantitative assessment factor in the service role played by those centres. In this context, where the scale of diversion forecast from the centres is limited and the centres themselves have been found to be in either good or reasonable health, we do not consider the quantitative impact of either foodstore, in isolation or together, to be significantly adverse. Conclusions and recommendations Sequential assessment The locations of the two application sites in very different parts of the wider Loughborough area means that while there is some overlap in sites, including in the town centre itself, some sites are only relevant to one application. While the evidence provided in support of the Lidl application has satisfactorily dismissed the sequentially preferable sites, we have some concern over the Aldi sequential assessment. The evidence provided by the applicant is contradictory; however, it appears that the Grange Park local centre site could be capable of accommodating the proposed Aldi store when a reasonable degree of flexibility is adopted. However, adopting a pragmatic approach, we have concluded that the local centre at Grange Park is not likely to generate the level of footfall or trips to support a development of the scale proposed. We therefore agree that the Aldi application has also satisfied the sequential test. Impact on planned investment The issue of Grange Park is more complicated. In reaching a view on Grange Park, we refer to the PPG criteria in assessing impact on planned investment: ° the policy status of the investment: the local centre is allocated in the development plan. ° the progress made towards securing the investment: while there is an allocation for a new local centre, the reserved matters permission has now expired so the only approved parameter remains that set out in the outline approval which refers to commercial uses not exceeding 0.5ha. We note the following from the officer’s report on the lapsed reserved matters permission: ‘The developer has advised that the submission is made to comply with the deadline set and that the granting of approval would not be followed by an imminent start on the development. This will be dependent on the marketing of the development, when the housing development is more advanced and when it is hoped that the necessary commercial interest will be kindled. ’
November 2017 21 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
As set out in Section 1, we were asked to liaise with developer to understand the current position. This comprised a phone conversation with William Davis Homes 6 in which they stated while they had previously undertaken some marketing to secure a convenience anchor for the local centre (which did not result in any tenants being secured), they have not actively marketed the site in recent years; nor have they objected to assertions within the Turley report which refer to the Aldi application development ‘replacing’ the approved Grange Park local centre. As such, with reference to the PPG, we conclude that no progress has been made to secure the investment. ° the extent to which an application is likely to undermine planned developments or investments based on the effects on current/forecast turnovers, operator demand and investor confidence: neither applicant has provided evidence that there is no operator demand for the Grange Park site, nor has the developer of Grange Park submitted any representations to CBC in either objection or support of either planning application. In the discussion with PBA, the developer indicated that the previous marketing exercise had not yielded any retailer interest, but they could not confirm whether this had formally been reported to CBC. Although there is commonality between both proposals and the local centre at Grange Park (as having convenience retail provision, or an expectation of provision) which might indicate competition for operators, it appears that there was not investor confidence in the Grange Park even before these applications were submitted. With reference to the PPG, it cannot be demonstrated that there is that either application would undermine the investment. The sequential assessment analysis undertaken by both applicants indicates that a store of the size proposed could be accommodated on the 0.5ha site at Grange Park. However, there is no evidence that the developer at Grange Park is promoting the site for development. The Rushden Lakes decision sets the bar high in terms of what constitutes impact on planned investment: the Inspector concluded that there needed to be a clear link between the application and the potential investment for an application to be able impact on the investment. The long-term lack of delivery of a local centre at Grange Park suggests investment has stalled for reasons unrelated to either the Lidl or Aldi applications. On this basis and having regard to the Rushden Lakes approach, we do not consider there is any eligble planned investment at Grange Park which either application could impact on. Impact on town centre vitality and viability While we have set out some reservations in the relation to the quantitative assessments undertaken by the applicants in support of each application, having undertaken our own assessment we have not identified impact in excess of 5.5% on any designated centre either in solus or cumulative terms. In the context of the health
6 PBA telephone conversation with Adrian McInnes, William Davis Homes (22.11.17)
November 2017 22 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
check findings, we do not consider that this would give rise to any significantly adverse impacts on the any existing town centres. Potential conditions We are mindful that the above advice relates solely to retail planning matters; CBC will be weighing these up in balance with other issues. In the event CBC are minded to approve either one, or both, of the applications, we recommend that the following conditions are imposed. The Aldi application ° Restriction on total net sales area (1,254 sqm net) and gross floor area (1,800 sgm GEA) within the foodstore; ° Control over the proportions of net sales area devoted to the sale of convenience (1,003 sqm net) and comparison goods (251 sqm net) within the foodstore; ° No dedicated butcher, fishmonger, pharmacy, photo, dry cleaning, optician, bakery or delicatessen counters within the store; ° Convenience retail sales should only be allowed from the foodstore. This is because the submitted assessment has not made any allowance for convenience retail space to be provided within the A1-3 flexible units; ° No subdivision or amalgamation of the units; ° Revoking permitted development rights. The Lidl application ° Restriction on total net sales area (1,424 sqm net) and gross floor area (2,460 sgm GEA) within the foodstore; ° Control over the proportions of net sales area devoted to the sale of convenience (1,139 sqm net) and comparison goods (258 sqm net) within the foodstore; ° No dedicated butcher, fishmonger, pharmacy, photo, dry cleaning, optician, bakery or delicatessen counters within the store; ° No subdivision of the units; ° Revoking permitted development rights.
November 2017 23 Planning applications P/16/2141/2 & P/17/0942/2 Retail review and impact assessment
November 2017 24
APPENDIX A QUANTITATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Table A: Revised baseline Market shares rebased to exclude Budgens (%) Turnover in 2017 (£M) Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Total
Foodstores in Zone 1 Tesco Extra, Park Road, Shelthorpe, Loughborough 48% 19% 15% 21% 2% 19% 2% 3% 2% £38.94 £11.13 £5.52 £12.62 £1.37 £14.55 £1.45 £1.96 £1.09 £88.62 Sainsbury's, Ashby Road, Loughborough 17% 16% 11% 10% 2% 4% 11% 6% 0% £13.56 £9.28 £4.04 £6.20 £1.44 £3.18 £6.69 £3.59 £0.11 £48.09 Tesco, Unit 1, The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough 3% 12% 4% 3% 0% 1% 5% 2% 0% £2.67 £6.98 £1.40 £1.98 £0.00 £1.09 £3.27 £1.12 £0.00 £18.50 Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 13-14 The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough 2% 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% £1.30 £1.85 £0.04 £0.35 £0.00 £0.34 £0.13 £0.36 £0.19 £4.57 Other foodstores, Loughborough town centre 2% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% £1.74 £1.26 £0.12 £0.62 £0.34 £0.00 £0.40 £0.00 £0.00 £4.48 Other foodstores, survey zone 1 10% 8% 2% 1% 0% 2% 3% 1% 0% £7.81 £4.63 £0.59 £0.80 £0.00 £1.24 £1.94 £0.48 £0.07 £17.58
Foodstores in Zone 2 Morrisons, Gorse Covert District Centre, Maxwell Drive, Loughborough 7% 26% 15% 3% 0% 1% 5% 5% 0% £5.88 £15.47 £5.60 £1.88 £0.00 £0.58 £3.43 £3.29 £0.21 £36.32 Aldi, 51 Belton Road, Loughborough 5% 10% 5% 4% 1% 1% 5% 4% 0% £4.11 £5.79 £1.77 £2.43 £0.39 £0.63 £3.27 £2.40 £0.00 £20.79 Other foodstores, survey zone 2 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.57 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.57
Foodstores in Zone 3 Asda, 25 Charnwood Street, Shepshed 0% 1% 18% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 0% £0.36 £0.55 £6.51 £0.24 £0.00 £0.00 £0.62 £1.21 £0.05 £9.53 Co-Operative Extra Foodstore, The Hallcroft, Shepshed 0% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% £0.07 £0.00 £4.05 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.84 £0.00 £6.96 Other foodstores, Shepshed 0% 1% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% £0.00 £0.40 £2.14 £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £0.21 £1.65 £0.09 £4.60 Other foodstores, survey zone 3 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.52 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.52
Foodstores in Zone 4 Costcutter, Barrow Road, Sileby 0% 0% 0% 5% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.82 £0.42 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.23 Co-Operative, 21 High Street, Barrow on Soar 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.15 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.15 Other foodstores, survey zone 4 0% 0% 0% 9% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.15 £0.00 £5.66 £0.46 £1.68 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £7.94
Foodstores in Zone 5 Asda, Inglenook Park, Barkby Thorpe Lane, Thurmaston 1% 1% 0% 17% 37% 13% 3% 0% 2% £0.80 £0.59 £0.17 £10.49 £26.74 £10.01 £1.61 £0.21 £1.18 £51.79 Aldi, 1169 Melton Road, Syston 0% 0% 0% 6% 13% 2% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.07 £0.00 £3.34 £9.28 £1.75 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £14.43 Tesco Metro, 1197 Melton Road, Syston 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 1% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.19 £12.09 £0.43 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £12.72 Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 8, Thurmaston Shopping Centre 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 2% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.07 £2.22 £1.24 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.53 Other foodstores, survey zone 5 0% 0% 0% 1% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.17 £0.00 £0.73 £7.51 £0.18 £0.12 £0.28 £0.28 £9.28
Foodstores in Zone 6 Co-Operative Supermarket, 17-25 Cropston Road, Anstey 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.80 £0.00 £0.00 £0.25 £3.05 Co-Operative, 19 Wanlip Lane, Birstall 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.07 £0.08 £2.73 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.88 Tesco Express, 139 Sibson Road, Birstall 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.60 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.60 Other foodstores, Birstall 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.06 £0.00 £2.52 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.58 Other foodstores, Quorn 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% £0.10 £0.06 £0.00 £0.10 £0.00 £2.16 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.42 Other foodstores, survey zone 6 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 1% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.27 £0.00 £0.06 £0.65 £1.98
Foodstores in Zone 7 Co-Operative Food, 87 Main Street, East Leake 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.06 £0.00 £0.00 £10.45 £0.00 £0.00 £11.52 Other foodstores, East Leake 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% £0.10 £0.29 £0.00 £0.09 £0.00 £0.00 £2.39 £0.00 £0.00 £2.88 Other foodstores, Keyworth 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.09 £0.00 £0.00 £1.12 £0.41 £0.00 £1.62 Other foodstores, survey zone 7 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.37 £0.00 £0.04 £2.41
Foodstores in Zone 8 Morrisons, Whitwick Road, Coalville 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 1% 1% 25% 25% £0.39 £0.00 £2.33 £0.00 £0.00 £1.08 £0.45 £15.96 £14.23 £34.43 Other foodstores, Castle Donington 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.66 £0.00 £3.66 Other foodstores, survey zone 8 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 3% 0% £0.53 £0.00 £0.09 £0.00 £0.00 £0.08 £0.53 £1.67 £0.14 £3.04
Foodstores in Zone 9 Co-Operative, Main Street, Markfield 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 3% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.16 £0.45 £0.00 £0.00 £1.97 £2.58 Other foodstores, survey zone 9 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 8% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.59 £4.55 £6.14
Foodstores outside study area Tesco Extra, 1 Bradgate Mall, Beaumont Shopping Centre, Beaumont Leys, Leicester 0% 0% 1% 1% 2% 20% 0% 0% 21% £0.00 £0.00 £0.23 £0.79 £1.31 £15.60 £0.00 £0.16 £11.94 £30.03 Aldi, Thornborough Road, Coalville 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 8% 10% £0.00 £0.00 £0.30 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £5.12 £5.57 £10.99 Asda, 184 Loughborough Road, West Bridgford, Nottingham 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.11 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £10.74 £0.00 £0.00 £10.85 Sainsbury's, Grove Farm Triangle, Fosse Park, Leicester 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 3% 0% 1% 6% £0.69 £0.00 £0.12 £0.80 £0.65 £2.09 £0.00 £0.95 £3.23 £8.54 Tesco, Resolution Road, Ashby-de-la-Zouch 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 8% 1% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.42 £0.00 £0.19 £0.00 £5.03 £0.58 £6.22 Tesco Extra, Hamilton District Centre, Thurmaston Lane, Leicester 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 1% 0% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.14 £4.42 £0.96 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £5.52 Morrisons, Gamston District Centre, Nottingham 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 8% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.52 £0.00 £0.00 £4.69 £0.00 £0.00 £5.21 Tesco Extra, Waverley Street, Long Eaton 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.63 £0.00 £2.63 Asda, Midland Street, Long Eaton 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 1% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.96 £0.42 £2.37 Sainsbury's, Stoney Road, Beeston, Nottingham 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.30 £0.00 £0.00 £2.30
Other foodstores outside study area 2% 1% 2% 4% 4% 9% 7% 9% 19% £1.70 £0.62 £0.77 £2.23 £2.85 £6.95 £4.18 £5.89 £11.21 £36.40
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% £80.76 £59.87 £36.42 £59.95 £71.74 £77.46 £62.34 £64.48 £58.04 £571.06
Source: Market shares derived from CRTCS Available convenience turnover derived from Turley report Appendix 7 Scenario B Table 1 Table B: Revised baseline with new stores openings since 2012, in 2017 Turnover in 2017 with new openings (£M) New baseline market shares (%) Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Total
Foodstores in Zone 1 Tesco Extra, Park Road, Shelthorpe, Loughborough £37.72 £9.87 £4.99 £12.18 £1.36 £14.39 £1.41 £1.90 £1.09 47% 16% 14% 20% 2% 19% 2% 3% 2% 15% Sainsbury's, Ashby Road, Loughborough £13.14 £8.23 £3.65 £5.98 £1.43 £3.15 £6.52 £3.49 £0.11 16% 14% 10% 10% 2% 4% 10% 5% 0% 8% Tesco, Unit 1, The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough £2.61 £6.52 £1.32 £1.92 £0.00 £1.08 £3.22 £1.11 £0.00 3% 11% 4% 3% 0% 1% 5% 2% 0% 3% Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 13-14 The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough £1.24 £1.70 £0.04 £0.32 £0.00 £0.33 £0.13 £0.36 £0.19 2% 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% Other foodstores, Loughborough town centre £1.73 £1.25 £0.12 £0.62 £0.34 £0.00 £0.40 £0.00 £0.00 2% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% Other foodstores, survey zone 1 £7.81 £4.63 £0.59 £0.80 £0.00 £1.24 £1.94 £0.48 £0.07 10% 8% 2% 1% 0% 2% 3% 1% 0% 3%
Foodstores in Zone 2 Morrisons, Gorse Covert District Centre, Maxwell Drive, Loughborough £6.93 £17.52 £6.38 £2.19 £0.00 £0.69 £4.08 £3.91 £0.25 9% 29% 18% 4% 0% 1% 7% 6% 0% 7% Aldi, 51 Belton Road, Loughborough £4.06 £5.69 £1.73 £2.37 £0.39 £0.63 £3.27 £2.40 £0.00 5% 10% 5% 4% 1% 1% 5% 4% 0% 4% Other foodstores, survey zone 2 £0.00 £0.57 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Foodstores in Zone 3 Asda, 25 Charnwood Street, Shepshed £0.35 £0.53 £6.32 £0.24 £0.00 £0.00 £0.61 £1.21 £0.05 0% 1% 17% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 0% 2% Co-Operative Extra Foodstore, The Hallcroft, Shepshed £0.07 £0.00 £4.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.83 £0.00 0% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 1% Other foodstores, Shepshed £0.00 £0.40 £2.13 £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £0.21 £1.65 £0.09 0% 1% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 1% Other foodstores, survey zone 3 £0.00 £0.00 £0.52 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Foodstores in Zone 4 Costcutter, Barrow Road, Sileby £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.80 £0.42 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 5% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Co-Operative, 21 High Street, Barrow on Soar £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.14 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Budgens, Granite Way, Mountsorrel £0.82 £1.02 £0.61 £1.02 £0.20 £0.41 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 1% 2% 2% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% Other foodstores, survey zone 4 £0.00 £0.15 £0.00 £5.66 £0.46 £1.68 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 9% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 1%
Foodstores in Zone 5 Asda, Inglenook Park, Barkby Thorpe Lane, Thurmaston £0.78 £0.55 £0.16 £10.18 £26.63 £9.92 £1.59 £0.21 £1.18 1% 1% 0% 17% 37% 13% 3% 0% 2% 9% Aldi, 1169 Melton Road, Syston £0.00 £0.06 £0.00 £3.26 £9.24 £1.73 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 5% 13% 2% 0% 0% 0% 3% Tesco Metro, 1197 Melton Road, Syston £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.19 £12.08 £0.43 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2% Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 8, Thurmaston Shopping Centre £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.07 £2.22 £1.23 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 2% 0% 0% 0% 1% Sub-total, survey zone 5
Foodstores in Zone 6 Co-Operative Supermarket, 17-25 Cropston Road, Anstey £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.79 £0.00 £0.00 £0.25 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 1% Co-Operative, 19 Wanlip Lane, Birstall £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.07 £0.08 £2.72 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 1% Tesco Express, 139 Sibson Road, Birstall £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.60 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% Other foodstores, Birstall £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.06 £0.00 £2.52 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% Other foodstores, Quorn £0.10 £0.06 £0.00 £0.10 £0.00 £2.16 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% Other foodstores, survey zone 6 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.27 £0.00 £0.06 £0.65 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 1% 0%
Foodstores in Zone 7 Co-Operative Food, 87 Main Street, East Leake £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.06 £0.00 £0.00 £10.45 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% 2% Other foodstores, East Leake £0.10 £0.29 £0.00 £0.09 £0.00 £0.00 £2.39 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 1% Other foodstores, Keyworth £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.09 £0.00 £0.00 £1.12 £0.41 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% Other foodstores, survey zone 7 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.37 £0.00 £0.04 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0%
Foodstores in Zone 8 Morrisons, Whitwick Road, Coalville £0.38 £0.00 £2.28 £0.00 £0.00 £1.07 £0.45 £15.96 £14.23 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 1% 1% 25% 25% 6% Other foodstores, Castle Donington £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.66 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 1% Other foodstores, survey zone 8 £0.53 £0.00 £0.09 £0.00 £0.00 £0.08 £0.53 £1.67 £0.14 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 3% 0% 1%
Foodstores in Zone 9 Co-Operative, Main Street, Markfield £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.16 £0.45 £0.00 £0.00 £1.97 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 3% 0% Other foodstores, survey zone 9 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.59 £4.55 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 8% 1%
Foodstores outside study area Tesco Extra, 1 Bradgate Mall, Beaumont Shopping Centre, Beaumont Leys, Leicester £0.00 £0.00 £0.22 £0.77 £1.31 £15.46 £0.00 £0.16 £11.92 0% 0% 1% 1% 2% 20% 0% 0% 21% 5% Aldi, Thornborough Road, Coalville £0.00 £0.00 £0.27 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £4.98 £5.56 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 8% 10% 2% Asda, 184 Loughborough Road, West Bridgford, Nottingham £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £10.47 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 0% 0% 2% Sainsbury's, Grove Farm Triangle, Fosse Park, Leicester £0.67 £0.00 £0.11 £0.77 £0.64 £2.07 £0.00 £0.93 £3.22 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 3% 0% 1% 6% 1% Tesco, Resolution Road, Ashby-de-la-Zouch £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.41 £0.00 £0.19 £0.00 £4.89 £0.58 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 8% 1% 1% Tesco Extra, Hamilton District Centre, Thurmaston Lane, Leicester £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.13 £4.41 £0.95 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% Morrisons, Gamston District Centre, Nottingham £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.50 £0.00 £0.00 £4.57 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 7% 0% 0% 1% Tesco Extra, Waverley Street, Long Eaton £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.56 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% Asda, Midland Street, Long Eaton £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.90 £0.41 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 1% 0% Sainsbury's, Stoney Road, Beeston, Nottingham £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.30 £0.00 £0.00 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0%
Other foodstores outside study area £1.70 £0.62 £0.77 £2.22 £2.85 £6.94 £4.18 £5.89 £11.21 2% 1% 2% 4% 4% 9% 7% 9% 19% 6%
Total £80.76 £59.87 £36.42 £59.95 £71.74 £77.46 £62.34 £64.48 £58.04 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Commitments convenience turnover in 2017 £M Morrisons extension £7.33 Waitrose £4.09 Total £11.42
Commitments turnovers derived from Turley report Appendix 7 Scenario B Table 6 Notes: trade draw for Morrisons extension as per existing trade draw. PBA judgement used to inform trade draw of Waitrose opening Table C: Aldi solus impact in 2022
Pre-diversion Post-diversion Growth in turnover (£M) Diversion to Aldi store (£M) turnover (£M) turnover Total Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Total Total Impact from 2017 Foodstores in Zone 1 Tesco Extra, Park Road, Shelthorpe, Loughborough £90.33 £2.27 £0.29 £0.12 £0.37 £0.01 £0.32 £0.03 £0.02 £0.00 £3.43 £86.91 4% -£1.71 Sainsbury's, Ashby Road, Loughborough £48.47 £0.79 £0.24 £0.09 £0.18 £0.01 £0.07 £0.14 £0.03 £0.00 £1.56 £46.92 3% -£1.17 Tesco, Unit 1, The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough £18.82 £0.16 £0.19 £0.03 £0.06 £0.00 £0.02 £0.07 £0.01 £0.00 £0.55 £18.28 3% -£0.22 Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 13-14 The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough £4.57 £0.04 £0.03 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.08 £4.49 2% -£0.08 Other foodstores, Loughborough town centre £4.75 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £4.73 0% £0.25 Other foodstores, survey zone 1 £18.68 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £18.68 0% £1.11
Foodstores in Zone 2 Morrisons, Gorse Covert District Centre, Maxwell Drive, Loughborough £44.28 £0.42 £0.52 £0.15 £0.07 £0.00 £0.02 £0.09 £0.04 £0.00 £1.30 £42.98 3% £6.65 Aldi, 51 Belton Road, Loughborough £21.74 £0.49 £0.34 £0.08 £0.14 £0.00 £0.03 £0.14 £0.05 £0.00 £1.27 £20.47 6% -£0.32 Other foodstores, survey zone 2 £0.60 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.60 0% £0.03
Foodstores in Zone 3 Asda, 25 Charnwood Street, Shepshed £9.74 £0.02 £0.02 £0.15 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.01 £0.00 £0.22 £9.52 2% -£0.01 Co-Operative Extra Foodstore, The Hallcroft, Shepshed £7.20 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £7.19 0% £0.23 Other foodstores, Shepshed £4.80 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £4.79 0% £0.19 Other foodstores, survey zone 3 £0.54 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.54 0% £0.02
Foodstores in Zone 4 Costcutter, Barrow Road, Sileby £3.41 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.40 0% £0.16 Co-Operative, 21 High Street, Barrow on Soar £3.32 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.31 0% £0.16 Waitrose Mountsorrel £4.33 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £4.32 0% £4.32 Other foodstores, survey zone 4 £8.43 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £8.43 0% £0.49
Foodstores in Zone 5 Asda, Inglenook Park, Barkby Thorpe Lane, Thurmaston £54.33 £0.05 £0.02 £0.00 £0.31 £0.10 £0.22 £0.03 £0.00 £0.00 £0.74 £53.60 1% £1.81 Aldi, 1169 Melton Road, Syston £15.16 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.20 £0.07 £0.08 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.35 £14.81 2% £0.38 Tesco Metro, 1197 Melton Road, Syston £13.46 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £13.45 0% £0.73 Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 8, Thurmaston Shopping Centre £3.74 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.73 0% £0.20 Other foodstores, survey zone 5 £9.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £9.82 0% £0.54
Foodstores in Zone 6 Co-Operative Supermarket, 17-25 Cropston Road, Anstey £3.26 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.25 0% £0.20 Co-Operative, 19 Wanlip Lane, Birstall £3.08 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.07 0% £0.19 Tesco Express, 139 Sibson Road, Birstall £1.71 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.71 0% £0.11 Other foodstores, Birstall £2.77 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.77 0% £0.19 Other foodstores, Quorn £2.59 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.59 0% £0.17 Other foodstores, survey zone 6 £2.09 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.09 0% £0.12
Foodstores in Zone 7 Co-Operative Food, 87 Main Street, East Leake £12.26 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.00 £0.03 £12.24 0% £0.72 Other foodstores, East Leake £3.07 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.07 0% £0.19 Other foodstores, Keyworth £1.72 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.72 0% £0.10 Other foodstores, survey zone 7 £2.57 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.57 0% £0.16
Foodstores in Zone 8 Morrisons, Whitwick Road, Coalville £35.85 £0.02 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.01 £0.15 £0.04 £0.31 £35.55 1% £1.12 Other foodstores, Castle Donington £3.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.82 0% £0.16 Other foodstores, survey zone 8 £3.20 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.20 0% £0.16
Foodstores in Zone 9 Co-Operative, Main Street, Markfield £2.70 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.70 0% £0.12 Other foodstores, survey zone 9 £6.38 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £6.38 0% £0.25
Foodstores outside study area Tesco Extra, 1 Bradgate Mall, Beaumont Shopping Centre, Beaumont Leys, Leicester £31.55 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.02 £0.01 £0.34 £0.00 £0.00 £0.04 £0.41 £31.14 Aldi, Thornborough Road, Coalville £11.25 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.01 £0.04 £11.22 Asda, 184 Loughborough Road, West Bridgford, Nottingham £11.27 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.23 £0.00 £0.00 £0.23 £11.04 Sainsbury's, Grove Farm Triangle, Fosse Park, Leicester £8.87 £0.04 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.01 £0.01 £0.13 £8.73 Tesco, Resolution Road, Ashby-de-la-Zouch £6.34 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.06 £6.28 Tesco Extra, Hamilton District Centre, Thurmaston Lane, Leicester £5.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.02 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.04 £5.78 Morrisons, Gamston District Centre, Nottingham £5.40 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £0.00 £0.00 £0.11 £5.29 Tesco Extra, Waverley Street, Long Eaton £2.67 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.02 £2.65 Asda, Midland Street, Long Eaton £2.42 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.02 £2.40 Sainsbury's, Stoney Road, Beeston, Nottingham £2.45 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.00 £0.05 £2.40
Other foodstores outside study area £38.32 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.02 £0.01 £0.01 £0.00 £0.06 £38.27
Trade draw % 39% 15% 7% 13% 2% 11% 9% 4% 1% £M £4.33 £1.66 £0.72 £1.44 £0.22 £1.22 £0.94 £0.44 £0.11 Notes Aldi turnover and trade draw sourced from Turley report Appendix 7 Scenario B, Tables 8 and 9 respectively Table D: Lidl solus impact in 2022 Pre- diversion turnover Post-diversion Growth in (£M) Diversion to Lidl store (£M) turnover (£M) turnover Total Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Total Total Impact from 2017 Foodstores in Zone 1 Tesco Extra, Park Road, Shelthorpe, Loughborough £90.33 £0.84 £0.40 £0.12 £0.24 £0.00 £0.06 £0.04 £0.04 £0.00 £1.75 £88.58 2% -£0.03 Sainsbury's, Ashby Road, Loughborough £48.47 £0.29 £0.33 £0.08 £0.12 £0.00 £0.01 £0.19 £0.07 £0.00 £1.11 £47.36 2% -£0.73 Tesco, Unit 1, The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough £18.82 £0.06 £0.26 £0.03 £0.04 £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £0.02 £0.00 £0.51 £18.31 3% -£0.19 Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 13-14 The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough £4.57 £0.01 £0.03 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.06 £4.51 1% -£0.06 Other foodstores, Loughborough town centre £4.75 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £4.74 0% £0.25 Other foodstores, survey zone 1 £18.68 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £18.68 0% £1.11
Foodstores in Zone 2 Morrisons, Gorse Covert District Centre, Maxwell Drive, Loughborough £44.28 £0.16 £0.71 £0.15 £0.04 £0.00 £0.00 £0.12 £0.08 £0.00 £1.26 £43.02 3% £6.70 Aldi, 51 Belton Road, Loughborough £21.74 £0.18 £0.46 £0.08 £0.09 £0.00 £0.01 £0.19 £0.10 £0.00 £1.11 £20.63 5% -£0.17 Other foodstores, survey zone 2 £0.60 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.60 0% £0.03
Foodstores in Zone 3 Asda, 25 Charnwood Street, Shepshed £9.74 £0.01 £0.02 £0.15 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.02 £0.00 £0.22 £9.52 2% -£0.01 Co-Operative Extra Foodstore, The Hallcroft, Shepshed £7.20 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.02 £7.19 0% £0.23 Other foodstores, Shepshed £4.80 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £4.79 0% £0.19 Other foodstores, survey zone 3 £0.54 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.54 0% £0.02
Foodstores in Zone 4 Costcutter, Barrow Road, Sileby £3.41 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.40 0% £0.17 Co-Operative, 21 High Street, Barrow on Soar £3.32 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.32 0% £0.16 Waitrose Mountsorrel £4.33 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £4.32 0% £4.32 Other foodstores, survey zone 4 £8.43 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £8.43 0% £0.49
Foodstores in Zone 5 Asda, Inglenook Park, Barkby Thorpe Lane, Thurmaston £54.33 £0.02 £0.02 £0.00 £0.20 £0.07 £0.04 £0.05 £0.00 £0.00 £0.41 £53.92 1% £2.13 Aldi, 1169 Melton Road, Syston £15.16 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.13 £0.05 £0.02 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.20 £14.96 1% £0.53 Tesco Metro, 1197 Melton Road, Syston £13.46 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £13.45 0% £0.74 Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 8, Thurmaston Shopping Centre £3.74 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.74 0% £0.20 Other foodstores, survey zone 5 £9.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £9.82 0% £0.54
Foodstores in Zone 6 Co-Operative Supermarket, 17-25 Cropston Road, Anstey £3.26 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.26 0% £0.21 Co-Operative, 19 Wanlip Lane, Birstall £3.08 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.08 0% £0.20 Tesco Express, 139 Sibson Road, Birstall £1.71 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.71 0% £0.11 Other foodstores, Birstall £2.77 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.77 0% £0.19 Other foodstores, Quorn £2.59 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.59 0% £0.17 Other foodstores, survey zone 6 £2.09 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.09 0% £0.12
Foodstores in Zone 7 Co-Operative Food, 87 Main Street, East Leake £12.26 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.03 £0.00 £0.00 £0.03 £12.23 0% £0.71 Other foodstores, East Leake £3.07 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.07 0% £0.19 Other foodstores, Keyworth £1.72 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.72 0% £0.10 Other foodstores, survey zone 7 £2.57 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.57 0% £0.16
Foodstores in Zone 8 Morrisons, Whitwick Road, Coalville £35.85 £0.01 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.32 £0.00 £0.40 £35.45 1% £1.02 Other foodstores, Castle Donington £3.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.82 0% £0.16 Other foodstores, survey zone 8 £3.20 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.20 0% £0.16
Foodstores in Zone 9 Co-Operative, Main Street, Markfield £2.70 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.70 0% £0.12 Other foodstores, survey zone 9 £6.38 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £6.38 0% £0.25
Foodstores outside study area Tesco Extra, 1 Bradgate Mall, Beaumont Shopping Centre, Beaumont Leys, Leicester £31.55 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.02 £0.00 £0.07 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £31.46 Aldi, Thornborough Road, Coalville £11.25 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.05 £11.20 Asda, 184 Loughborough Road, West Bridgford, Nottingham £11.27 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.31 £0.00 £0.00 £0.31 £10.96 Sainsbury's, Grove Farm Triangle, Fosse Park, Leicester £8.87 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.06 £8.80 Tesco, Resolution Road, Ashby-de-la-Zouch £6.34 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £0.00 £0.11 £6.23 Tesco Extra, Hamilton District Centre, Thurmaston Lane, Leicester £5.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £5.80 Morrisons, Gamston District Centre, Nottingham £5.40 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.13 £0.00 £0.00 £0.14 £5.26 Tesco Extra, Waverley Street, Long Eaton £2.67 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.05 £2.62 Asda, Midland Street, Long Eaton £2.42 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.04 £0.00 £0.04 £2.38 Sainsbury's, Stoney Road, Beeston, Nottingham £2.45 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.07 £0.00 £0.00 £0.07 £2.38 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 Other foodstores outside study area £38.32 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.01 £0.00 £0.04 £38.28
Trade draw % 20% 28% 8% 12% 2% 3% 16% 12% 0% 161% £M £1.61 £2.26 £0.69 £0.95 £0.15 £0.25 £1.28 £0.94 £0.00 £0.00 Notes Lidl turnover derived from Rapleys report Appendix 5 Table 4. Trade draw based on existing Belton Road Aldi trade draw. Table E: Cumulative impact in 2022 Pre- diversion turnover Post-diversion Growth in (£M) Cumulative diversion (£M) turnover (£M) turnover Total Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Zone 5 Zone 6 Zone 7 Zone 8 Zone 9 Total Total Impact from 2017 Proposed stores Aldi £4.33 £1.66 £0.72 £1.44 £0.22 £1.22 £0.94 £0.44 £0.11 £11.09 £11.09 Lidl £1.28 £1.81 £0.55 £0.76 £0.12 £0.20 £1.02 £0.75 £0.00 £6.50 £6.50
Foodstores in Zone 1 Tesco Extra, Park Road, Shelthorpe, Loughborough £90.33 £2.88 £0.60 £0.21 £0.55 £0.01 £0.37 £0.06 £0.05 £0.00 £4.73 £85.61 5% -£3.01 Sainsbury's, Ashby Road, Loughborough £48.47 £1.00 £0.50 £0.15 £0.27 £0.01 £0.08 £0.29 £0.09 £0.00 £2.39 £46.08 5% -£2.01 Tesco, Unit 1, The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough £18.82 £0.20 £0.39 £0.05 £0.09 £0.00 £0.03 £0.14 £0.03 £0.00 £0.93 £17.89 5% -£0.61 Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 13-14 The Rushes Shopping Centre, Loughborough £4.57 £0.05 £0.05 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.12 £4.45 3% -£0.12 Other foodstores, Loughborough town centre £4.75 £0.01 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.03 £4.72 1% £0.24 Other foodstores, survey zone 1 £18.68 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £18.68 0% £1.11
Foodstores in Zone 2 Morrisons, Gorse Covert District Centre, Maxwell Drive, Loughborough £44.28 £0.53 £1.06 £0.27 £0.10 £0.00 £0.02 £0.18 £0.10 £0.00 £2.25 £42.02 5% £5.70 Aldi, 51 Belton Road, Loughborough £21.74 £0.61 £0.68 £0.14 £0.21 £0.00 £0.03 £0.29 £0.12 £0.00 £2.09 £19.65 10% -£1.14 Other foodstores, survey zone 2 £0.60 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.60 0% £0.03
Foodstores in Zone 3 Asda, 25 Charnwood Street, Shepshed £9.74 £0.03 £0.03 £0.26 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.03 £0.03 £0.00 £0.39 £9.35 4% -£0.18 Co-Operative Extra Foodstore, The Hallcroft, Shepshed £7.20 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.02 £7.18 0% £0.22 Other foodstores, Shepshed £4.80 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £4.79 0% £0.18 Other foodstores, survey zone 3 £0.54 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.54 0% £0.02
Foodstores in Zone 4 Costcutter, Barrow Road, Sileby £3.41 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.39 0% £0.16 Co-Operative, 21 High Street, Barrow on Soar £3.32 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.31 0% £0.16 Waitrose Mountsorrel £4.33 £0.01 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £4.31 0% £4.31 Other foodstores, survey zone 4 £8.43 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £8.43 0% £0.49
Foodstores in Zone 5 Asda, Inglenook Park, Barkby Thorpe Lane, Thurmaston £54.33 £0.06 £0.03 £0.01 £0.46 £0.16 £0.25 £0.07 £0.01 £0.00 £1.05 £53.28 2% £1.49 Aldi, 1169 Melton Road, Syston £15.16 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.29 £0.11 £0.09 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.50 £14.66 3% £0.23 Tesco Metro, 1197 Melton Road, Syston £13.46 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £13.45 0% £0.73 Marks & Spencer Simply Food, Unit 8, Thurmaston Shopping Centre £3.74 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.73 0% £0.20 Other foodstores, survey zone 5 £9.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £9.82 0% £0.54
Foodstores in Zone 6 Co-Operative Supermarket, 17-25 Cropston Road, Anstey £3.26 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.25 0% £0.20 Co-Operative, 19 Wanlip Lane, Birstall £3.08 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £3.07 0% £0.19 Tesco Express, 139 Sibson Road, Birstall £1.71 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.71 0% £0.11 Other foodstores, Birstall £2.77 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.77 0% £0.19 Other foodstores, Quorn £2.59 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.59 0% £0.17 Other foodstores, survey zone 6 £2.09 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.09 0% £0.12
Foodstores in Zone 7 Co-Operative Food, 87 Main Street, East Leake £12.26 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.00 £0.05 £12.21 0% £0.70 Other foodstores, East Leake £3.07 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.07 0% £0.19 Other foodstores, Keyworth £1.72 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.72 0% £0.10 Other foodstores, survey zone 7 £2.57 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.57 0% £0.16
Foodstores in Zone 8 Morrisons, Whitwick Road, Coalville £35.85 £0.03 £0.00 £0.10 £0.00 £0.00 £0.03 £0.02 £0.40 £0.04 £0.62 £35.23 2% £0.81 Other foodstores, Castle Donington £3.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.82 0% £0.16 Other foodstores, survey zone 8 £3.20 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £3.20 0% £0.16
Foodstores in Zone 9 Co-Operative, Main Street, Markfield £2.70 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £2.70 0% £0.12 Other foodstores, survey zone 9 £6.38 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £6.38 0% £0.25
Foodstores outside study area Tesco Extra, 1 Bradgate Mall, Beaumont Shopping Centre, Beaumont Leys, Leicester £31.55 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.03 £0.01 £0.39 £0.00 £0.00 £0.04 £0.48 £31.07 Aldi, Thornborough Road, Coalville £11.25 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.06 £0.01 £0.08 £11.18 Asda, 184 Loughborough Road, West Bridgford, Nottingham £11.27 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.47 £0.00 £0.00 £0.47 £10.80 Sainsbury's, Grove Farm Triangle, Fosse Park, Leicester £8.87 £0.05 £0.00 £0.00 £0.04 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.02 £0.01 £0.18 £8.69 Tesco, Resolution Road, Ashby-de-la-Zouch £6.34 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.12 £0.00 £0.15 £6.19 Tesco Extra, Hamilton District Centre, Thurmaston Lane, Leicester £5.82 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.03 £0.02 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.06 £5.77 Morrisons, Gamston District Centre, Nottingham £5.40 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.02 £0.00 £0.00 £0.20 £0.00 £0.00 £0.23 £5.18 Tesco Extra, Waverley Street, Long Eaton £2.67 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.06 £0.00 £0.06 £2.61 Asda, Midland Street, Long Eaton £2.42 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.05 £0.00 £0.05 £2.37 Sainsbury's, Stoney Road, Beeston, Nottingham £2.45 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £0.00 £0.00 £0.10 £2.35
Other foodstores outside study area £38.32 £0.01 £0.00 £0.00 £0.01 £0.00 £0.02 £0.02 £0.01 £0.00 £0.09 £38.24
Notes Aldi store assumed to open first. Proposed turnover of Lidl store reduced by 20% to account for mutual impact.