The future of shops in Broughty Ferry could be under threat after supermarket giant Sainsbury’s won an appeal to sell more non-food items in its store.
Sainsbury’s, at West Pitkerro Industrial Estate, has applied to Dundee City Council to increase the floorspace it allocates to non-food goods from 20% to 30%.
City council rules restrict the sale of certain items in large stores in a bid to protect high streets.
Although the local authority rejected the bid last year, it has now been overturned on appeal to the Scottish Government.
The reporter who made the decision ruled that the wording of a council policy was not clear enough to merit refusal, among a number of other reasons.
Sandro Paladini, secretary of Broughty Ferry Traders’ Association, criticised the decision, saying that the group felt that council safeguards had been “undermined” by the Scottish Government.
He said: “The Broughty Ferry Traders’ Association are greatly disappointed by the decision to uphold the Sainsbury’s request to reverse the council’s decision.
“The original agreement, put in place by Dundee City Council, specifically restricted the sale of non-food goods to 20% as a direct safeguard to the existing traditional shopping centre in Broughty Ferry.
“We feel that this safeguard has been undermined by the Scottish Government’s approval of the Sainsbury’s application.”
David Hewick, planning officer for Broughty Ferry Community Council, believes the decision could impact on businesses in the Ferry.
He said: “We are concerned about this. We felt that if Sainsbury’s was able to sell more comparison goods, it would be harmful to Broughty Ferry and we wanted to support the traders’ association in their actions.”
A spokesman for Sainsbury’s said: “We are delighted that the application has now been approved, which will provide our customers with greater choice.”
In its appeal, Sainsbury’s provided an assessment of the impact the increase would have claiming it would not dramatically affect local trade.
The Scottish Government agreed with this, adding it was not the place of the planning system “to protect individual retailers from competition”.