Supermarket retail conversion at Unit 1 Brook Retail Park, Sherwood Road, Bromsgrove

What was proposed

The application sought to change Unit 1 from bulky goods retail to convenience and comparison retail, with restricted sales floorspace and comparison goods.

“The proposal seeks permission to change the use of Unit 1 at Brook Retail Park (formerly Homebase) to enable the sale of both convenience and comparison goods. The current building has a gross area of 4,217 sqm and a net sales area of 3443 sqm, including a mezzanine and external garden centre. The proposal is seeking to operate with a reduced net sales area of 1,598sqm, through not using the mezzanine or garden centre.”

“It is important to note that Unit 2 (currently Pets at Home) remains unchanged and does not part of the application. No physical alterations to the building or car park are proposed at this stage though minor works (plant equipment, lobby adjustments, escape routes, service yard alterations, signage) are the subject of separate applications which are pending consideration (Reference 25/00991/FUL (minor store alterations), 25/00992/FUL (plant installation in the rear service…”

Officer report

The site

The site is a retail park with two units, shared parking, access from Sherwood Road and nearby homes, businesses, a school and the A38.

“Site Description The application site is located within Brook Retail Park, which comprises two retail units and a shared customer car park. Unit 1, formerly occupied by Homebase, is the subject of this application, while Unit 2 is currently occupied by Pets at Home. There is car parking to the north and west of the units, providing a total of 164 spaces. The car park is divided in two sections by the Sugar Brook, 111 spaces to the west of the brook and 53 spaces to the east.”

“The retail units are accessed from Sherwood Road at the eastern side of the site. There is a service yard located to the rear (south) of the building which is accessed from Sherwood Road via a separate entrance located further south of the main customer access. Sherwood Road comprises footways and street lighting on both sides, and parking restrictions (No Parking 8am-6pm, Monday-Friday) operate in the vicinity.”

Officer report

Planning history

Earlier permissions established bulky goods retailing, while a previous supermarket proposal was withdrawn before this application was submitted.

“The range and type of goods to be sold from the retail warehouse hereby permitted shall be restricted to comparison goods within the following range: DIY, home improvement and garden goods; furniture; carpets and floor coverings; camping, boating and caravanning goods; electrical goods and gas appliances; car accessories; kitchens, bathrooms and associated accessories; homewares; soft furnishings; pets and pet products including animal foods, cages and animal accessories.”

“The preceding application to the current proposal (Ref: 24/01004/FUL) sought the variation of condition number 4 attached to 12/0300 to allow Unit 1(existing Homebase store) to operate as a supermarket selling a mix of convenience and comparison goods.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to secured town-centre mitigation funding and conditions controlling sales, travel, flooding, air quality and the store’s operation.

“In respect of mitigation measures, these are proposals which seek to enhance the accessibility, attractiveness and overall vitality of Bromsgrove Town Centre. The mitigation would amount to funding secured from the applicant through an appropriate legal mechanism in compliance with CIL Regulation 122.”

“The assessments have concluded and your Officers accept the findings that the sequential test has been passed. The revised retail impact assessment, whilst showing a clear adverse impact on the town centre and Buntsford Park Local Centre (the magnitude of which varies between the applicant and the consultant), the outcome is that a significant adverse effect is considered unlikely. Thereby the tests of paragraphs 91 - 95 of the NPPF have been passed.”

Officer report

Retail and traffic effects

The proposal was expected to cause clear town-centre trade loss, but officers considered the impact unlikely to be significantly adverse with controls and mitigation.

“The results of the independent assessment are set out in Table 12 at Appendix A of the Supplementary Advice No.2 on Retail & Town Centre Planning Policy Issues dated April 2026 and these indicate that the forecast overall impact on the comparison goods sector in Bromsgrove town centre would be -1.6%.”

“The likely loss of trade from the town centre's convenience and comparison retailers, due to the degree of overlap between the proposed store and existing town-centre and edge- of-centre shops, and the risk of reduced linked trips and footfall needs to be considered. The retail consultants conclusions are that there would be a net loss of 5.2% in respect of town centre turnover compared to the lower figures of the applicant (1.9%).”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways, travel planning, water management, noise and air quality consultees raised no objection, subject to specified conditions where applicable.

“Worcestershire Highways (Travel Planning) • The Travel Plan (Mayer Brown, dated January 2025) has been reviewed by the WCC Travel Planning Team. The matters raised related to the appointment of a Travel Plan Coordinator, Site Audit, Travel Plan measures, marketing, funding and monitoring. • In the previous response, it was advised that references to Modeshift STARS site and requested that the Travel Plan included interim contact details for the Travel Plan Coordinator role.”

“North Worcestershire Water Management • No objection subject to condition relating to an updated flood evacuation management plan • The site is predominantly located within flood zone 1, with the car park areas and front of the building within flood zones 2 & 3. • As there is no change in vulnerability class or impermeable area, there is no reason to withhold permission on flood risk or drainage grounds.”

Officer report

Public views

Supporters welcomed jobs, shopping choice and reuse of the vacant unit, while objectors cited congestion, safety, town-centre harm and inadequate sustainable transport.

“Comments in objection • The proposal would cause significant additional traffic congestion, especially on Sherwood Road, Stoke Road, the A38, and nearby junctions. • The traffic modelling and transport assessments are out of date, flawed, or based on unrealistic assumptions. The assumptions that many customers would walk or cycle for supermarket shopping are misplaced. • The local road network and current infrastructure are not suitable for a supermarket at this location.”

“Harm to the vitality and viability of town-centre and local centre foodstores. • Concern that the proposal may lead to closure or weakening of existing stores, including fears over the future of the town centre Argos. • Conflict with local and national planning policy, including: failure to comply with the sequential test, inadequate retail impact assessment and conflict with policies intended to protect town centres.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s representatives and a councillor spoke in support, while the ward councillor spoke against the application.

Members’ discussion

Members considered highway evidence, parking capacity, route-improvement works and the proposed £25,000 town-centre festoon lighting mitigation scheme.

“Members then debated the application. From the comments and questions by members of the Committee, the following responses were made, and issues highlighted: • The Transport Statement, which was reviewed by Worcestershire County Council as the highways authority, had demonstrated that the change of occupier type would not have a severe impact to the local road network.”

“The Committee discussed the town mitigation aspects of the proposal for the festoon lighting scheme costed at £25,000 along the high street. It was outlined that this project would enhance the visual quality of the town centre and support footfall, occupation time and the evening economy. Members sought further clarity on how the legal mechanism in relation to this would work in practice and technical advice was provided to the Committee.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee granted planning permission subject to conditions and delegated powers to secure town-centre mitigation funding and finalise the conditions.

“(b) that delegated powers be granted to the Assistant Director for Planning, Leisure and Culture Services, following consultation with the Planning Committee Chairman, to determine the application following the receipt and completion of a suitable and satisfactory legal mechanism in relation to the following matter:”

“(i) the securing of secure funding towards Town Centre mitigation measures;”

Minutes