The impact of regional, out-of-town retail centres: The case of the metro centre

The Impact of Regional, Out-of-Town Retail Centres: The Case of the Metro Centre E. B. HOWARD

and

R. L. DAVIES

Oxford Institute of Retail Management, Templeton College, Oxford OX1 5NY, England

PERGAMON OXFORD

. NEW YORK

PRESS . SEOUL . TOKYO

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllI lllllllllllll A 0305-9006(1993)40:2;1-7

Biographies Elizabeth B. Howard BA MA MRTPI is Research Fellow in Retailing at Templeton College, Oxford and a member of the Oxford Institute of Retail Management. Her research interests include the relationship between public policy and retailing and shopping centre development and management. Author of among others, Change in the Retail Environment (with R. L. Davies, 1988, Longman) and Leisure and Retailing (1990, Longman). Ross L. Davies BA MA MSc PhD is Director of the Oxford Institute of Retail Management and Fellow in Retailing at Templeton College. His special interests include the changing environment for retailing and new retail developments. His publications include Retail and Commercial Planning (1985, Croom Helm), Marketing Geography: with Special Reference to Retailing (1977, Methuen), Store Locution and Store Assessment Research (joint editor, 1987, Wiley).

90

0305--93 $24.00 (CJ1993 Pergamon Press Ltd

Progress in Planning, Vol. 40, pp. 89-165, 1993. Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved.

Contents Abstract

93

Acknowledgements

94

1. The Metro Centre Case Study Introduction 1.1. Aims and Methods 1.2.

95 95 97

2.

Trading Characteristics of the Centre Traffic and Sales 2.1. Shopping Patterns 2.2. Polarisation 2.3. Leisure and Retailing 2.4.

103 103 104

3.

Impact Nature of Impact 3.1. The Early Phase 3.2. Some Transport Implications 3.3. 3.4. Trading Repercussions 3.5. Employment

110 110 111 113 114 117

4.

The Health of Traditional Shopping Centres Pedestrian Activity 4.1. Metro Centre Pedestrian Flows 4.2. Land Use 4.3. Vacancies as a Measure of Health 4.4.

119 119 120 121 123

105 107

91

92 5.

Progress in Planning

Trading and Employment Repercussions: Mature Phase 5.1. Employment Reasons for Change in Employment and Sales 5.2.

125 125 127 130

5.3. 5.4. 5.5.

Trading Repercussions Sheffield and Newcastle Compared Regional impact

ii.

Metro 6.1. 6.2. 6.3.

Centre Market Share and Employment Metro Centre Market Share Metro Centre Employment Kind of Jobs

135 135 136 138

7.

Implications for Planning The Shopping Centre Hierarchy 7.1. The Health and Role of Traditional Centres 7.2. The Impact of the Metro Centre 7.3.

141 142 146 148

Appendix

1. Survey of Retail Employment

Change

133 133

150

Appendix 2. OXIRM Telephone Survey

157

Appendix 3. In-Centre

161

Bibliography

Survey

164

Abstract The Metro Shopping Centre is the first of a new wave of regional scale out-of-town developments in the U.K. This paper reports on an unusual longitudinal study of the development and impact of this shopping centre. Given the Centre’s vast size and its apparently direct competitive role with the traditional city centre of Newcastle, the study focuses on questions of trading deflections from other centres, and its effect on the retail structure of the region. This study gives evidence of actual change in the north east of England from 1986 to 1991. Results are given of a series of large scale and repeated surveys of consumers, pedestrians, retailers and shop land use. The new Centre draws customers over long distances and in large numbers. It does not compete only with the traditional city centre nearby. The shifts in shopping patterns identified after the opening of the Metro Centre were part of a more general movement to shop by car and to shop more in larger or more specialised centres. Impact has been widespread, but other shopping centres have not been evenly affected. Smaller retailers, weaker centres and the weaker parts of some centres have suffered most. The new Centre employs large numbers, though part time jobs have increased much faster than full time ones and total numbers are rather less than those suggested in planning for other, similar centres. Some tentative conclusions are given about off-setting job losses elsewhere. It is concluded that the development of a large ‘green field’ shopping centre hastened processes of change in the traditional shopping centres of the region but was not the only cause of them. The impact of the new development was cushioned by substantial growth in retail sales through most of the 1980s. A process of polarisation is identified, with the new Centre attracting more mobile, more prosperous customers and traditional large centres the converse. The implications of such a process are considered.

93

Acknowledgements The research was supported by a grant (No. 00232171) from the Economic and Social Research Council, which is gratefully acknowledged.

94

CHAPTER

1

The Metro Centre Case Study 1.1.

INTRODUCTION

This paper presents a case study of retail change on Tyneside conducted over a five year period from 1986 to 1991. The study focused on the impact of the new, regional scale ‘out-of-town’ Metro Shopping Centre on established centres in the area. It was undertaken for three reasons. First, the Metro Centre was the forerunner of several other new, regional scale ‘out-of-town’ shopping centres proposed and built within Britain in the late 1980s. Considerable interest was generated in both public and private sectors as to what its precise effects might be. In particular, given its vast size and its apparently direct competitive role with the city centre of Newcastle, there was concern that it might lead to a loss of vitality in the traditional city centre, which might become something of an American ‘downtown’. Secondly, against the background of booming economic conditions and a loosening of planning controls nationally towards major out-of-town retail development (Hall, 1988), there was further interest in whether Metro-type schemes would fundamentally alter the structure of retailing within metropolitan areas in Britain. Would the traditional hierarchy of shopping centres be radically altered or even displaced? If so, there would be major implications for local communities and for local planning policies. Thirdly, the Metro Centre symbolised a new market-led, national retail planning philosophy which engendered a debate in both the public and private sectors as to how desirable this philosophy was for the late 1980s and early 1990s (Oxford Retail Group, 1989). The spirit of enterprise which ushered in the Metro Centre, and others like it, in the mid to late 1980s has been damped down by a deep recession in retailing in the early 1990s. Important planning and development issues that arose during the course of the study, therefore, are now being re-assessed under different circumstances. The study provides a record and interpretation of change at a time when emotions ran high and there was considerable uncertainty in planning and investment in the market place. For the future, there are important lessons about 95

96

Progress in Planning

the scale of effects of large, ‘out-of-town’ regional shopping centres, their effects compared to ‘in-town’ developments and the adjustments necessary to planning policies for their integration with the traditional urban structure. The Metro Centre lies about three miles west of the town centre of Gateshead. It is in the Gateshead part of Tyneside’s Enterprise Zone and on what was regarded as one of the least inviting of derelict sites back in 1980. The site had been used for dumping ash from the local power station. The Tyne and Wear Structure Plan required new retail development to be concentrated in existing centres, except where the bulk or ‘special nature’ of the goods involved made this impracticable. The Structure Plan was approved in 1981. So was the Enterprise Zone. Enterprise Zone regulations gave a general permission for non-food retail development, and food retail building of less than 250 square metres. Early proposals by John Hall of Cameron Hall Developments were for a ‘retail strip’ on the American model: a series of retail warehouses mainly for bulky goods brought together on one site, with perhaps leisure uses associated with them. The returns from such a development on a site which was physically difficult and thus expensive to develop, were unattractive. By early 1984 Cameron Hall produced an exhibition of much more ambitious proposals. The scheme was for a complete regional level, covered shopping centre, with large amounts of surface car parking, a spacious layout, leisure activities associated with the shopping, and late evening opening, of a kind which had not previously been seen in the U.K. That exhibition caught the attention of many retailers who saw the progress ‘out-of-town’ developments had been making in the bulky goods field. Government attention was also engaged, to the extent that an urban development grant was shortly agreed, to finance the construction of a road interchange. Carrefour agreed at an early date to take one of the main units on the site. The catalyst for success, however, was the interest of Marks and Spencer. That company had stated early in 1984 that it would consider going out-of-town to solve some of the space shortage and development problems it was experiencing. It announced that its first venture would be in the Metro Centre and from that time a queue of other retailers formed for space in the new centre. The following year the developers obtained long term investment funding from the Church Commissioners, who purchased the freehold of the whole site, and Royal Scot Leasing (part of the Royal Bank of Scotland). 100% capital allowances against tax for Enterprise Zone building played a critical part in attracting their interest. Phase I of the Metro Centre opened in April 1986. Phase II opened in October 1986, taking the total gross retail space to over 1 million square feet. Phase III opened in stages in 1987 with a bus station, more car parking and about another 500,000 square feet gross of retail space, a ten screen cinema, a funfair and later a bowling complex. It was regarded as an innovative, glamorous development and widely reviewed in the trade press.

The Impact of the Metro Centre

Metro

centre

20 minute lsocrone

,

:: ...

....:i : _.. ...jjj> .>

-\ ‘\

\

x:::::::.:.

..:$ >:.:.: ._... ._. (:__. _,.: :+: ...:.:.: : .. ,~.._ II.. _._..._. _...:_ i.. i.L.._ :ii.. _._. .i ..

:

I i: :.:. .:i::.::.. c. :\ ..... :....,:: ::g ::;$ \ .:::.::.:.’ ...._..-_,___ :, _... .:..f__:,.: .::::i:::I:.:.: : .. ..:.: .::+.:.‘:; _.,. ::‘I:~::~,~ anset 5 ..:i_,. :.’.::.:.,- - - - . _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. i:: .,.. -. c.::.:: _.

.N

ti,, 0

5km 1

drwe

‘.

:

,;>i Durhom . ,,:_ ..:., ,f( >*. 52::.:. : : I_r*.....:.’ .c,;;j,...:. ‘.. ... .. ,. . .

_...._._ : ‘: ,,:y;: ::. : ::..:.:.._ ::

FIG. 1. Shopping centres in the north east of England and the Metro Centre catchment.

1.2.

AIMS

AND

METHODS

Systematic studies of the impact of new forms of retail development have appeared in the U.K. since the 1960s. There remain difficulties in understanding how these should be dealt with for planning purposes. Current government advice

97

98

Progress in Planning

NOT

TO !XALE

FIG. 2. Complex layout of the Metro Centre.

is that the “preservation of existing commercial interests” (Department of the Environment, 1988) is not the function of planning. Impact studies have tended to focus on the way new development affects trade in existing shopping centres, however.

The impact of the Metro Centre TABLE

1. Space usera at the Metro Centre

Overall area

sq. m 215,600

Gross retail/service area Net retaiuservice area* Gross leisure area

130,700 66,@Jo 15,000

Major tenants: Marks & Spencer House of Fraser Carrefour (later Asda) BHS Littlewoods Boots Sears *Estimate Council.

99

by Gateshead Metropolitan

17,400 12,900 7900 7900 4300 3400 3100 Borough

Retail activity and investment are critical to the health of town centres (Oxford Retail Group, 1989, 1990) and shopping centre development is a politically sensitive issue. In an extensive review of the literature BDP and OXIRM argue that impact is of legitimate concern for five reasons. These are: the need to understand change; the need to control public costs; the concern with efficient use of resources especially land; the equity argument, as retailing and shopping centres directly affect the standard of living of consumers; the quality of life argument, as the degree of accessibility of different types of retail outlet and shopping centres affect most individuals and groups. The same literature review concluded that in the end too little is understood about the patterns of change in shopping centres for the purposes of good planning. Most ‘impact studies’ are forecasts not empirical post-hoc studies. This case study of retail change on Tyneside and the impact of the Metro Centre is an attempt to fill some of the gaps. Our research aimed to assess the effects of developing Britain’s first true regional ‘out-of-town’ shopping centre at three levels. First, it aimed to measure the specific trading and employment effects of the new centre and immediate repercussions for public policy making in the metropolitan area. Secondly, it was intended to evaluate more broadly the nature of the new centre’s effects compared with the impacts of the development of the Eldon Square regional shopping centre and the Tyneside light rail Metro system. (For details of this work, see Bennison and Davies, 1980; Bennison, 1982; Howard and Davies, 1986). The third aim was to interpret the longer term consequences of ‘out-of-town’ developments for the formulation of retail planning policies. Continuity with previous work on Tyneside was sought and the basic research methods established then were used. A series of ‘before’ and ‘after’ surveys was carried out.

100

Progress in Planning

There were four main groups of surveys: postal surveys of retail businesses, land use surveys, pedestrian flow counts and shopper surveys. Most used well established methods, but in addition a household survey by telephone was carried out. Telephone enquiries have been used extensively for many years in the United States for social research. They are now familiar in opinion polling in this country and a large proportion of all market research interviews are now carried out by telephone. Methodological research on the use of telephone surveys for retail investigations in the U.K. is rare (Macey, 1986; Howard, 1992). Retailer surveys by post were particularly important as the prime source of information on both the trading and employment affects of the new Centre. They were carried out at the end of 1987 and in mid 1990, covering retail outlets in seven traditional centres in the catchment area of the Metro Centre. A sample of approximately 1000 establishments included shops of all sizes. A major problem in any survey of retailers in particular places is obtaining an up-to-date and complete sample frame. The principal directory sources are incomplete, and in the nature of the industry, rapidly out-dated. During 1987 the Tyne and Wear County Wide Research and Intelligence Unit undertook and coordinated a county-wide series of retail floorspace surveys. (TWCWRIU, 1987). We are grateful to the Unit for making available parts of the file, which provided a complete and relatively up-to-date identification of retail units for the survey. The same framework was used for the updating survey three years later, as our objective was to track internal changes within firms. (See Appendix 1 for the questionnaire). The surveys were supplemented with interviews with key figures in the management of the retail industry’s response to the new development. Over 7,000 interviews with shoppers were carried out. Repeated surveys were mounted in Newcastle city centre and the Metro Centre. Those in Newcastle were designed to build on earlier shopper surveys. Those in the Metro Centre gave more information about spending patterns than those in Newcastle, as it was possible to interview shoppers on leaving the Centre and completing their visits. The Metro Centre samples were also more truly representative than those taken at a selection of points in the street of Newcastle. Sampling at Metro Centre exits was done in proportion to the total flows of visitor counted leaving the Centre. Both sets of surveys aimed to determine the catchment areas of the centres, the characteristics of shoppers, their previous and current shopping patterns and their attitudes towards the new Centre, distinguishing amongst shoppers on the basis of place of residence, socio-economic group and mobility. (Samples of the questionnaires used are in Appendix 1). As the research progressed it became clear that increased emphasis should be given to the objective of assessing the nature of the new style regional mall, in terms of trading performance and consumer responses through the in-centre surveys. This was a necessary preliminary to understanding the Centre’s impact on

The impact of the Metro Centre

101

the north east’s other shopping centres; and was also of considerable interest to both public and private sector planners in other regions. These in-centre surveys of course gave a good picture of the shopping behaviour of their customers. It was necessary to carry out a household survey to determine overall patterns of shopping, associated with all the shopping centres in the region. There are no official statistics covering the sales of all centres later than the 1971 Census of Distribution. A 1975 household survey for the preparation of the Tyne and Wear Structure Plan gave slightly more recent information (TWCC, 1976). At the end of 1987 therefore, we undertook a survey of North Durham and Tyne and Wear by telephone. 2,000 respondents were interviewed about their most recent non-food shopping trips, trips by other members of their households, and their opinions of the Metro Centre. This survey aimed to provide a regional picture of shopping behaviour, against which particular groups of shoppers using the new Metro Centre could be assessed. It also gave an indication of the market share of the new Centre. The effectiveness of the telephone survey method in providing information on shopping trips and centre catchments is discussed elsewhere (Howard and Davies, 1988; Howard 1992). Sampling procedures can be very complex. We chose the methods which are being used in practice in shopping surveys. In other words the telephone accessible population was sampled. A systematic sample was taken from the telephone directories. A total of 5040 telephone numbers were selected. Calling elicited 3567 answers. 44% of people contacted refused to be interviewed. 29% of the original sample were not contacted after three attempts at different times and dates. Overall completion, or true response rate, was 40% In comparison with alternative methods it was concluded that the telephone method had the advantages of allowing a rapid survey of a large region, costing less than face to face household interviewing and achieving a higher response rate than postal surveys. As the object was to assess broad patterns of shopping, travel and non-food spending, the limitations imposed by the size and nature of the telephone accessible population were acceptable. Households with unlisted telephone numbers and households without telephones were excluded from the survey. Investigations suggested that telephone owning households accounted for four fifths of the retail expenditure in the northern region (in 1987) and perhaps nine tenths of spending by car-owning households. Land use inventories provided evidence of the long term impacts of the new Centre. Fieldwork and information from local authority sources were combined to monitor change especially in the incidence of vacancies in shopping centres. Pedestrian flow counts formed the fourth set of surveys. They were undertaken in Newcastle, continuing a series begun in 1976, and commenced for the Metro Centre itself. Changes in pedestrian flows between one year and the next, and differences between one point and another, are the result of a complicated mix of factors, but can be taken as a surrogate measure of trade. Flows are also a particularly useful measure of the relative health of streets and parts of a centre.

102

Progress in Planning

In general, the philosophy behind the use of several separate but interrelated surveys was that in isolating the effects of a new centre from other influences at work, the evidence of several indicators was likely to be more reliable than the findings of a single source. Other data used in the research programme came from several sources. It was possible to link customer and shopping trip data to population Census data and to investigate the value of a commercial geodemographic marketing database particularly in assessing the differential attraction of various shopping centres, through the facilities of Pinpoint Analysis Ltd. We are grateful to them for their sponsorship and allowing us to extend the research programme in this way. We are also grateful to local authorities in the north east for co-operation and allowing us access to land use data.

CHAPTER

2

Trading Characteristics

of the Centre

Our first question is what trading characteristics the new centre has developed. Table 2 sets out broad results from the series of surveys carried out at intervals at the Metro Centre itself.

2.1.

TRAFFIC

AND SALES

Our main conclusions are threefold. First, many retailers’ sales expectations were too high, for various reasons, in the first year of Metro Centre’s trading. It takes much more time for shifts in consumer behaviour to occur which are sufficient to support such a large development as the Metro Centre in a non-traditional location, than in a traditional focus of activity.

TABLE 2. Shoppb % Shopper groups

at the Metro Ceatd June 1987

June 1988

June 1989

2 7

3 16

91

79 2

4 15 2 76 3

1 16 4 79 1

29 54 17

45 47 9

39 44 17

41 45 23

6 12 17 16

9 19 20 17 14 11 10

15 16 14 19 15 11 9

15 20 19 17 11

November 1986

Main mode of transport Walk Bus Train Car Other Time spent in centre Under llh hours l&under 3% hours 3% hours or more Shopping frequency: last visit Today, yesterday 2-6 days ago 1 week ago 8 days-l month ago >l-3 months ago >3 months ago Never before

z 40 103

10

7

104

Progress in Planning TABLE

% Shopper

groups

November 1986

Draw from parts of catchment area % Shopper groups O-10 minutest _ 10-20 minutes _ 20-30 minutes Over 30 minutes % Total spending O-10 minutes 10-20 minutes 30-30 minutes over 30 minutes

2. Cont’d June 1987

June 1988

June 1989

_

42 30 10 18

34 35 13 19

32 33 10 26

28 31 19 24

_ _ _ _

Average spending per group % not spending

f38.12 14

f33.19 10

f38.14 9

*Data for Saturdays. For weekday information see OXIRM A21. IUsing isochrones defined by Gateshead MBC, 1988.

f44.36 5 Research

Report

Secondly, in the longer term the Centre has broadly performed at the higher levels of traffic and trade that were being suggested at planning Public Inquiries into similar developments, rather than the lower. No turnover information has been released by retailers publicly. Our assessment is based on customer surveys, traffic data from GMBC and confidential information from some retailers. It is possible to estimate sales in a variety of ways from the partial data available. The margin of error is always substantial. Vehicle trips or total customer arrivals may be known with some confidence, but information on spending comes from sample surveys at particular times. Customers spend very variable amounts at the Centre, and the general levels of spending differ from day to day and season to season. Using vehicle arrival data, information from Saturday and Thursday customer surveys at various dates, and sales data from some major retailers, we estimated sales at the Metro Centre for 1988 at approximately f200 million (Howard, 1992). It is possible that sales have grown substantially since that date, in line with increasing traffic, and ahead of national retail sales.

2.2.

SHOPPING

PATTERNS

Thirdly, the new Centre has peculiar shopping patterns associated with it. The role the new regional centre has developed is not the same as a traditional regional centre. Specific comparisons with the role of Newcastle city centre have been made through the consumer surveys carried out in both centres. The new

The impact of the Metro Centre

105

TABLE 3. Traffic at the Metro Centre Total vehicle arrivals* 1987 1988 1989 1990

4.8 6.5 7.2 7.6

1991

7.6 million

*Source: tSource:

% Shopper groups arriving by cart 79 76 79 _

million million million million

Gateshead Metropolitan Borough In-centre Consumer Surveys.

Council.

centre has a catchment which is as extensive as the traditional one (see Table 2). Metro’s catchment is biased to the south, however. It draws strongly along the motorways through Durham and to the west but its appeal in the heavily populated area north of the Tyne is limited by the ‘intervening opportunity’ of Newcastle city centre for people living to the north and east. Table 5 (p. 112) illustrates this point further. Metro has developed a complex role, supplying a range of convenience goods as well as comparison goods, serving a local population with everyday needs on frequent shopping trips, and a wider customer base with more specialised goods on less frequent trips. In these ways it resembles the traditional centre. It differs, however, in the kind of trips customers tend to make to it. They are trips by car, in family or other groups, higher spending and more leisurely than trips to the city centre. Figure 3 presents some of the contrasts. We are able to pursue this analysis further by using some of the new spatial marketing techniques available.

2.3.

POLARISATION

Geodemographic clustering techniques have been used to produce classifications of households such as CACI’s ACORN, Pinpoint’s PiN Profiles and CCN’s MOSAIC types. Combining locational, demographic, social and economic information, the groups are useful as discriminators for many marketing purposes. PIN classifications were attached to the households sampled in the telephone survey, using the classifications for their postcode neighbourhoods. Figure 4 compares the PiN Profiles of households whose most recent non-food shopping trip was to the Metro Centre with those visiting Newcastle city centre and Sunderland town centre. Data are taken from the telephone survey. This survey of the non-food shopping trips of 2000 households dealt with over 5000 separately reported trips by all household members (see Appendix 2 for the questionnaire). JPP 40:2-B

106

Progress in Planning

16-24 years

i

25-44 yeor,

1

I

Newcastle

m

Metro centre

sty

centre

Source’ OXIRM In-centre

surveys

b B 45-53years 8 a

FIG. 3. Contrasting

customer

profilesin the

city of Newcastle and the Metro Centre.

For the Metro Centre, highest index scores are for the households in neighbourhoods of ‘upwardly mobile young families’. Other groups appearing at levels above the survey average are those classified as ‘suburban, middle aged and older’, particularly ‘suburban commuters’. ‘Crowded council neighbourhoods’ and households in ‘low status areas with flats’ are significantly under-represented. The contrast with Sunderland and with Newcastle is clearly shown in Fig. 4. It is possible to interpret these profiles as representing a kind of polarisation in behaviour. The more prosperous, more mobile family-based households tend to use the new shopping centre. Less mobile, less well off and older households tend to use it less. There are implications for the health of traditional town and city centres in such a polarisation. There is some evidence of it here and further research is continuing in other areas. More evidence for or against such polarisation should be sought in shopping centre and other urban research. The implications of a significant trend would be considerable. Retailers are able to respond to local market conditions through their own use of increasingly sophisticated geographical market research

The Impact of the Metro Centre Newcastle shoppers P~Nproflle

Metrocentre shoppers PIN proflle

Ll-_l-& 0 50

Index (IDO-survey

100

150

-A

Index (ICXJ-survey overage

ovemge)

Sunderland shoppers PIN proflle

107

PIN

clusters

A - Rural B - brmed forces C - Upwardly mobile young fomllies Cl - Affluent households E - Older peopte in smaller house6 F - Suburbon, middle-aged or older

G - Working people w&h families H - Poor urban areas I - Low status areas wtth flats J - Inner-city bedslts K - Poor multi-ethmc nelahbourhoods L - Crowded council nelgibourhoods

Index(lDD-survey

average)

FIG. 4. Geo-demographic

profiles of respondents,

by destination

of last main shopping trip.

techniques (Reynolds, 1988). The customer profile of the Metro Centre is what many retailers want. Less attractive customer bases will not encourage their investment. Investment by finance institutions, developers and retailers is essential to bring improvements to deteriorating environments, provide further choice for consumers and to maintain the viability and vitality of town and city centres. Polarisation in customer behaviour may thus imply polarisation in development and investment.

2.4.

LEISURE

AND

RETAILING

There has been much discussion among private sector developers and in the trade press of the effect of the combination of leisure and retailing inside the Centre. We attempted to define and test the ways in which it might increase the impact of the centre. Five possible benefits in the combination were extracted from a review of marketing material for the Centre and promotional items in the trade press. These

108

Progress in Planning

were: that the catchment area would be extended; that visitors would spend more than in a traditional centre; that they would stay longer (and spend more); that the target customer would be attracted; and that consumers would be encouraged to choose to visit the new centre rather than older ones. The Metro Centre certainly has a very extensive catchment. A conventional major in-town shopping centre might expect perhaps 25% of its trade to be drawn from places more than 20 minutes drive away. About 40% of Metro Centre’s trade was derived from these long distances by 1989 when trading patterns had become established. Close analysis showed, however, that those using the leisure facilities, as well as shopping, were more local. The catchment for leisure-and-shopping is smaller than the shopping only catchment. Visitors do make leisurely or long stay visits to the new Centre. Customer spending is also high. Average spending per trip is higher than on trips to other centres. Those using the leisure facilities tend to spend less than others in the shops, and leisure spending is not sufficient to account for the higher than average spending. That is, high spending seems to be related to the retail attraction of the Centre not the special leisure-retailing combination. Table 4 shows the differences

TABLE 4. Contrasts

between

visitors to superstore, activities

Mall shoppers*

other

Superstore shopperst % visitor groups

shops

and leisure

Leisure users*

Home address

within 10 minutes 10-20 minutes 20-30 minutes over 30 minutes Total Len@ of visit Up to 1 hour l-2 hours 2-4 hours over 4 hours Total

35 32 13 20

51 36 9 4

28 31 20 21

100

100

100

45 27 21 6

40 29 24 7

13 34 33 21

100

100

100

40-16 l-32 38-N

f per group 42.14 - 87 41.27

42-19 f 3.94 31.00

Average spending

Total In cafes In shops

*Shoppers spending in any mall shop, but not superstore or leisure users. tShoppers spending in food superstore and perhaps elsewhere. $Visitors spending in leisure activities, who may or may not spend in retail stores. Data from 1989 In-Centre survey.

The impact of the Metro Centre

109

among leisure users and those spending only in the shops. The more local catchment for leisure activities can be seen. This table also shows clearly that the catchment for the food superstore is much more limited than for the Centre as a whole. Half of all the superstore shoppers came from the zone within 10 minutes drive of the Centre. It may be, of course, that the combination encourages people to make more trips than they might otherwise have done, thus enhancing total sales. The Metro Centre receives a large proportion of infrequent or ‘special’ trips, compared with other shopping centres. It is difficult to estimate what its attraction might have been without the leisure uses. Traffic volumes are high. The Centre management has estimated total visitors at over 21 million in 1990. The June 1988 in-Centre survey showed about 10% of visitors, during shopping hours on Thursday and Saturday, using the funfair or cinema. Almost a fifth of visitors said that the funfair was “important” or “very important” in the decision to visit the Metro Centre. In the repeat survey a year later, a rather lower proportion of a higher absolute number of visitors were using the funfair, cinema and bowling alley. The proportion is likely to be higher at holiday times, of course. Overall our conclusion is that the new Centre is very popular. It is difficult to say that retail sales are actually increased by the leisure attractions. The Centre has achieved, however, a special role in the region: it is different from others in its customer profile and the extent of its catchment. It might not have had such a draw without its particular combination of retailing, design and leisure features. It will be interesting to see whether Meadowhall, a later development of an out-of-town regional mall outside Sheffield, has the same success and impact. Meadowhall does not contain significant leisure facilities in its retail malls and is rather smaller.

CHAPTER

3

Impact Consideration of the role of the new Centre leads to the next major question addressed in the research. Was the Metro Centre directly competing with the traditional regional centre? The earliest evidence on this question proved somewhat misleading. It came from a direct question to customers in the new centres, of a kind often used in impact investigations, about where they might have gone shopping before the new centre opened. Very large proportions cited the city centre, leading to the suggestion that impact would be focused there. Such has not proved to be the case. It seems rather that these answers described consumers’ views of what the nearest competition for the new centre might be, rather than any real assessment of changes in their own travel or spending patterns. The weight of evidence from several sources leads us to conclude that the new centre is not simply diverting a share of regional sized centre trade from the pre-existing patterns. It is rather the instrument and opportunity for a series of shifts in consumer behaviour which lead to new patterns of travel and spending. Impact is not directly focused.

3.1.

NATURE

OF IMPACT

It is necessary to consider carefully what is meant by ‘impact’. There has been some debate about the kinds of impact a new centre might have and the significance of such impacts for town planning policies. (See, for example, Gibbs, 1987 and the review by BDP and OXIRM, 1992.) Previous work on the impact of retail development has tended to focus on the diversion of sales, or less often jobs, from one centre to another. Impact expressed in turnover loss is a shorthand expression for structural change in the retail industry and in the physical structure of shopping centres. Changes in space and employee productivity and profit levels are most immediate. These changes are filtered through company operating and financial structures to profitability before they have an ‘impact’ on those features which are ultimately of concern for the 110

The impact of the Metro Centfe

111

future of shopping centres. These features are: levels and kinds of employment; space contractions; unit closures and the substitution of one kind of business for another; the occurrence of vacancies; investment interest; the climate of business confidence. The government’s Planning Policy Guidance Note on major retail development (1988), drew attention to the need to focus on the ‘vitality and viability’ of town centres in assessing the impact of new developments. A crucial dimension of vitality and viability is continued investment by retailers, local authorities, developers and landlords (Oxford Retail Group, 1989, 1990). Investment confidence can be affected by the impact of a new centre’s development. Our research methodology did not include any assessment of investment or investor confidence. This lack is probably the greatest constraint on its value. We would recommend that further work in this area should include research on investment patterns and attitudes. Our principal aim has been to assess the impact of the new centre on the region, on trading, on employment and on shopping behaviour. 3.2.

THE

EARLY

PHASE

Evaluative work in the project has fallen into two stages. The first considered the early phase of impact, associated with the opening and first two years of trading of the new centre. The second stage considered the maturing development. Previous work on the impact of new retail development has tended to focus on the short term, often only a few months. The telephone household survey of non-food shopping trips at the end of 1987 gave the first indication of the relative non-food turnovers of local centres since the 1971 Census of Distribution and Tyne and Wear County Council’s 1975 Structure Plan work. The Metro Centre, opened in phases beginning in April 1986, had started to take a very large slice and was certainly rivaled only by the largest traditional centres. A clear picture emerged from the survey of the new Centre attracting less frequent but higher spending trips than all other centres, even the largest centre, i.e. Newcastle. 2000 households gave information on over XKKlshopping trips to over 50 different centres, within a region including the whole of the 5 Districts of Tyne and Wear and the northern half of Durham. Table 5 summarises the main origin and destination results. The new centre’s share of trade did not diminish directly in proportion to distance. The dangers of applying allocations of turnover to catchment zones and penetration rates derived from one shopping centre to another centre, as is done in forecasting exercises for planning purposes, is clear. The Metro Centre does not draw evenly over each drive time band, partly because population distribution is uneven and partly because competition with other centres, especially Newcastle,

112

Progress in Planning TABLE 5. % Share of non-food shopping trips: 1987

Newcastle

Sunderland

Home addresses of shoppers Newcastle 80 Gateshead 40 North Tyneside 56 South Tyneside 31 Sunderland 11 North Durham 18 ALL 34 Source:

Telephone

Survey

within

Centre Washington

1

2

8 56 10 14

3 18 10 5

30 minutes

catchment

destination Others

16 23 38 47 7 35 34 of Metro

Centre:

Metro

All

4 34 6 11 8 27 13

100 100 100 100 100 100 100

all trips within

last week.

varies from place to place. Metro’s draw from Newcastle is relatively low. It is much stronger from areas to the South. The ‘impact’ of the Metro Centre on the trade of other centres was calculated in a theoretical way at this stage. Trips seen to be going to the Metro Centre were reallocated, zone by zone, to other shopping centres, in proportion to the trips otherwise taken by those other centres. Thus the number of trips theoretically diverted from each centre was calculated. The results are not measures of trade actually diverted from other centres - the theoretical calculation resembles the ‘forecast impact’ calculations generally made in planning for the development of new centres. The calculation was thus of interest in applying the actual trip generation levels of the Metro Centre in the equations. The result of the reallocation of trips to other centres may be summarised as a theoretical loss of trips from each centre: Newcastle 12%, Durham 19% and Sunderland 8%. The relationship between trips and actual spending implied in these figures is not clear. We have evidence of spending per trip for late 1987 from the survey, but none for the period before Metro opened. The sales loss from Newcastle may have been higher than 12%, because spending per trip is higher in the Metro Centre than elsewhere. It is reasonable to assume in the light of regional economic trends that spending growth in the north east was of a similar order to the national average over the year from October 1986, when the major portion of the Metro Centre opened, to the October/November 1987 date of the survey. If shoppers were spending more per trip than in pre-Metro days, the impact of the loss of a certain number of trips on sales was lessened. The impact on Newcastle, for instance, might have been reduced so that the loss of 12% was offset by say 4% expenditure growth on remaining trips, which would make the ‘loss’ appear to be 8.5%. Evidence from some retailers tended to confirm these levels of reductions in real sales and from ‘expected’ levels of sales (e.g. Pope, 1987).

113

The Impact of the Metro Centre 3.3.

SOME

TRANSPORT

IMPLICATIONS

Many more trips to the Metro Centre are by car than other means. Public transport access, via a main line railway station on the Newcastle-Carlisle line, and a network of bus routes is now good. The Centre was, however, built to capitalise on the demand for easy car access to shops. Journeys by public transport from many parts of the region require a change of bus or train. By definition, an outlying or ‘out of town’ shopping centre does not lie at the focus of the usual centripetal public transport routes. The shift of shopping trips to the Metro Centre implies a shift to the use of cars for shopping, or at least bigger shifts in the travel and shopping patterns of car owning households than non-car owning ones. It is well known in general terms that an increasing proportion of shopping trips nationally are undertaken by car - particularly food shopping trips to supermarkets. National Travel Statistics from the Department of Transport show a marked increase on the last decade. Table 6 shows the contrast in modal split for non-food shopping trips to the Metro Centre and to traditional Centres. Data comes from the telephone survey which is acknowledged to under-represent poorer and non-car owning households. TABLE 6. Modal split of various non-fad Bus

Metro

By Centre: Newcastle Metro Centre Sunderland South Shields North Shields Durham Washington Wallsend

51 19 63 48 38 45 30 51

19 1

By Sex: Males alone * Females alone* Joint tripst

shopping trips

Foot % respondents

Car

All

9 11

2 2 8 16 14 7 8 16

25 76 29 24 33 48 61 32

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

42 46 35

6 8 5

9 8 5

42 36 53

100 loo loo

By Household: Pensioners head With children With no children

59 37 46

8 9 7

6 8

25 46 37

100 100 100

By Car Ownership: Car owning households Non-car owning households

18 67

5 10

11

72 10

100 100

-

*Not accompanied by second adult member of own household. tAccompanied by second adult member of own household. Source: 1987 Telephone Survey.

114

Progress in Planning TABLE 7. Last centre visitedby respondentsin car owning and non car-owning % Respondents

in households

Newcastle Metro Centre Durham Sunderland Darlington Washington Gateshead North Shields Peterlee South Shields All centres

households

With cars 31 23 5

12 3 6 1 1

2 100

Without cars 38 a 2 17 1 4 4 3 2 5 loo

Source: 1987 Telephone Survey.

Table 7 therefore divides the sample in two, and shows shopping destinations separately for car-owning and non-car-owning households. The Metro Centre has a relatively greater appeal for the car owner. It takes a much larger share of the shopping from the car-owning group. The development of the Centre can thus be described as giving a turn to the wheel of change. It has enabled shopping trips to be made by car, perhaps releasing ‘frustrated demand’ for car borne shopping.

3.4.

TRADING

REPERCUSSIONS

The theoretical estimate of trade diversion above can be compared with evidence of actual sales changes, given by retail businesses in a first postal survey at the end of 1987 of retail outlets in the region. The suggested losses did seem to be borne out by the replies to this enquiry. The centres surveyed were as follows. First, the top level of competing centres within the main catchment of the Metro Centre: Newcastle, Sunderland, South Shields, North Shields and Gateshead. The next two largest centres within the immediate catchment, which have also particular features of interest were also included: Washington, as an early version of a planned ‘out-of-town’ shopping centre; Durham, as a traditional town centre constrained by an historic physical environment and facing strong competition from new shopping developments of all kinds. Copies of the questionnaires used are attached in Appendix 1. The form follows that used successfully in previous work for the Scottish Office (Davies and Wade, 1984). It seeks information under four headings. First is current employment, broken down by occupation, sex and age, hours worked and permanent or temporary. Secondly, information is sought on total employment, and the full time/part time breakdown, one year and three years previously. Respondents are

The Impact of the Metro Centre

115

also asked for their own ranking of reasons for any change identified over the most recent period. Thirdly, for each time period, information is requested on the general change in actual sales in the store. The question is framed in relative terms. It has been found that the response to a direct question about absolute turnover brings a very poor response. A question about large or small increases or decreases is far more successful. In the current surveys, definitions of ‘slight’, ‘moderate’ and ‘substantial’ change in % terms were offered to clarify both the questions and the results. Response to the survey was typical of postal surveys of this kind. Returns were not large, representing 16% of all occupied retail outlets in the survey centres. In particular centres the response ranged from 11 to 28%. Returns were biased to the larger firms. A substantial portion of retail space was thus covered by the survey but problems arose in attempting to break down the results to look at particular centres, other than Newcastle, or particular types of business. For the period 1984-1986 the health of the shopping centres surveyed was variable. Sunderland, in particular, showed numbers of outlets suffering declining sales. Sales in parts of all centres were buoyant. In the regional city centre, Newcastle, some firms were doing very well, particularly the large multiples. During 1987, a change occurred. Newcastle for the first time showed notable decreases in trade even in its core area. The data suggested that the year on year sales increases seen in the seven major centres stopped. Some retailers of course, with particular strengths, continued to do well. The change in the trend cannot readily be accounted for by a change in wider influences on the retail industry, or regional retail spending. The major new factor seems to have been the new centre’s opening. TABLE 8. Reported sales changes: Newcastle retail outlets

% Outlets reporting: Reduction No change Increase

Over 3 years to end 1987 Core* Outer? 22 0 88

25 19 56

Over 1 year to end 1987 Core Outer 45 7 48

48 12 39

*Prime shopping streets. tsecondary streets. Source: Retailer Survey.

Store managers were asked for their own subjective explanations of the change in sales they had experienced. The most frequent answer was the impact of a rival centre. Other explanations were, however, given considerable importance. Sunderland and South Shields respondents felt less impact. Gateshead (town centre) retailers not surprisingly suggested the most. Durham came next, before Newcastle or Washington, which are considerably nearer Metro. The strength of

116

Progress in Planning TABLE

9. Reasons given for changes in sales levels in 1987 % respondents*

Internal Company marketing Store alterations Staff productivity or change

27 18 20

External Effects of the economy Changes in catchment Centre redevelopment Traffic schemes Competition New shopping centre

37 14 24 27 31 50

*All respondents in 7 traditional tMultiple replies permitted. Source: Retailer Survey.

citingt

centres.

the impact on Durham might be expected in view of the catchment area for the Metro Centre identified in our consumer surveys. The main drawing power of the new centre affected the whole of the main catchment area of Durham city. It is important to remember the context of generally increasing consumer spending over the period in question, in the north east as elsewhere. Some reasonable assumptions based on the consumer surveys, our estimate of the new centre’s turnover, and Family Expenditure Survey regional expenditure data, point to the Metro Centre absorbing under 8% of the available retail expenditure from households within 30 minutes drive, by the middle of 1988, and less in the previous year. Growth of several percentage points a year in consumers’ expenditure in the region before, during and after the opening of the new centre provided a ‘cushion’ to allow other centres to adjust to the early effects of the Metro Centre.

TABLE

10. New centre affecting sales: citations by centre % respondent

Newcastle North Shields Gateshead South Shields Sunderland Washington Durham All centres Source:

Retailer

50 51 87 39 39 51 63 50 Survey.

citing

The fmpact of the Metro Centre 3.5.

117

EMPLOYMENT

The picture of retail employment from the 1987 retailer survey in the main traditional shopping centres of the north east was of an industry in change before the Metro Centre opened. The job total was slowly declining, despite the improvement in the regional economy and the growth in jobs generally. In the 7 traditional centres, the number of part time jobs was growing, and full time ones decreasing. Both these trends were, not unexpectedly, greater than the national average for retailing. Large centres concentrate the growing multiple firms in non-food trades, where productivity and employment practices have been changing rapidly. The structure of jobs was seen to be surprisingly similar to that in superstores (Sparks, 1983). Surveyed outlets in the main traditional centres showed a sharper decline in numbers employed in 1987, than the trend from 1984 onwards. Full time employment fell the most. The increase in part time employment was checked. Loss of jobs in the surveyed centres was probably smaller than the increase provided by the new employment at the Metro Centre. The balancing arithmetic is difficult because of the limited data available. The Census of Employment provides a region-wide data source. There are difficulties, however, in allocating employment to particular shopping centres. No data is collected on a centre basis. The location of units of record collection is not necessarily the same as the location of places of work; errors and omissions occur in allocations. Information can now be extracted from the Census by postcode using the National Online Manpower Information System. Investigations of postcode areas representing shopping centres were carried out, but tests of the data against other information showed serious inadequacies. Work was then done on more reliable data for four Travel to Work Areas within the new centre’s main catchment, to compare with 24 others including the rest of the country’s top 25 shopping centres. We concluded tentatively, that up to September 1987, almost one year after the main openings at the Metro Centre, the gain in jobs in the catchment area from the new development, was sufficient to offset the generally declining trend. The trends in the Newcastle TIWA, including the new centre, contrasted with the average for the rest of the country’s top 25. There was greater change in the convenience sector retailing in the direction of the trends: to reduce full time and increase part time jobs. In non-food businesses there was a contrary trend, to increases in full time jobs rather than decreases and increases in jobs overall. From this we might conclude that the development of the new centre led to a net increase in jobs in the ‘ITWA, against the trend in other areas where no similar centres were built. However, the trend is not particularly clear, and the unreliability of the data undermines the conclusions. Looking wider, at the whole northern region, including all the shops outside the main centres, by using the Employment Gazette estimates, suggested that there

118

Progress in Planning TABLE 11. Employees in employment, industry

northern region, retail

1984

September December

104,000 105,000

1985

March June September December

103,000 101,ooo 102,000 105,000

1986

March June September December

102,000 101,000 101,000 103,OQO

1987

March June September December

100,000 98,000 99,000 98,000

1988

March June

96,000 96,000

Source: Employment Gazette, Historical Supplement October 1987. November 1988. Includes all of retail industry SIC 1980, that is including petrol and vehicle retailing.

were employment losses which offset the Metro Centre gains. The implication was that the early impact from the new centre was not concentrated simply on its obvious competitors, the other large centres in the region. Change was spread widely. It is particularly significant that Christmas 1987 apparently saw no seasonal increase in retail employment in the region as a whole, (against the national trend) suggesting lack of confidence at sales prospects just as the Metro Centre was beginning to attract customers in large numbers. Overall, the official statistics are as unsatisfactory for research on the impact of new out-of-town centres as other previous problems with a locational element. The value of our own sample surveys of retail businesses is thus enhanced. The surveys focused on disentangling the effects of the new centre’s development from other factors. Results of both 1987 and 1990 surveys will be brought together below, to discuss the long term impact of the new Centre.

CHAPTER

4

The Health of Traditional Shopping Centres The second retailer survey in 1990 provided the lynch pin for a re-assessment of impact in the maturing phase of the new Centre’s development, after 1988. The two retailer surveys marked the two major phases of evaluation. Throughout the research period, however, monitoring of land use changes and annual surveys of pedestrian flows provided further opportunities for assessment. The results of both types of survey contributed to the conclusions set out for the two main phases of work, but it is worth identifying them separately here. The aim with both sets of surveys was to track changes in the ‘health’ of traditional shopping centres. 4.1.

PEDESTRIAN

ACTIVITY

Pedestrian counts are carried out as a surrogate measure of trade in shopping centres. They can also be accepted as a measure in themselves of activity and vitality in a centre. Pedestrian counts were carried out in Newcastle city centre and the Metro Centre only. Our survey series began in 1976 in Newcastle city centre, and 1987 in the Metro Centre. All counts were carried out in the same way, at the same time and in the same place every year. (New counting places were added of course, as the Metro Centre opened in stages). Eighty separate fifteen minute counts were carried out in Newcastle for each survey, and forty four at maximum in the Metro Centre. For each counting position, adult pedestrians passing - both directions along a mall or pavement were counted. Surveys were conducted simultaneously in each centre, on a Tuesday in February. There was a broadly upward trend in the counts in Newcastle from 1976 to 1986. Variations have occurred of course, and activity levels in the southern part of the city centre declined (Howard and Davies, 1986). 1988 saw for the first time a substantial decrease in activity overall in Newcastle. There had also been a decline from 1986 to 1987, but a much lower one. 1989 saw a recovery, but not to the levels of the mid 1980s. The Metro Centre opened towards the end of 1986. The 1988 survey coincided with a particular draw at the Metro Centre - the opening of the funfair. At the time of the 1989 survey there were no 119

120

Progress in Planning , 150 t

+ -+-x*

Northern streets Eldon Square centre Northumberland St Southern streets

I 501 1980 1981

I 1982

I 1983

I 1984

+ /\

I 1985

n

I 1986

I 1987

I 1988

I 1999

1 1990

FIG. 5. Pedestrian counts in Newcastle city centre.

special factors drawing people away from Newcastle; the attractions of the new regional centre in Gateshead, however, were much better established by then. The recovery in the count levels from 1988 to 1989 was marked but not complete. No change in the regional economic situation would account for the change. The ‘impact’ of the Metro Centre on Newcastle as a rival shopping centre is apparent in the pedestrian activity levels which can be seen in Fig. 5. There was considerable variation in the way in which the activity levels changed in different parts of the city centre. Eldon Square, the in-town purpose built centre, fared well, though the principal shopping street, Northumberland Street, in the longer term saw greater increases in overall traffic. Long term decreases in activity were most pronounced in the southern streets of the city centre. The interplay of a variety of factors could be seen affecting changes here. Alterations in bus routes and stops and the development of an extension to Eldon Square were particularly important. A process of concentration of activity in the prime areas had begun much earlier and was directly accelerated by the development of the in-town centre, Eldon Square (Bennison and Davies, 1980). Although the new centres out-of-town could not have a direct influence on the structure of the city centre (as building Eldon Square had done), the same processes of change appear to have been given further impetus by their development. We were led to the conclusion that the impact of the new centre, although widespread, had more severe consequences in the secondary areas of the city centre.

4.2.

METRO

CENTRE

PEDESTRIAN

FLOWS

Comparison of pedestrian flows over time within the Metro Centre are not straight forward. The structure of the Centre changed as new tenants, new car parks, the bus station and so on opened. Activity also built up as the centre

The Impact of the Metro Centre

121

established a trading pattern in the region: in general the total pedestrian flows increased in line with the traffic increase referred to in Table 3. It is most interesting in the context of this paper to compare flows with those recorded at exactly the same times in the Eldon Square covered shopping centre in Newcastle city. Highest flows recorded in the Metro Centre were equivalent to 4200 persons per hour along Cameron Walk near Sears, and 3800 along the Parade near Mothercare. Both malls are on the lower floor. Upper floor flows were less, though they showed strong increases from 1987 to 1990. Higher flows must occur at other times: these figures refer to survey times only. Some Eldon Square points, however, had flows recorded at the same time, of over half as much again. 6000 in Whitecross Way approaching the market and 5300 in Eldon Way near the John Lewis department store. This comparison reflects the differing character of the layouts of the two centres, not just total activity in the two or the relative attractions of particular stores. Some indication of differences in overall customer levels can be obtained from cordon counts. At each main entrance to each centre, counts were made of pedestrians entering only. An almost complete cordon was possible at the Metro Centre, but at Eldon Square it was not possible to account for people entering via two stores with external doors. On the other hand, the Eldon Square count must include some people just ‘passing through’, where no such traffic exists at Metro. In 1989, for example, the cordon count at Eldon Square was over 13,000 and at Metro 3500. There is an indirect, not direct, relationship between these figures and relative trade at the two centres. Metro Centre trades much longer hours, and spending per unit there is different, probably higher than at Eldon Square. Holiday peaks are probably also greater at the out of town centre, so the relationship between pedestrian traffic at the two is likely to vary by the time of day, day of the week and so on. Some pointers to relative trade are contained in the data however.

4.3.

LAND

USE

Land use surveys provided both the framework for the retailer postal surveys, and some direct analysis of the changing health of centres. Assessing the significance of changes proved difficult. In the absence of comparisons, it was difficult to attribute changes in the composition of shop outlets in north eastern centres, to the impact of new centre building. There were relative losses of independent businesses and increases in the numbers of multiple outlets. Vacancies increased in most centres at the end of the research period, as retail sales growth halted nationally and the business environment became more difficult. In some centres, an increase in vacancies in 1987/1988 was also apparent, against the national trend. JPP 40:2-C

122

Progress in Planning

0

Newcastle

6Sl Metro

EZi 8 man centres m Retal world

l2Zl Washington

FIG. 6. Total retail floorspace in major shopping centres.

Occupied retail floorspace in the nine major centres of Tyneside grew substantially during the 1970s and early 1980s. At Washington new town, an entirely new centre was developed. Growth halted in the old centres by 1986. Total floorspace in the region continued to increase thereafter with the major additions of the Metro Centre, its adjoining retail warehouses, the retail park of Retail World and off centre superstores. The traditional centres began to decline in size. Space has fallen out of retail use, as in the Grey Street area of Newcastle, or the southern part of Gateshead. Activity has become more concentrated on prime areas, through a process of in-town shopping centre development, shop relocations and tenancy changes. The processes discerned in the 1970s (Bennison and Davies, op. cit.) as part of the impact of the development of a major in-town shopping centre, have continued in the 1980s. Extensions to shopping areas have occurred as, for example, at Eldon Gardens in Newcastle, which has extended the principal shopping area north of the Haymarket for the first time. Overall, however, a shrinkage has taken place. The greatest decreases have occurred in the centres of Gateshead, Shields Road and Whitley Bay. The increase in South Shields is accounted for by district supermarket development: durable floorspace has declined. Only Newcastle has seen a significant increase in durable sales space, and this trend was reversed in the 1986-1988 period. There is a relationship between amount of durable floorspace and the change 1971 to 1988. The larger the centre, the less decline there has been. The relationship is fairly consistent except in the case of Gateshead, which has seen by far the greatest relative loss, of half its 1971 durable floorspace. Although there was a substantial loss here from 1986-1988 the larger decline cannot be attributed, as is tempting, to the proximity of the Metro Centre. Much of Gateshead’s decline was clesrly happening before the Metro Centre was built.

The impact of the Metro Centre 4.4.

VACANCIES

AS A MEASURE

123

OF HEALTH

Planning Policy Guidance Note No. 6 (Department of the Environment, 1988) sets out examples of the possible effects of major new developments on existing centres, which should be taken into account in planning, as “a significant increase in vacant properties, or a marked reduction in the range of services the town centre provides, such as could lead to its general physical deterioration . . .“. The evidence from the north east suggests that vacancies have not occurred in large numbers across centres “as a whole”. PPG6 uses the phrase “affect the vitality and viability of a centre as a whole”, with that emphasis, as the suggested test of whether the impact of new development should be taken into account in planning. The retailer surveys suggest that the impact of the Metro Centre was felt across centres as a whole. Land use vacancies did not follow in the same way. Field surveys of shop use were carried out in the seven centres included in the retail business postal survey in early 1986 before Metro opened and updated in late 1989. In all of the centres, more vacancies appeared in peripheral streets than core or prime areas. The percentage increase in core areas was often high - but because the starting number was so low.

TABLE 12. Vacant shop properties,

Newcastle Gateshead Sunderland North Shields South Shields Washington Durham

as % total outlets

1986

1989&O

14 6 7 12 8 3 2

16 11 4 15 5 3 3

Source: OXIRM Surveys. First Survey April 1986, second survey October 1989-March 1990. Premises under construction excluded.

Vacancies were a poor record of change even in the outer areas, however. Where streets were in the poorest retail health for the longest, ultimately non-retail uses developed, particularly in Newcastle. Durham was a centre where sales, customer numbers and employment in stores were more affected than others by the Metro Centre, as shown by the retailer survey. It was second only to Gateshead in the proportion of businesses experiencing major effects, yet

124

Progress in Planning

vacancies remained low. Retail space in the city centre increased over the period, as a new development was completed. Durham is a small, physically constrained shopping centre. Both before the Metro Centre opened and during at least the two years thereafter, several major retailers were seeking without success to obtain space there. Overall, the ‘health’ of the centre remained good. Yet particular businesses within it suffered set-backs, which led to reduced employment. Although ‘impact’ was considerable, the short term vitality and viability of the centre remained good. The survey data may be rather an incomplete indicator of change, because it was not possible to measure the square footage of vacant or other premises. It is perhaps more important that the change in the number of vacant units was swamped by changes to other shops over the period. A large proportion of units in different centres saw changes of fascia name, usually involving a change of occupant, and often a change of kind of retail business. Such changes may or may not be consequent on the ‘impact’ of the development of the Metro Centre. Businesses may have failed and been replaced by those employing fewer people with lower sales: we have no evidence either way. However, the assessment of change within continuing businesses, via the postal surveys of retail outlets, suggested that changes in them in employment and sales were very significant; these are dealt within Chapter 5. The incidence and significance of vacancies was far outweighed by changes taking place within business.

CHAPTER

5

Trading and Employment

Repercussions:

Mature Phase

The full impact of a development such as the Metro Centre is unlikely to be seen in a short term study. The patterns and processes of urban change move slowly. As a shopping destination, the Metro Centre has continued to grow in popularity until the present time of writing. Evidence from major retailers suggests that sales continue to grow at the Metro Centre, more than at other locations in the region. That is, the centre’s role is continuing to develop, and its impact is likely to be felt for some time. Our 1990 survey of retailers in seven other centres in the region helped focus a re-examination of the Metro’s impact after some years trading. At this stage we could also draw together newly released data from the Census of Employment and consider the Metro’s impact on jobs. 5.1. EMPLOYMENT

Two broad kinds of employment information are supplied by our sample surveys. Data on job numbers and kinds of jobs are given. Secondly, respondents are asked to cite reasons for changes in those jobs. Table 13 gives the broad outline of the sample. Table 14 summarises the total change in the employment pattern in respondent outlets, by centre. Note that all data refers to change within outlets. Closures and openings are excluded from this table, as are firms unable to supply figures for each date. Thus a different set of outlets is included at each period. The aim was to investigate impact in the sense that it is experienced by retailers within their businesses. Impact studies which focus on the appearance of vacant units in shopping centres focus only on the very end of a process of change. In many cases, moreover, the impact of new developments on a retail outlet may lead to job losses, and the cancellation of investment plans, but not to closure of the outlet. It was noted in Chapter 3 that during the three years from the beginning of 1985, outlets responding to the first survey recorded an overall reduction in numbers of employees and this trend can be seen clearly in Table 14. Changing 125

126

Progress in Planning TABLE 13. Retailer survey respondents

1987 Respondents

1990 Respondents

No. of outlets

Persons engaged

70 21 8 16 48 11 31

2277 130 351 129 578 341 307

97 20 24 18 43 16 22

1707 116 769 177 813 160 240

Independents

75

332

100

550

Small multiples (<9 stores)

48

428

39

343

Large multiples (>lO stores)

82

3353

101

3089

Newcastle North Shields Gateshead South Shields Sunderland Washington Durham

No. of outlets

Persons engaged

Source: Retailer Surveys.

employment practices and productivity levels accounted for this sort of decline. Rates of change varied greatly among businesses, types of business and centres. Because some large businesses dominate the trends in some places and sectors, conclusions are tentative for some centres marked * in Table 14. The decreases in employment accelerated in 1987. It is difficult to attribute the change to general economic factors. The opening of the Metro Centre towards the end of 1986 was the major new factor.

TABLE 14. % Employment

change within outlets? 1985-1990s ss*

S

W*

D

All

25 20

8 -25

-10 -7

11 -

5 -

-4.0 2.9

-7 20

-3 2

3 -2

-11 3

3 -2

6 7

-5.0 -0.9

3

-26 -18

1 -4

-9 -12

3 4

-8 -9

-11.3 -9.8

7 4

-9 -9

19 12

-1 -2

2 -

-3 -3

-1.5 -2.4

N

NS*

1985-l 988 All Engaged Full Time Equiv.

-10 -14

-6 -5

1987-1988 All Engaged Full Time Equiv.

-5 -9

1988-1990 All Engaged Full Time Equiv.

-14 -15

-

1989-1990 All Engaged Full Time Equiv.

-3 -3

G*

Source: Retailer Survey. *Less reliable: see text. tDifferentsetsofoutletsforeachperiod. SReportingdatesvary, see text. N = Newcastle;NS = NorthShields; G = Gateshead; SS =SouthShields; S = Sunderland; W = Washington; D = Durham.

The impact of the Metro Centre

127

In considering the 1990 survey data, it is again necessary to be cautious. Many respondents did not supply full breakdowns of change in employment for categories of job or over the full period under investigation. Detailed cross tabulations have been suppressed because of the need to preserve the confidentiality of information from individual businesses. It is apparent, however, that job losses continued, within outlets trading throughout the period. In the most recent year, the reduction in full time equivalents proportionately exceeded that in total numbers for the first time. Reductions in the 2V2 year period 1988-1990 considerably exceeded those in the previous three year period. Retail sales growth generally began to turn down in the later period. Cost pressures on retail businesses increased considerably (e.g. see Treadgold, 1991), particularly staff costs. We cannot immediately, therefore, attribute losses to the impact of the Metro Centre. Experience varied among centres. The most reliable information is for Newcastle and Sunderland, with large numbers of respondents. Overall, Newcastle outlets reduced job numbers over the whole period more than those in Sunderland. Gateshead appears to have experienced the most reductions in the recent period; before 1987 substantial growth in certain outlets dominated the picture. Durham outlets show a distinct change from the early period of growth, to a later one of decline. Washington figures tend to show an increase throughout, in responding outlets. These centres all have different competitive roles versus the Metro Centre dependent on the mix of retailers within them and their geographical positions in the catchment area. Sunderland is rather self-contained in the region. Its catchment is distinct from the other main centres. Gateshead, of course, is closest to the Metro Centre and has always suffered from competition from Newcastle nearby. Durham lies in an area of particularly easy access to the Metro Centre. Washington has a strong convenience shopping role and the presence of SavaCentre strengthens its position.

5.2.

REASONS

FOR

CHANGE

IN EMPLOYMENT

AND

SALES

The reasons for change in employment are complex, and many factors combine to produce the overall changes summarised in the Table. This section will focus on disentangling the effects of the impact of the Metro Centre’s development from other factors. Survey respondents - usually store managers - were asked to rank in importance suggested reasons for changes in job kinds and numbers in their stores. The response rate to this question was low: under half replied. This is interesting in itself and leads to speculation about how store managers view store

128

Progress in Planning

performance. Of those who did answer in 1990, just over half cited changes in store performance, and most of these gave it as the most important reason. About a quarter cited rationalisation or development of the store and similar numbers cited a change in the ratio of full time to part time jobs. Fewer cited changes in productivity, working methods or labour costs. These proportions were very similar to the responses to the same question in the 1988 survey. Differences between shopping centres were not significant, except for Sunderland, where citations of trade performance substantially outweighed all others. Respondents were also asked to give reasons for changes in sales levels. This question was far more frequently answered than the previous one. The first survey revealed that over half of all respondents cited competition from new centres as a reason for changes in sales since 1986, when the Metro Centre opened. Larger firms cited it most often, and it was the most cited reason overall. Respondents in Gateshead town centre gave this reason more often than those in other centres, followed by those in Durham, then Newcastle and Washington. Those in Sunderland and South Shields gave this reason substantially less often. Tables 15 and 16 give the details. Competition from existing or new retailers was the second most cited reason. Productivity and managerial changes were third, except among independent retailers, who cited traffic and pedestrian flow changes instead (see Table 17). The effects of the economy on spending were cited by over a third of all respondents, but generally less often than other reasons.

TABLE 15. Reasons given for changes in sales levels for different time periods

All respondents

% Citing Effect of economy on spending Changes in size of catchment Redevelopment of the shopping centre Opening of new centres Competition from other new or existing retailers Traffic/parking/pedestrian flow changes New marketing strategies in the firm Alterations to store size or layout Staff or management change Other reasons

19861988

1988-1990

1989-1990

37 14

39 6

47 4

24 50

12 28

13 20

31

16

13

27

17

11

27

22

23

18 20

10 15 13

9 14 15

Column totals greater than 100; multiple choices allowed. Source: Retailer Surveys.

The impact of the Metro Centre TABLE

16. Reasons given for changes in sales levels 19884990, centres

% Citing

Effect of economy on spending Changes in size of catchment Redevelopment of the shopping centre Opening of new centres Competition from other new or existing retailers Traffic/parking/ pedestrian flow changes New marketing strategies in the firm Alterations to store size or layout Staff or management change Other reasons

Newcastle

Gateshead

Sunderland

in various

Durham

All centres

46

29

44

55

39

4

8

0

5

6

16

12

30

5

11

18

25

28

37

28

10

16

21

32

16

12

13

19

15

17

23

21

16

19

22

7

8

14

10

16 18

24 8

14 9

15 13

Column totals greater than 100; multiple choices allowed. Source: Retailer Survey 1990.

TABLE

17. Reasons given for changes in sales levels 1988-1990 Newcastle

% Citing Effect of economy on spending Changes in size of catchment Redevelopment of the shopping centre Opening of new centres Competition from other new or existing retailers Traffic/parking/pedestrian tIow changes New marketing strategies in the firm Alterations to store size or layout Staff or management change Other reasons

Independents

by kinds of firm,

Small multiples

Large multiples

41 10

40 5

31 6

3 34

5 35

8 26

6

15

15

27

25

11

17

20

37

3 10 17

5 15 10

19 28 4

Column totals greater than 100; multiple choices allowed. Source: Retailer Survey 1990.

129

130

Progress in Planning

The second survey in 1990 gave a different picture, for the years 1988-1990. The effect of the economy on spending moved into first place, though cited only by about 4 in 10. More noticeable was the drop in the proportion citing competition from either new centres or other retailers. The impact of new investment, through re-development, traffic and parking changes was much less noticed. The building activity of the middle 1980s had slowed considerably by 1988 and 1989. A quite dramatic difference is apparent in the reasons given for change in the most recent year of this period. Almost half cited the effects of the economy on spending, though the independents and small multiples mentioned this less often than the large firms. Among the large multiples, new marketing policies, then staff productivity and management changes are given most weight. Only a fifth of all respondents by this latest period attributed change to the impact of new centres. This reason remained, however, the second most popular given by the independents and small multiples. Clearly the implication is either that the impact of new centre development had tailed off after three years - or that other influences swamped the impact felt. Nationally, the end of 1989 marked a discontinuity in the retail sales trend. Economic policy measures reduced consumer confidence, credit and spending increases. Sales in pounds terms continued to increase through 1990, (though more slowly than before) but with rising inflation, the increase in the real value of sales dropped towards zero (CSO, 1991). It is useful to turn at this point to the evidence about actual sales changes being experienced by the respondent outlets. The trends give some evidence about the timing of the impact of the Metro development, directly and through comparison with a survey in Sheffield and with national data.

5.3.

TRADING

REPERCUSSIONS

In considering sales trends from 1984 to the end of 1987, it was concluded in Chapter 3 that many firms in the traditional centres around the Metro had experienced growth from 1984 to the end of 1986, which was halted in 1987. The dislocation in the trend was particularly clear among Newcastle city centre respondents. Sunderland respondents were also doing particularly badly during 1987, but it was difficult to attribute their difficulties to the impact of the Metro Centre. They had tended to experience poor sales in the earlier period, and consumer surveys showed relatively few shoppers attracted to the Metro Centre from the Sunderland area. Numbers of respondents in Gateshead, Washington and Durham also experienced major falls (over 10%) in sales during that year. The change in trend in Newcastle was felt throughout the shopping centre, in both its core and outer areas, but no respondents reported falls greater than 10%.

The tmpact of the Metro Centfe

It should be borne in mind that these figures refer to actual sales values (not volumes). During 1987 nationally, retail sales grew by 9%. It is reasonable to assume that sales in the region grew by some similar proportion. Thus a fall of, say, 10% in sales, year on year, must be set against a theoretical anticipated increase, if national trends were followed, of around 9%. Real impact was thus considerably more than 10%. In the period after the end of 1987 the pattern was different. Retail sales growth nationally was similarly high, at 10% for 1988 and 7% for 1989. It is possible that northern regions showed rather higher overall sales increases than southern regions. Taken overall, the ‘expected’ local trend might have been sustained high levels of sales growth, in money terms, through 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989, with perhaps a tailing off in 1989. We have already seen that growth was instead sharply checked in 1987, in the surveyed centres. In the next two or two and a half years, however, growth was generally resumed. See Table 18. These simple statements conceal a good deal of variation, by kind of business, size of firm and centre. Just about half of the independents and small multiples reported sales increases for the latest year and two thirds of large multiples. Nearly twice as many independents as other types of firms reported no change. Such variations are not unexpected, and reflect changes in retailing generally.

TABLE 18. Trends in sales levels: January 19tI&May 1990 % Respondents reporting Increase

May 1989May 1990 Newcastle North Shields Gateshead South Shields Sunderland Washington Durham

63 65 66 59 53 60 53

January 1988May 1990 Newcastle North Shields Gateshead South Shields Sunderland Washington Durham

68 71 53 59 54 79 65

Rows total 100%. Source: Retailer Survey 1990.

No (of which change over 10%)

Decrease (of which over 10%)

(28) t47j

11 ;;

26 24

(41)

;;

I:{ (19)

1:

:: 31 41 34

K! ( 6)

14 l1 ;;

;:“s; (36) (40)

15 0 5

14 21 35 24 31 21 30

[ :; (10) ( 6) ( 5) I::;

I ;; ( 9) ; :j (14) (10)

132

Progress in Planning

Overall, as Table 18 shows, nearly two thirds of outlets reported sales increases for the period after January 1988. This contrasts with just half for the year before. A quarter of respondents reported falls, compared with nearly 4 in 10 for the previous year in the earlier survey. The picture for the most recent reporting year to May 1990 only, is slightly different, with some more falls reported, and many fewer reporting increases, and a substantial number with ‘no change’. It is clear from this, and the previous section, that general economic changes and a check in spending by households, affected 1989-1990 sales figures. 1988, however, seemed to show a distinct recovery from 1987. We can make a better assessment of overall sales changes in the traditional centres by weighting responses to reflect outlet sizes. Table 19 gives the same data as Table 18 with each response weighted by the total number of full time equivalent jobs in the store. (The survey requested no information about actual sales, in pounds, for any outlet; jobs are taken as an approximate surrogate measure). The revised table shows a much stronger trend to sales increases. There is less difference between the 1988-1990 breakdown and that for the most recent year. Thus it seems that smaller firms suffered a change in fortunes in the more recent year more often than the larger firms.

TABLE

19. Trends in sales: responses weighted by size of outlet % Respondents Increase (of which over 10%)

May 1989May I990 Newcastle North Shields Gateshead South Shields Sunderland Washington Durham January 1988May 1990 Newcastle North Shields Gateshead South Shields Sunderland Washington Durham Rows total to 100%. Source: Retailer Survey

71 77 97 76 39 55 72

(20) (48) (22)

78 85 93 79

31 9 2 64 30 32 61

:9’ 87

1990.

No change

15 6 2

11 7 2 8 16 0 2

reporting Decrease (of which over 10%)

13 16 2 16 31 46 17

11 8 6 14 47 12 12

I :; (16)

3 4 4 3 20 6 5

The Impact of the Metro Centre 5.4.

SHEFFIELD

AND

NEWCASTLE

133

COMPARED

A direct comparison with Sheffield city centre retailing is possible. At the same time as the later north east survey, OXIRM carried out a similar investigation in Sheffield as part of the Meadowhall research programme (Williams, 1990). There is considerable variation in the comparison between sectors, which is partly accounted for by the small numbers of respondents in the small multiple and independent category. At the least it can be said that sales trends in Newcastle - with competition from the Metro Centre - were no less favourable than those in Sheffield - before the regional out-of-town centre there opened.

TABLE 20. Sheffield and Newcastle

sales trends compared

% Respondents

1989-1990

Increase (of which over 10%)

No change

reporting Decrease (of which over 10%)

Sheffield

Large multiples

60

(11)

6

33

(11)

Small Independents multiples All: weighted

93 54 66

I:;; (25)

36 0 11

98 25

i “0 ( 7)

18

( 4)

I:;;

l2 11 9 11

21 50 13

:1:; ( 5)

Newcastle

Large multiples Small Independents multiples All: weighted

70 40 70 75

Rows total to 100%. Source: Retailer Surveys 1990.

5.5.

REGIONAL

IMPACT

The implications of all the material may perhaps be best summed up in the contrast between the year of 1987 and that of May 1989-May 1990. The first phase of the Metro Centre opened in October 1986 (and the Carrefour supermarket and adjoining small shops earlier in 1986). Extensions to the Centre opened during 1987. By May 1989 the new Centre was complete and most had been trading for some time. Traffic had reached levels roughly half as much again as in the Spring of 1987. Table 21 compares sales trends in all responding outlets in traditional north east centres for these two contrasting years. The increase nationally in retail sales at current prices was 8.7% in 1987 and 7% in 1989, slightly more up to May 1990. The national figures are not reflected in

134

Progress in Planning TABLE 21. Weighted sales changes: 1987 and 1990 contrasted % Respondents Increase (of which over 10%) Year to Jan 1988 Year to May 1990

52 70

7 28

No change

3 12

reporting Decrease (of which over 10%) 46 19

7 5

the north east survey results. 1987 was a far more difficult year there and it is this contrast which summarises the sales impact of the Metro Centre on surrounding centres. A final summary exercise can be done using a market share approach, which demonstrates the peaking effect of the impact, and puts the impact of the regional centre development in a perspective of regional retail sales. This is considered in the next chapter.

CHAPTER

6

Metro Cente 6.1.

METRO

Market Share and Employment

CENTRE

MARKET

SHARE

We have estimated the turnover of the new centre at f200-240 million per annum, June 1988 prices, for the situation which existed at June 1988. Traffic to the centre was about one third less in 1987 than 1988, and the simplifying assumption that turnover was one third less in real terms, can be made. Similarly, traffic grew by about 12% in 1989 and 6% in 1990, and turnover may have been this much greater. No actual retail sales for regions or areas have been available since the 1971 Census of Distribution. Theoretical sales, based on Family Expenditure Survey spending information can be calculated. Using Pinpoint Analysis Ltd/DSR Marketing Systems Retail Potential figures, we estimate that Metro’s turnover from within its 30 minute drive-time catchment represented 7% of available retail expenditure in this zone in 1988. Figure 7 shows an index of total sales for this catchment, assumed to rise in line with national trends. Metro’s share is shown increasing as described above, and taken from the growing expenditure available in the region. A large portion of the increase in the region’s retail potential remains available for other shopping centres. Metro’s ‘impact’ was ‘swamped’ by general growth. Other centres could continue to grow.

Ma

r

-‘isE%

elsewhere sales

LZI

Increase

03

Metro

1967

l9ee

FIG. 7. Metro Centre share of retail sales growth. 135

1969

136

Progress in Planning 145-

-n+

70 1983

All catchment sales Sales excl Metro

I 1984

I 1985

I 1986

I

I

1987

1988

I 1999

I 1990

1 1991

FIG. 8. Regional sales growth and the 1987 shock.

This is not to imply that a serious impact was not felt. A loss of ‘just’ a few points in sales, especially real sales values, can have very serious effects in businesses where fixed costs remain unchanged or increasing. Impacts, as our surveys have shown, have been experienced to different degrees in various places and kinds of business. The shock of 1987’s impact can be seen better by looking at Fig. 8 showing the likely experience before 1986, of steady and large sales increases. A sharp change in the trend for 1987, for retailing in places other than the Metro Centre, represented a serious change in the business environment.

6.2.

METRO

CENTRE

EMPLOYMENT

Finally, we reach the question of the kind and number of new jobs created at the Metro Centre. “Although the development of the Metro Centre was contrary to existing development plan shopping policies, the local authority [Gateshead MBC] supported the development because of the potential benefit to the local economy and increased job opportunities” (GMBC, 1989). By June 1989 there were almost exactly 5000 jobs in the Centre (plus more in the adjoining warehouse and commercial development). At this date we carried out a full survey of retailers in the Centre in collaboration with the local authority. A short questionnaire was used, delivered and collected by hand. 98% of outlets responded and GMBC estimates have been used to give total employment figures for the Centre (see Table 22). A similar survey was carried out at the Retail World warehouse park in Team Valley at the same time and in the same way: some data for comparison are given in Table 23. By this date the Centre management claimed that sales turnover was over f300 million (Feenan, 1989). This figure was above the levels of sales (taking inflation

The Impact TABLE 22. Employment

Retail OutletS Service Outlets Leisure Outlets Centre Functions

of the Metro Centre

137

at the Metro centre: Jane 1989

Total jobs

% Full time

3677 867 272 104

43 54 70 95 46

4920

Space occupied* (sq m) 57,666 7448 15,OW

‘GMBC Information Note January 1990. Net Space. tGross space occupied. *Jobs and space allocated by main function of outlet. Source: OXIRM/GMBC Retailer Survey.

TABLE 23. Comparisons

of kinds of jobs at various centres

% Male

% Female

7.6 15.9 23.5

45.2 31.2 76.4

52.8 47.1 100

Warehouse park Retail World, 1989$ Part time 11.2 Full time 36.2 All 47.4

25.7 27.0 52.7

36.9 63.2 100

Metro Centre: retail 19899 Part time Full time All

6.7 14.2 21.0

49.6 29.4 79.0

56.3 43.6 100

Metro Centre: all* 19891 Part time Full time All

8.1 18.9 27.0

44.1 28.9 73.0

52.2 47.8 100

Traditional centres 199Ot Part time Full time All

Total

*Including centte management, catering, leisure services and retailing. Sources: tOXIRM 1990 Retailer Survey; $GMBC 1990; BOXIRM/GMBC Retailer Survey.

factors into account) which had been forecast for other regional out-of-town centres at Public Inquiries into proposals for them. It was also well above our own estimate of likely sales at the Centre. The figure of 5000 jobs is, however, somewhat below the level apparently expected. Before the Centre opened, Chesterton asked retail tenants for their estimates of likely employment (Tym, 1986). Tym gave those ratios as 7.4 jobs per 1000 sq ft retail space for Metro, 7.2 at Milton Keynes and 8.6 at Brent Cross. JPP 4D:2-D

138

Progress in Planning

Re-calculating the Metro ratio using our 1989 survey figures for jobs, and GMBC’s figure for net selling space, gives a ratio of 6.6 jobs per 1000 sq ft. All jobs except those in leisure facilities, and all space except the leisure space, are included. The estimate of net selling space seems rather low when the gross space in the Centre is considered, and thus the ratio may actually be too high. It is already lower than the early estimates. Many of the jobs involved are part time. 9% indeed were for less than 8 hours per week. A theme running through the debate about planning for major retail development particularly where the focus is on local economic regeneration, is the ‘value’ of retail jobs, particularly part time jobs. We cannot deal here with the questions whether local effort or land allocations should be for industries other than retailing. There are some conclusions to be drawn, however, about the difference between employment opportunities at the Metro Centre, and those in other shopping centres.

6.3.

KINDS

OF JOBS

Table 23 contrasts the part time/full time and sex characteristics of jobs in traditional north east centres and at the new centres. There are relatively more part time jobs taken by women, than full time jobs and jobs taken by men, in the Metro Centre. The shift towards part time jobs, and jobs taken by women, is general throughout retailing. It is most pronounced in the larger stores and large multiple companies, which are most dominant in the large shopping centres we are concerned with here. The Metro Centre is, of course, an entirely new major centre, and by definition comprises all new stores, where firms have been able to start with the kind of job profiles they seek, taking little account of any existing jobs or post holders. Metro Centre stores often epitomise the new style outlet, staffed with more part timers and temporary staff than elsewhere. One reason is the nature of the centre: opening long hours, with untested and changing daily, weekly and annual trading patterns. Another is increasing productivity in retailing. ‘Retail engineering’, detailed information on and control of distribution and sales movements, means that staffing can be tailored more precisely to places and times of highest demand. The flexibility implied is often most easily achieved through part time working. Productivity overall is rising, related both to this more precise tailoring and to increased investment and automation throughout the industry. The third reason, however, is simply the Centre’s newness: new staffing practices could be introduced all at once. Similar practices are developing in other centres. If no more regional out-of-town centres are built, there will still be shifts to part time working and so

The impact of the Metro Centre

139

on. Most retailers are facing similar problems in recruiting and retaining full time staff. Many centres and stores are opening longer than traditional hours; further extensions seem possible. Employment at the Metro Centre has itself changed over the period since its opening. Some stores have reduced the total numbers of jobs, especially full time jobs. As the Centre has been extended and sales have grown, many more part time than full time jobs have been created. GMBC carried out counts of jobs at store openings which showed 1745 part time and 1613 full time jobs by June 1987. By the 1989 survey, full time job numbers had increased by a quarter, but part time jobs had increased by 45%. Some shifts have also taken place in the traditional centres. In outlets providing continuous data there was, for example, an increase from 55.8% to 57.1% in the proportion of part time jobs. Some of the change at the Metro Centre, however, is due first to initial trading expectations not being met and staff being shed, and secondly, to an increase in evening trading as the centre has developed, with a need for more staff at non-traditional hours. More precise comparisons can be made to illustrate the contrast between traditional centre employment and that at the Metro Centre. From the 1989 and 1990 surveys, a matched sample of non-food outlets from firms represented in both traditional centres and the Metro Centre was constructed. That is, shops in the Metro Centre were matched with shops elsewhere operating under the same names. Table 24 presents the comparison. It is clear from this that the pattern of jobs in the Metro Centre is indeed different from that in the traditional centres. Part time employment is more dominant. However, the matched sample suggests that men do not hold relatively fewer of the jobs in Metro Centre stores than in those stores elsewhere. The apparent difference is accounted for by the difference

TABLE 24. Matched sample

Stores in Metro Centre %

Stores in traditional centres %

Male employment Part time Full time

22.7 11.2 11.5

14.9 5.0 9.9

Female employment Part time Full time

77.3 55.2 22.1

85.1 51.3 33.8

Part time employment

66.4

56.3

Full time employment

33.6

43.7

140

Progress in Planning

in the type of firm and store: there are fewer of the kinds of shop which generally employ men elsewhere. In conclusion, we can say two things. First, employment patterns at the Metro Centre epitomise modern retailing and the changes in it. More jobs are part time, and more held by women, than in other centres. Many jobs are for a few hours per week. Secondly, employment levels are not as high as might have been expected. There are two reasons: lower sales levels than the levels associated with the high job estimates, and the increasing productivity generally in new retail space, which, of course, makes up the whole of the Centre.

CHAPTER

7

Implications

for Planning

A quiet revolution took place in retail planning policy in the 1980s. No new legislation brought this about: rather new attitudes to development, the abolition of metropolitan counties and the success of certain retail businesses out-of-town were all important. In a market-led and developer-led climate, large numbers of out-of-town retail centres were proposed and many built. The Metro Centre was the largest and one of the earliest schemes in this new wave of development. In a way, it was a test of where the changes in planning attitudes were likely to lead. The opening of the Metro Centre was followed by other regional shopping centres, in out-of-town, or non-traditional locations. Merry Hill near Dudley, Meadowhall near Sheffield, and Lakeside near Thurrock opened by the end of 1990. Six others have planning permission, near Bristol, Chester, Dartford, Leeds and Clydebank respectively. Planning procedures are still pending (mid 1992) for centres outside Manchester and Cambridge. Over fifty similar proposals in the late 1980s caused some congestion in the planning system, but also widespread concern about the future role of in-town centres and the possibility of urban sprawl (e.g. duBrow, 1987). Schiller in 1986 has described these proposals as the ‘third wave’ of out of town retail development in the U.K., following the waves of grocery and bulky goods outlets. It is clear now more than five years later that the third wave has been less sizable than it might have been, while the second has continued to roll onwards. Large numbers of retail warehouses, often in a new form of shopping centre, the retail warehouse park, have been built recently. Over 2000 retail warehouses and 200 retail warehouse parks can now be counted. Such parks are much smaller than regional shopping centres. The largest are half the size of Meadowhall or Lakeside, themselves smaller than the Metro Centre. They are based on the provision of outlets for bulky goods though the definition of the latter is rather broad. There are signs of changing functions for such parks (Stathers, 1991), Fosse Park, for example, includes food and fashion retail outlets. Concern about a fundamental shift in the character and location of shopping centres has remained focused on the outlying regional centre, however, which is said to replicate the high street out of town. Four types of planning concern can 141

142

Progress in Planning

be discerned: that the health and role of the town centres might be undermined by the removal of retailing functions; that outlying shopping centres might become the focus or agent of the sprawl of other urban functions; that transport patterns might change significantly enough to undermine public transport and increase the use of private cars with consequent undesirable environmental impacts; that social inequities in opportunities for shopping might be increased. Our study focused on the first, and can offer same comments on the last. These four concerns might be generalised in a question about the future nature of the hierarchy of shopping centres. 7.1.

THE

SHOPPING

CENTRE

HIERARCHY

As Brown has put it most recently (1991), “for decades the notion of a retail hierarchy has dominated, some would say ossified, land use planning in the U.K. and many other countries”. The preservation of the hierarchy is a central plank of planning policy, appearing in Structure Plans and underlying planning attitudes. There have been many different descriptions of the hierarchy, and attempts to incorporate observed types of shopping centre into the classifications (Brown, op. cit.).

Dawson and Sparks (1987) have insisted that the concept is no longer an adequate basis for planning retail land uses and suggest that many of the assumptions of the hierarchical model do not hold true today. The question we are faced with is: does the development of something like the Metro Centre undermine the hierarchy or demonstrate that shopping and retailing patterns no longer operate hierarchically, or not? In general terms, a prime assumption of a hierarchical model is that customers buy lower order or convenience goods on frequent trips to nearby small shopping centres. They buy comparison goods less frequently in fewer centres located further from them. A hierarchy of centres nests in a system ranging from the smallest neighbourhood centre to the largest, regional centre selling a wide range of goods. Critics of the model point out that less frequent purchasing of perishable goods, greater personal mobility and the growth in shopping which is discretionary rather than purposive, and may result in the purchase of many different kinds of goods, undermine the model. The appearance of an out of town regional shopping and leisure centre might be said to capitalise on these changes and to be a demonstration that the hierarchy is no longer being maintained. Is the Metro Centre then part of the north east shopping hierarchy or apart from it? Chapter 2 especially reported evidence about the role of the Centre and the nature of customers trips to it. Its role is different from the old regional centre of Newcastle; trips to it are different. This summary disguises, however,

The impact of the Metro Centre

143

the multiplicity of roles the Centre plays. The Centre is the destination for many ‘special’, irregular, infrequent leisurely, shopping trips. It is also a convenience centre for regular short trips from a local population. The limited catchment of the food superstore, compared with the rest of the Centre, for example, shows this. It is a top level centre, with department stores, special fashion shops and so on, supplying the whole region on occasional trips. In this way it replicates the traditional regional centre, and makes the north east hierarchy a twin-centre system rather than single centred. Indeed a close examination of the catchments of Newcastle and of the Metro Centre suggests that something of a north-south catchment split has appeared, with Newcastle drawing most strongly from the area north of the Tyne and Metro from the south. The geographical aspects of behaviour which find expression in the development of separate catchments for major centres, have thus appeared in the new north-east shopping system. There is no clear distinction between the two catchments, indeed they overlap considerably. Further support for the continued importance of proximity, and of the range of goods on offer (the fundamentals said to produce the hierarchical system) comes from work on customer attitudes to centre choice. Customers are more mobile than in the past, and able to make more choices about where to go shopping as the marketeers keep reminding us. In some of the in-centre customer surveys already described, we asked shoppers some simple questions about what they mainly liked or disliked about shopping there. The questions were unprompted: we did not offer them any descriptions of anything we thought they ought to like or dislike. The answers were, however, generally clear, often strongly expressed, and they tended to fall into just a few categories. Table 25 shows the answers given by the overwhelming majority at the Metro Centre. The ‘likes’ were first: an appreciation of the spaciousness of the centre; second: the lightness of the malls. ‘Airy’ was a word used over and over again. Less often, people mentioned the car parking facilities, the cleanliness of the centre and the way it was ‘well looked after’. Most people found nothing to seriously dislike, but a minority cited, paradoxically, difficulties with car parking or access. (Traffic problems within the centre have now been eased.) Secondly, people mentioned a lack of particular stores, particularly a choice of department stores, or the range of shops in general. Table 25 then gives the most popular answers to the same question on the same day in Newcastle city centre including Eldon Square. What do people like there? The variety and choice of shops available. What do they dislike? The crowds and congestion. The next part of the table shows the answers for the retail warehouse park, Retail World. Car parking, ease of access and the collection in on place of a series of furniture and do-it-yourself stores were what customers appreciated. These results suggest among other things that shoppers appreciate the new styles in the new centres, but that the retail offer is more important to them.

144

Progress in Pfanning TABLE 25. Likes and dislikes in various centtes % respondents

mentioning

Likes

Dislikes

Metro Centre spaciousness light, airy car parking clean, cared for everything available location

24 15 8 8 6 6

car parking lack of shops or variety of shops

10

Newcastle City Centre variety or choice of shops everything available location

35 8 5

crowds car parking

30 4

Retail World Park car parking choice of shops everything available location

17 13 13 8

lack of particular shops lack of cafes/ toilets

Source:

In-Centre

surveys

Y

4 6

1988.

Next, in the telephone survey of households all around the north east, respondents were asked which shopping centre they had visited on their last non-food shopping trip (see Table 26), then why they had made that choice. Again the answers were unprompted. Table 26 shows the difference in the pattern of reasons given for going to the Metro Centre from those given for other centres, and the overall pattern for all fifty or more centres mentioned combined. The investigation was very simple but gives some evidence of how people see the centre choice available to them. There are many surveys related to particular centres, of customer perceptions of their good and bad points. Few exist about choice among centres, with which to compare our data. The table suggests, however, that nearness and convenience of access still dominate centre choice, together with the range of shops available. One must assume that the idea of ‘nearest centre with desired range of shops/goods’ underlies the idea of choosing a centre ‘because it’s the nearest’. Table 26 and actual catchment data thus suggest that the processes which are assumed to underlie the maintenance of a centre hierarchy continue to operate in the north east of England. Processes which undermine it have also developed. Two particular points can be made. Mobility has been encouraged by the development of the new kind of centre. The Metro Centre competes with, and has an impact on a range of other shopping centres, not just the nearest ones,

The impact of the Metro Centre TABLE 26. Reason for choosing last centre to visit; all respondents,

Newcastle

Uncrowded, quiet Weather protection Appearance style General: “its nice, I like it”, etc. For a day out, a change Habit, always go there All reasons

by centre visited

Metro Sunderland % Respondents

All

13

Near or nearest Easy or easiest to get to Near work Buses convenient Car parking good Car parking free Range of choice of shops To visit some particular shop

145

11 1 6 2 14

6

6

8 3

17

15

10

11

2 6

7

2 4

3 3

100

100

100

100

Source: Telephone Survey.

and not just its obvious regional-level rival. Short distance trips to middle sized centres such as Durham have been replaced with longer ones to the Metro Centre. A significant proportion of long distance trips, from beyond 45 minutes drive away, has developed. Secondly, the Centre demonstrates, and encourages the kind of shopping trip which is not simply concerned with the mechanical obtaining of certain goods in the most efficient way. It encourages leisurely and fun trips (only some of which include visits to leisure outlets in the Centre). Such trips are less constrained than others to the logic of the hierarchy. In an attempt to draw some conclusions from the north east study, and to contribute to the debate about the classification of shopping centres, we suggest the following. The traditional pattern of U.K. retailing encompassed perhaps five broad kinds of shopping centre, which could be described in terms of a hierarchy. Table 27 shows these in the left hand column. The emerging pattern of retailing is of a whole series of new kinds of shopping centre, as well as of changes within the traditional centres. Table 27 list these in parallel with the traditional forms. All of these new forms can be seen in the U.K. They do not, however, form a separate system, replacing the old. Nor do they form complete systems in every region. In

146

Progress in Planning TABLE 27. The changing pattern of shopping centres The Traditional Hierarchy

The Emerging

City centres Old sub-regional centres District centres Neighbourhood centres Local centres

Outlying regional centres New sub-regional centres Retail warehouse parks Superstores/retail warehouses Modern convenience stores

Pattern

the north east although, or perhaps because, Metro is the new regional centre, the sub-regional centre has not appeared. It is possible to argue that the new centres are hierarchical, distinguished by function and size. Each has taken decentralised functions from a parallel level of traditional centre. It is hardly true, however, that such a straightforward process of replacement is going on. Retail warehouse parks, for instance, tend to be functionally specialised (in furnishings, hardware etc.) and to have taken some of the role of both city or town centres and district centres. In policy terms the important consideration is how far the process of ‘replacement’ should be planned for. A new outlying centre provides retailing and shopping convenience of a sort less easily found in traditional centres with their legacy of buildings from earlier times. It offers spacious, purpose built premises which can be efficiently managed. It gives (perceived) easier access by car, and more spacious, comfortable surroundings for shoppers. New centres lack the spirit of the town centre of course: the mix of uses and social interaction which make them meeting places for the community. They lack the architectural and townscape appeal of traditional building. New and old co-exist in the north east, but as the hierarchy diminishes in significance, some old centres and parts of old centres become less important. Planning for decline is a new challenge in retail planning. The next section considers the role of existing centres.

7.2.

THE HEALTH

AND ROLE

OF TRADITIONAL

CENTRES

As the Metro Centre opened, there were fears that the city of Newcastle would be seriously damaged. Later the competition was described as beneficial: a catalyst for improvement in the city centre (Cheeseright, 1987). The debate which has followed about whether outlying regional centres can be accommodated in the U.K. without risking serious environmental or economic decay in town and city centres has been conducted noisily at times, and largely in the Public Inquiries related to planning applications. BDP and OXIRM (1992: 149) were, however, “struck by the absence . . . of ‘on the ground’ evidence of the effects of new retail development”.

The impact of the Metro Centre

147

Certainly in Newcastle, major changes have taken place in the shopping centre, at least partly in response to the new competition. Eldon Square centre was refurbished and extended. Retailers and the city council cooperated in establishing new late evening opening hours. Car park charges were reduced. Retail businesses in Newcastle, and elsewhere, suffered a considerable shock in 1987, as Chapter 5 in particular has shown. Although many businesses have recovered from that shock, the Metro Centre has continued to absorb much of the retail expenditure growth in the region. Stores belonging to major multiple groups in traditional centres in the region have performed less well than similar stores elsewhere in the country. Yet, as we have seen, shopping centres did not see a rash of vacant premises. (The most recent national retail recession of 1991-1992 has led to rather more vacancies.) The planning issues associated with the impact of the outlying development, we suggest, should be seen to be mainly in two related areas: investment confidence, and polarisation trends in the use of shopping centres. Investment and reinvestment are necessary to maintain the quality of any built environment. Development in the town centre can be less attractive than in out-of-town sites. Where planning permission can be obtained, building in out of town sites tends to be less constrained, less difficult and perhaps less expensive than development in the town centre. It provides modern, easily managed premises for retailers. As our research has shown, it is welcomed by large groups of consumers. In a retail environment dominated by multiple retailers, whether regional or national companies, the choice may not be a simple one between an in-town and an out-of-town location. The building of the Metro Centre, like many recent shopping centres, was led by the developer, not by expressed retailer demand. Once a new centre exists, retailers may find they must take a unit to protect their market share. Their costs increase, but overall trade in the region for the company may not grow in proportion. The multiple retailer may then have two less profitable outlets but is unlikely to close one, at least in the short term (as the overall evidence in this study has shown). Closure would mean losing market share and would incur significant closure costs, lease penalties and so on. Staff reductions, and lower investment are far more likely results. Lack of interest in investment by individual companies may take a long period to become manifest in environmental decline. This lack of investment confidence may be compounded by the polarisation referred to above. All the work on catchment and consumer analysis reported above shows the differential draw of the Metro Centre compared with traditional shopping locations. The customer profile for the new centre is quite different from that for, say Newcastle city centre. It is weighted to the younger, more prosperous, more mobile groups. This profile is more appealing to many retailers than that for older centres. In the difficult economic climate of the 199Os, retail

148

Progress in Planning

investment is likely to be more limited and more selective than in the past. The impact of the out of town centre may become more important in the future, many years after its opening, as new investment decisions come to be made. This is an argument that impact may continue to be felt in the future. It is important to state two things in this context. Firstly, buoyant economic conditions cushioned the early impact of the Metro Centre. Secondly, the impact on consumer behaviour and on retail businesses so far has been more significant than popular comment suggests. Reports that the impact of the Metro on Eldon Square and certain retail businesses have not been severe are not surprising and owe something at least to the demands of maintaining a good public front. In addition, the strongest competitors do well. Little publicity has been given to others’ experiences. Our research has attempted to investigate overall impact empirically and objectively.

1.3.

THE

IMPACT

OF THE

METRO

CENTRE

To summarise, the impact of the new centre has been widespread. In the first five years of its existence, the Metro Centre took a substantial share of retail sales, second only to the traditional regional centre. Its impact was not, however, focussed directly on that city centre, but spread widely across its broad catchment area. Impact was experienced through a hastening or reinforcement of trends already working in retailing and shopping centres in the region. These trends included consumer preference for larger or more specialised or more convenient shopping centres and to use their increasing mobility to visit them. Trends to greater productivity in retail businesses and shifts to new working patterns within them were also reinforced. Impact has been most adverse, not in the largest centre or even the centres nearest to the Metro Centre, but in the weaker centres and the weaker parts of centres. Local planning authorities are having to address the issue of planning for decline in such weaker centres or parts. Chapter 4 showed the decline in activity in southern peripheral streets in Newcastle city centre. Much of the retail stock there is old, inefficient and remote from prime pedestrian circulation area, as far as retailers are concerned. Yet the age and character of some of these historic streets are precisely the features which the local authorities and the community as a whole, wishes to conserve. Planning for a change in the location of shopping, to out-of-town centres, involves planning for changes in the function of traditional centres, street by street. In Newcastle before the Metro Centre opened, specific initiatives had been taken to promote new investment and new functions in Clayton Street and Grey Street respectively, where retail decline had already been observed. The process of contraction of the retail centre, referred to in Chapter 4 has continued. Further

The fmpact of the Metro Centre

149

streets are suffering decline and the question of the role of the periphery of the city centre has been re-addressed and is likely to be a significant planning issue for the future. More out-of-town regional shopping centres have opened in the U.K. since the Metro Centre and more are planned. In a less buoyant economy, but received with similar consumer approval, these developments may have more severe impacts on retailing elsewhere than the Metro Centre has so far in the north east. The Metro Centre’s impact was cushioned by retail sales growth during its development period. The 1980s were exceptional in postwar times for retail sales growth. If results from this research are to be extrapolated for planning in other areas, similar processes to those identified here should be taken into account. It should be recognised, however, that the effects of those processes will depend heavily on general and local economic circumstances. Perhaps the greatest impact of the development of the Metro Centre has been on professional and public opinion. The assumption that American style malls would not be built in U.K. disappeared with the building of this centre. It set new standards for design, quality and size in the U.K. shopping centres. It has attracted widespread consumer approval. Actual individual choices about shopping and travel have shifted strongly in its favour. There has also been a notable reaction in the last few years against the style of shopping centres built in the 1960s and 1970s in traditional locations. There is a demand for smaller scale building, conservation and preservation in town centres. Retail investment and development have an important part to play in maintaining town centres and enabling their renewal. Yet there is also clear customer approval of the outlying giant centre, which may undermine plans for in town development. There is a challenge to planning to find a balance between new and old forms of shopping centres, which satisfy conflicting community and consumer demands.

Appendix 7-Survey

of Retail Emp/oyment Change

OXFORD INSTITUTE OF RETAIL MANAGEMENT SURVEY OF RETAIL EMPLOYMENT

if

Tiakhere you woutd like us

CHANGE

to send you a copy of the research repoti on the resutts of this survey.

Leave Blank

GENERAL lNFORMATlON

cl

I I I1

Fascia Name Mc&ss

mnI m cl

Post Code Kii

of Business

Position heki by Respondem

1.

2.

ts tits stem:

lick one

1.

A rlngk independentlyowned business

Cl

2.

Pad of 8 rmsl chain (wifh less than 10 storo5)

0

3.

Part da larger chain (with 10 or more stores)

q

In whatyeaf oW this particular store begin trading under ttspresent business Mme? Year

3.

a.

How muchsates #oorspaceIs thsm In this store?

b.

Ian exect tigum Is unknown,were estimate dimensions here:

n

n by

150

Cl

m

I I I I

0

The impact of the Metro Centfe PRESENT

4.

EMPLOYMENl

a

Howm6nypooptewortfhth!sstomatthe (bckbyourseW, l6tnityandanycasual zrntum7

I I I

P6rm6nent employe66 ilh~U~*nrlod.ah~bwk~11icm6m6~6m h*yU~~W*prc(mr.WWW Tonpomry employees TOTAL NUMBER b.

Mywur wnunttyenptoy/ngsta#on howm6nyam?

lteqwmrybasls.

EB

E

YTS oth6n

m

M6n6p6mtBup6wl6om B6h6tdtkh6N w66d

Pmp6mt6

Ch6dwutOp6mtomiC66hi6r6 B6I68 A66f6t6nt6Count61BbtffSh6tt Flibn SlO~pm cloanD~un

TOTAL t-m*)

TOTAL (ptinm) -

151

152

Progress in Planning

7.

How many pa+tfrm sfaff work less than 15 hours per week?

6.

How many yourslaffsrs there in each of the followingcaWgories? (fncludeyounoff, fa&fy and hmporary enpfoyees)

of

Part-Time

Full-Time MALES

Under 16 1645 Over 45

FEMALES

I I I I I

Under 16

Es

1645 Over 45

TOTAL ~

TOTAL~

Please check that your total tiiures tally withthose in Question 6.

I I I 1 I I I 1

The fmpact of the Metro Centre FOR STORES

THAT

WERE TRADING

IN OCTOBER

1986

If this aton was not opan In October 1966, go to OuaStlon 20.

9.

How manypeopfs ware employed in Mis store one year ago In O&bar (Wuda yourseii, ianMy and any casual labour).

i986?

I I I I

Permanent employees

I I I I I I I I

Temporary employees TOTAL NUMBER

10.

How many males and females W~IW an@oyad yaar C/f=&

0, in Octobar 198b? Yo utsalf, famiiy and temporary

on a IuII andpart-time

basis one

anployees)

I TOTAL wf-~)

11.

12.

TOTAL

_.__rm-nm)

of

Total number of employees increased

0

Total number of employees decreased

0

Total number ol employees stayed the Same

cl

If lhafa has bean a change h total numban between 1986 and 1987 &her an Increase must In&untant raasons / or this?

apple ampIoyad /n your store of or dz raasa), whal hava bean the

(Rank In relative order of importanceaS many reasonz as you can) 1.

Change in trade petformance of the store

2.

Government legislation(eg: employee protection)

3.

Rationallsatlon/developmentprogrammesor tlrm

4.

Change In labour costs or staft productivity

5.

Change In Store size, layout, sellingpractices

6.

Change In lull4me/part-time staff ratio

7.

Other reasons. please specly

JPP 40:2-E

I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I

_

#you have not been 8bIa zo provh3 f@uras for 09 and 010. can you navafthakss indicafa whalhar there has bean a change In Um lotal numbar pa@ eqloyadin lhk slam In ttm last year?

I

cl

153

154

13.

Progress in Planning

!Sinw Ocroher 16136.what has teen the general trend in thekvel ofsales attained In this store,eonpared with thep~v/ousyear. (e4cWatS&Wmelpts. Do not &just for the effects ot hflattin).

klClBaSOd: DOCNaSd: NoChaqo:

up 10 5%

up10 10%

Mom than 10x

WJhW

Mcderatdy 0

Sub61antblly 0

ModarateFy Cl

Substantially El

IJ

SligMly 0 0

k~tnnd~lot~lnndinthodrsinuawhole? Abouttha8amo

14.

Cl

Qnaler Change

0

Lesschange

Whawbm9nttwmost~ntmasanskwthooverdtch8nge h-~~~hyourctoror~mbumwkst~r? 1.

Etbcb ot aconomy on ~ponding

2.

Changn In (ho rlzo ot cmchmnt ama

3.

Rdadqmonl

4.

Opening ol now rhopping oantror

ot the rhopplng antn

5.

CoqotiUon horn other now or oxbUng ntaibm

6.

Tm?ik achomrolpuWno@adaslrianflow change

7.

Now ma&&g

0.

AWdon8

rtraWgb8 wRhlnthe firm

to rton rlzo or layout

9.

Stdl proddvky

10.

Cthor masons. pba80 rpocly

of managrmnl change

El

The Impact of the Metro Centre FOR STORES THAT WERE TRADING IN 1984 If this

16.

#ton wu not open In Octobw 1994. go to Ourrllon 29.

Howmanypopki

wmmp/oyedinthisstomh0ctdw

1984?

(lncludaywrseK IurJly andany casuallabour)

I 1I I

Pwmanmtlnployms ~lW&W$f.df.d~hvlb~DnlhhlW~nd

I I I I

Tmpomry rmploywm

I 1

TOTAL NUMBER

r1111 I I I I I I

I 11 I

cl

upta 10%

uptozo%

Over 20%

hlcm8ae

=!aw

0

Modarabty cl

substanlblly 0

Dwfaa8e

sapw

0

ModDmtoly cl

subctsntblly Cl

Noclung.:

cl

cl

I

155

Progress in Planning

156

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AT METRO CENTRE, GATESHEAD

20.

e~Yectbar the Metro CenWehad on your busk%~s since ii was fitsl

~SII

(Ring whichever numben are appropriale) Up lo 10% z

21.

,-&

No c-0

tizw

Over 10% !t-zasa

No of Customers

1

2

3

4

Levelof sales

1

2

3

4

5

Level ot Protlts

1

2

3

4

5

Noc4Enployeeo

1

2

3

4

5

5

WpuranswertoO2Owas8change~ r number of employees,how mnny of Ihe fobwing categorkmofpe@e has tK” & hvohd? FUII-TIITB (3ohmormmpv)

Patt-lime &assmm3ohrSpw)

Permanent employees

m

FE m

Tan’poray employees Males FelV&S

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS 22.

P

b-

Duringrhonext12monthsdo you think thatyou wilt enployz More people

q

The same number

Cl

Fewer people

Cl

Don’t know

q

cl

tt u think thal you will enploy more or less peoplethan at press-nk wK” Ich types ofenplopes wifl you seek to increase or reduce? (Tick as many categories as are appropriate) Full-nma (3ohcfnlmlpw)

Part-Time (Lesshan3ohrspw)

Permanent employees Temporary employees Male5 Femakr

m m

Ei

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CO-OPERATION IN COMPLETING THIS QUESTlONNAlRE Please return it In the enclosed reply paid envelope.

Appendix 2-OX/RM

Telephone Survey

OXIRM TELEPHONE SURVEY CIRCLE ANSWER CODES, OF FILL IN CODES. INTERVIEWER NUMBER

. . . .. .. .. . . . . . .. . .. . .

QUESTIONNAIRE NUMBER DAY OF MONTH

WRITE IN ANY NON-CODABLE ANSWER

. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .

.. . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .

RECORD NON CONTACTS BEFORE INTERVIEW OBTAINED

012

3 45678910

INTRODUCE SELF AND OBTAIN INTERVIEW . . . would you answer a few questions for an independent study of the places people go shopping. It will only take 5 minutes . . . . .. .. . RECORD REFUSALS IF CALL BACK IS REQUESTED: DETAILS IF DOUBT Are you 18 or over? 1.

2.

3 45

6 78910

. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . .. . . .. . .

ACCEPT ANY ADULT RESPONDENT

Thinking of the last time you went shopping for non-food items, which shopping centre did you go to?

.......

When was that shopping trip? today yesterday 2 - 6 days ago 1 week ago

3.

012

0 - 14 days ago 15 days _ - ^ 1 month ago over I - 3 months ago over 3 months ago don't know

1

^

3” 4

What means of transport did you use on that shopping trip?

IF TRAIN: was that the metro or ordinary train? IF BUS: was that a service bus or special coach trip? IF TWO MENTIONED: which was for the longest part of the journey? RECORD SECOND MEANS

157

walk car bus coach metro train cycle taxi other

5 6 7 8 9

158 4.

5.

Progress in Planning Why did you go to (the shopping centre you mentioned) rather than some other place?

How much did you spend altogether on that shopping trip on all kinds of goods, to the nearest pound?

....... .......

and how much of that was on food? 6.

You have told me about your last non-food shopping trip, now can you tell me whereabouts you went shopping (not for food, but other things) the time before that?

....... 7.

and when did you go there? today yesterday 2 - 6 days ago 1 week ago

8.

1 2 3 4

0 - 14 days ago 15 days - 1 month ago over 1 - 3 months ago over 3 months ago don't know

5 6 7 a 9

How many people are there in your household: could you tell me the number of adults including yourself and the numbr of children (under 18) separately? adult . . . . . . . if 1 go to 16 children

. . .. .. .

9.

Thinking of the other adults in your household, can you tell me the last time each of them went shopping for non-food items?

10.

Taking the first (2nd, 3rd UNTIL NO MORE ADULTS) person:

11.

Who would that be? 111111 222222 333333 444444 555555

husband wife child parent other 12.

When did he/she last go shopping for non-foods was it the last time went yourself (that you have just told me about?) 111111GOTO15 yes no

222222

The lrnpact of the Metro Centfe 13.

How

long

ago was it?

111111 222222 333333 444444 555555 666666 771717 888888 999999

today yesterday 2 - 6 days ago 1 week ago 8 - 14 days ago 15 days - 1 month ago over 1 - 3 months ago over 3 months ago don't know 14.

Which shopping centre did he/she go to? IS THERE ANOTHER ADULT?

15.

16.

17.

CODE ..............

YES: GO TO 10 NO: GO TO 15

Are you the person who does most of the shopping for your household? yes

INTERVIEWER RECORD SEX ask if in doubt

OF

iI0

1 2

male female

1 2

RESPONDENT:

Have you ever been shopping at the Metro Centre

yes

no 18.

159

1 2GOTO19

How long ago was that? today yesterday 2 - 6 days ago 1 week ago

3 4

8- 14 days ago 15 days - 1 month ago over 1 - 3 months ago over 3 months ago don't know

5 7" 8 9

160

19.

Progress

in Planning

I am going to read some descriptions of the Metro Centre could you tell me which you agree with? (it doesn't matter if you haven't been there, we want to know how people think of it). (CODE: 1

first,

2

second,

3

don't know or neither)

it is convenient to get to, or inconvenient to get tl3 it has poor bus services, or good bus services it has the sort of shops I want, or it does not have the sort of shops I want it has a good selection of shops, or it has a poor selection of shops its a pleasant place, or its not a pleasant place to be its a good place to go with children, or its not a good place to go with children it has poor car parking, or it has good car parking its good for a day out, or its not a place for a day out its different from other shopping centres, or its similar to other shopping centres prices are high there, or prices are not high there there are good places to eat there, or it does not have good places to eat 20.

Could you tell me your postcode please? IF REFUSAL, just the we only need to know come from. IF STILL AND REFERENCE, CHECK

22.

123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123

Do you, or the other people in your household, own or have the regular private use of a car? 1 yes no

21.

123 123

2

. . .. . .. .. . . .

first half will do, the general areas people REFUSE, NOTE PHONE NUMBER WITH SUPERVISOR

Could you tell me the occupation of the head of .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . the household please?

Thank you very much

Appendix 3-In-Centre

Survey

OXFORD INSTITUTE OF RETAIL MAWAGEMENT Retail Change of Tyneside: In-Centre Questionnaire Interviewer No: ........... Questionnaire No: ......... Location No: .............. Time: .....................

1.

Good-morning/afternoon. I would like to ask you a few questions about shopping in the Metro Centre.

(ii.

Are you aged 16 over?

If under tally and close interview)

Tally: Count until successful interview obtained

. . . . . . . . refusals . . .. .. . . wrong age 1.

Record

no: in group

2.

Were you shopping for anything in particular? . . . anything else?

male female children

food, household necessities cosmetics, pharmaceuticals clothing, footwear electrical appliances furniture, furnishing hardware, inc. D.I.Y. conf. tobacco, newspapers alcohol snack or meal visit bank/office other - write in nothing special/browsing 3.

12 12 12

3 3 3

4 4 4

5+ 5+ 5+

._.................

f i

2 I 8 9

10

11 12

Which shopping centre would you have gone to for this before the Metro Centre opened?

.................................................................. 4.

Row long have you been in the Centre? (hours) . . . .. . .. .. . . .. . . .. . .

161

162 5.

Progress in Planning When was the last time you came shopping here? yesterday 2 - 6 days ago 7 days ago 8 days/less than month 1 month ago over 1 - 3 months ago over 3 months ago never before don't know

6.

When was the last time you went shopping in Newcast le city centre? yesterday 2 - 6 days ago 7 days ago 8 days/less than month 1 month ago over 1 - 3 months ago over 3 months ago never before don't know

I.

Would you tell me what shopping centre you must usually go to for: clothing, footwear . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . . .. main food shopping . . .. .. . . . . . .._................................. 'something special' (a present or special clothes, say):

.......................... ....................................... 8.

Is there anything you part icularly like about Metro Centre? . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.................................................................. 9.

Is there anything you particularly dislike about Metro Centre?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._.................................. .................................................................. 10.

Have you brought anything here? yes no

1

2

(if yes): 11.

How much did you spend to nearest f

..........

..s.....

The Impact of the Metro Centre 12.

DO you, or does any member of your household, have the use of a car/van? 1 yes 2 no

13.

What means of transport did you use to get here? 1

walk bus metro car/van driver car passenger

: 4 5

train m/pedal taxi cycle

6 8 7

other

9

163

(if not car) Could you have come by car today if you'd wanted?

ir.

1 2

yes no 15.

When you come to the shopping centre today, did you co#nefrom home or elsewhere? home work other shops other

16.

2' 3 4

Could you tell me the postcode of your home address? (Postcodes, or street name and area) ......*.........,.............................,....................

11.

Could you tell me the occupation of the head of your household? ............................................................*......

18.

Do you have any difficulties in doing your own shopping? (For h@alth reasons, say) no yes: health problems yes: other reasons Interviewer estimate age of respondent

: 3 16 25 45 60

- 24 - 44 - 59 +

TRANK YOU VBRY MUCH FOR YOUR COOPERATION

t :

Bib fiograph y BDP PLANNING and OXIRM (1992) The Effects of Major Out-of-Town Retail Development: A Literature Review for the Department of the Environment, HMSO, London. BENNISON, D. J. and DAVIES, R. L. (1980) The impact of town centre shopping schemes in Britain, Progress in Planning, 14(l). BENNISON, D. J. (1982) The Initial Impact of Metro on Actrvities within Central Newcastle upon Tyne, TRRL Supplementary Report 745. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne. BROWN, S. (1991) Retail Location: the post hierarchical challenge, International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, l(3). CENTRAL STATISTICAL OFFICE (1991) SDM 28, Retail Sales, Business Monitor, HMSO, London. CHEESEWIGHT, P. (1987) Changing the shopping pattern in Gateshead, Financial Times, 24.4.87. DAVIES, R. L. (1986)., Retail planning in disarray, The Planner, 72(7), 20-22. DAVIES, R. L. and HOWARD, E. (1988) Issues in retail planning within the United Kingdom, Built Environment, 14(l). DAVIES, R. L. and Wade, B. (1984) Superstore Impact on Retail Employment, Scottish Development Department, Edinburgh. DAWSON, J. A. and SPARKS, L. (1987) Issues for the planning of retailing in Scotland. Journal of Scottish Planning Law and Practice, 18. DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (1988) Major retail development, Planning Policy Guidance Note, HMSO, London. DUBROW, B. (1987) Investment in town centres, Paper presented at National Chamber of Trade, Out of Town Retail Developments, NCC, Bristol. FEENAN, R. (1989) Letter, Retail and Distrrbution Management, 17(4). GATESHEAD METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL (1988 and 1990) Metro Centre Information Notes, GMBC, Gateshead. GATESHEAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT (1989) Survey of employment at Metro centre, GMBC, Gateshead. GIBBS, A. (1987) Retail innovation and planning, Progress in Planning, 27(l). GUY, C. (1980) Retail Location and Retail Plannina in Britain. Gower, Farnborouah. HALL, P.‘(1988) Planning for retail change: Inter&ional comparisons, Built Enviyonment, 14(l), 5-6. HOWARD, E. B. and DAVIES, R. L. (1986) Contemporary Change m Newcastle City Centre and the Impact of the Metro System, Discussion Paper 77, Centre for Urban and Regional Studies, University of Newcastle upon Tyne. HOWARD, E. B. (1986) Impact assessment of regional out-of-town shopping centres, Town and Country Planning, November. HOWARD, E. B. and DAVIES, R. L. (1987a) Non-Food Shopping Trips in the North-East Region: A Survey by Telephone, Research Paper A16, OXIRM, Templeton College. HOWARD, E. B. and DAVIES, R. L. (1987b) Change in the Retail Environment, Oxford Reports on Retailing, Harlow, Longman. HOWARD, E. B. (1988) Impact Studies: How valuable are they?, Property Journal, 13(4), 11-17. HOWARD, E. B. (1989) Prospects for Out-of-Town Retailing: The Metro Experience, Oxford Reports on detailing, fiarlow, Longman. HOWARD, E. B. (ed.) (1990) Leisure and Retailing, Oxford Reports on Retailing, Harlow, Longman. 164

The Impact of the Metro Centre

165

HOWARD, E. B. (1992). Meadowhall: The Impact of One Year’s Development, Research Paper D9, OXIRM, Templeton College. MACEY, F. (1986) Telephone research: a progress report, ADMAP, June. OXFORD RETAIL GROUP (1989) Planning for Major Retad Development, The Oxford Retail Group, Oxford. . ’ -. _ OXFORD RETAIL GROUP (1990) Retailing Issues for Development Plans, The Oxford Retail Group, Oxford. POPE, M. (1987) Metro Centre : A retailer’s view point, Proceedings of Summer Meering, PTRC, London. REYNOLDS, J. (1989) Analyses of Local Area Characteristics for Business Decisions-Applications in Retailing, Research Paper A19, OXIRM, Templeton College. SCHILLER, R. K. (1986) The coming of the third wave, Estates Gazette, 279(6279). SPARKS, L. (1983) Employment characteristics of superstore retailing, Service Industries Journal, 3(l).

STATHERS,

D. (1991) The impact of Fosse Park on Leicester crty centre, Shopping Centre Spring. TREADGOLD, A. (ed.) (1991) The City View of Retailing, Longman, Harlow. TYM, R. (1986) Greater Manchesrer Shopping Study, R. Tym and Partners, London. TYNE AND WEAR COUNTY COUNCIL (1976) Shopping Patterns in Tyne and Wear, T.W.C.C., Newcastle-on-Tyne. WILLIAMS, J. (1990) Retailer Survey in Shefield, Research Paper D5, OXIRM, Templeton College. Horizons,