HITE YOUNG GREEN PLANNING - Tameside

WHITE YOUNG GREEN PLANNING REGATTA HOUSE CLIPPERS QUAY SALFORD QUAYS

MANCHESTER M50 3XP

TEL 0161 872 3223 FAX 0161 872 3193

Tameside Retail Study

Final Report

Prepared by

WHITE YOUNG GREEN PLANNING

On behalf of

December 2005

CONTENTS Page No 1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 BACKGROUND TO THE RETAIL INDUSTRY 2 3 ORIGINAL MARKET RESEARCH 13 4 POPULATION AND EXPENDITURE 33 5 PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK 49 6 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND STRATEGIES IN ADJOINING 56 LOCAL AUTHORITY AREAS 7 ASSESSMENT OF VITALITY AND VIABILITY OF DEFINED CENTRES 63 8 RETAIL CAPACITY ASSESSMENT 107 9 QUALITATIVE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL FLOORSPACE 119 10 POTENTIAL FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND THE 123 EMERGING STRATEGY

1 INTRODUCTION Objectives of the Study 1.01 White Young Green was commissioned by Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council in 2005 to

undertake an update of the Tameside Retail Study undertaken by CB Hillier Parker in January

2001.

1.02 The key focus of the study was to provide an up-to-date assessment of the future capacity for retail

development in the Borough in accordance with national planning policy. Furthermore, the study

sought to examine identify any significant changes between 2001 and 2005 and therefore help to

inform the preparation of future retail planning policy and strategies.

1.03 In undertaking this research, consideration has been made with regard to the relevant advice

contained in the recently published Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS6) ‘Planning for Town

Centres’. Furthermore, it is notable that White Young Green has also undertaken specific studies

with regard to the redevelopment of Hattersley District Centre and the future development of

Ashton Market. Although these studies are considered ‘stand alone’, the key findings have been

utilised in this study.

1.04 In order to update the 2001 Study, new empirical research has been undertaken as part of the new

study including a telephone survey of 1,000 households in Tameside and the surrounding area in

order to ascertain general patterns of shopping activity within the sub-region. The same catchment

was adopted as in the 2001 Study in order to facilitate comparable analysis.

1

2 BACKGROUND TO THE RETAIL INDUSTRY NATIONAL CONSUMER EXPENDITURE TRENDS Introduction 2.01 The latest figures recorded by MapInfo for retail consumer expenditure in 2004 reached an all time

high of £4,486 per head per annum (at 2002 Prices). This represents over 97% growth in

expenditure since 1984 when average retail expenditure per head stood at £2,275. This represents

a compounded average annual growth rate for all retail goods of +3.4% per annum.

2.02 However, when the headline figure is examined in more detail, it is evident that much of this

impressive growth recorded in the past twenty years has been achieved in the ‘non food’ goods

sector.

Convenience Goods 2.03 In 1984, the average spend on convenience (food groceries) goods was £1,350 per head per

annum. By 2004 the average spend per head was £1,536, which represents a growth of just 14%

or 0.6% per annum compound (at 2002 prices). As can be seen from Figure 2.1 below, the pattern

of growth over the twenty year period has been inconsistent with expenditure declining during six of

the twenty years. It is evident that expenditure per capita on convenience goods has fluctuated

within a narrow band with no real trend growth over the past 40 years as a whole. Whilst

expenditure steadily declined in the 1970s, the trend since then has been slightly upwards.

Figure 2.1: UK Average Consumer Retail Expenditure by Goods Type (2002 Prices)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

Year

£ pe

r cap

ita Convenience Goods

Comparison Goods

Total

2

2.04 There is a widely held theory that we will only purchase the convenience goods that we need to

ensure that we eat regularly and therefore the likelihood of witnessing major growth after inflation is

limited. In addition, as society in general becomes more affluent and our standard of living

increases, we will have a greater tendency to eat out more frequently thereby reducing the need to

spend as much on food goods. This is demonstrated by the forecast growth in ‘eating out’.

2.05 More recent evidence on growth has shown that the opposite is actually occurring with convenience

goods expenditure per capita increasing at 0.8% per annum between 1998 and 2004. This is

significantly greater than the rate of growth recorded over the previous ten years (1988-1998) of

0.2% per annum. Much of this growth could be attributed to the increase in popularity of more

expensive organic produce and luxury items. The major supermarket operators have responded to

consumers increasing demands for higher quality produce with the release of brands such as

Sainsbury’s ‘Taste the Difference’, Tesco’s ‘Finest’ and Asda’s ‘Extra Special’. However, it must be

noted that the increases that have been recorded in the short term are likely to reflect the strong

economic growth over the past five years and general increases in household disposable income.

2.06 If the economy were to enter into a recessionary period in the future this growth may not be as

significant as spending on luxury items would be the first to be hit. In fact between 1980 and 1984

expenditure on convenience products fell by 5%. During 1991 and 1995 convenience expenditure

also fell, by 1%. This would appear to suggest that recessionary periods may have an influence on

the overall level of growth recorded in convenience goods shopping.

2.07 MapInfo recognise that convenience goods retail expenditure has been erratic over the last 40

years, with low trend growth over the period as a whole. In this respect, MapInfo consider that the

statistical relationship is unreliable and there would appear to have been some trend breaks. They

state that at present the most statistically robust estimate for growth in this sector is for the period

1993 to 2004 when the annual growth rate averaged +0.8%. MapInfo suggest that such growth

appears to be sustainable and the spending on convenience goods as a share of all spending

appears low, compared with trend, over this period. But this may be more as a result of the

strength of comparison goods. Notwithstanding this, it is evident that a number of major

supermarket operators develop a range of different formats, notably Tesco, who have established a

range of stores in recent years (e.g. Tesco Extra, Express and Metro).

Comparison Growth 2.08 In 1984 the average spend on comparison (non-food) goods was just £947 per capita per annum.

This represented just 41% of total retail expenditure and was well behind average expenditure on

convenience goods (£1,350). However, there has been significant growth in comparison goods

3

expenditure since 1984, which now means that comparison goods expenditure represents

approximately 66% of retail expenditure.

2.09 In 1994, more was spent on comparison goods than convenience goods for the first time since

records began in 1964. By 2004, the average expenditure on comparison goods had reached

£2,950 per capita. This represented a growth of over 200% in just 20 years. This equates to an

annual average growth of 5.8% compared to the 0.6% growth recorded in convenience goods.

2.10 Similar to convenience goods, the growth recorded over the twenty year period reflects the general

economic performance and growth in disposable income. At the height of the economic boom in

the mid to late 1980s growth was recorded as high as 8.5% in 1986. By 1991 no growth was

recorded reflecting the onset of the recession and increasing interest rates. By the mid to late

1990s growth had recovered significantly with the latest high recorded in 2000 with 8.3% growth.

Furthermore, growth of 9.6% was recorded between 2001 and 2002.

2.11 However, despite the peaks and troughs recorded, the most important fact in the last 20 years is

that growth on non-food expenditure has trebled. In fact, spending in 2004 on comparison goods

per capita at constant prices was over four times larger than spending on the same basis in 1964.

2.12 With this in mind, it is not surprising to discover that major retail development has been driven by

non-food retail development including regional shopping centres such as The Trafford Centre. In

fact, all of the major supermarket operators now recognise that the future growth in retail

expenditure will be primarily focused on non-food goods. Therefore, we have witnessed the shift in

emphasis within larger supermarkets to provide space for the sale of comparison goods. This has

been most successfully achieved within Asda; where the growth of the Asda George brand has now

resulted in the development of stand alone Asda George stores selling only non-food goods.

Tesco have followed suit with Tesco Homeplus stores being opened (including a new store in

Denton).

2.13 MapInfo recognise that the strong growth recorded in the short term appears to be unsustainable,

similar to the boom in the 1980s, which was followed by a period of slower growth. Therefore,

MapInfo consider that projected sales per capita based on medium and long-term trends look more

believable. In this respect, MapInfo identify growth in comparison goods expenditure of between

4.8% and 5.5% per annum in the future.

Implications of Future Growth 2.14 In order to examine the potential implications of future expenditure growth, MapInfo have provided

forecasts for UK consumer spending, which are based partly upon past trends but also on expected

4

changes on other economic variables. The forecasts recognise that the short-term growth trends

for all goods, especially comparison goods are unsustainable and that some correction is

necessary. However, MapInfo expect price falls to continue for products such as electronics and

clothing, which will continue to boost sales.

2.15 On this basis, MapInfo have provided forecasts, which are set out below.

Figure 2.2: Average Annual Forecast Growth Rates

Convenience Comparison Total 2004-2006 +0.8% +3.8% +2.8% 2004-2011 +0.8% +4.1% +3.1% 2004-2016 +0.9% +4.3% +3.3%

Source: MapInfo Brief 05/2 (September 2005)

2.16 By applying these forecast growth rates through to 2016, it is evident that growth will still be

significantly focused on comparison goods. Figure 2.3 below illustrates that by 2016, total

expenditure will have increased by 49% to £6,468 per capita per annum. The anticipated growth

recorded for convenience goods will be 11% compared to the 70% growth recorded in comparison

goods expenditure.

Figure 2.3: Actual and Forecast Expenditure per Capita per Annum

2003 2011 2016 Convenience £1,584 £1,688 £1,766 Comparison £2,762 £3,809 £4,702 Total £4,346 £5,497 £6,468

The Retail Market

2.17 The retail market has been the subject of some profound changes over the recent past. The mix of

social and economic conditions which prevailed in the 1980s triggered the arrival of a much more

discerning consumer, driven not just by value for money but also increased selectivity and a

demand for higher quality shopping environments. These conditions continue to impinge on the

nature of today’s retail market where consumer loyalty has become a vital ingredient in the success

of retailers. Increasingly, successful shopping facilities have to fulfil the role of a destination

location. In large parts this means providing a wide range of shopping and leisure facilities able to

attract and retain the interest of the entire family. In return such schemes benefit not only from

much wider catchment areas, but also from substantially longer shopping trips.

2.18 Over the last twenty year period, the retail property landscape across the UK has changed

dramatically. Town Centres, which began the 1980s firmly in pole position with just over 28 million

sq m, represented three-quarters of all retail space in the country at the time. However, since then

this position has been severely challenged. Indeed, by the end of 1988, the amount of traditional

5

‘high street’ space is estimated to have dropped by 1.2 million sq m to just over 27 million sq m or

45% of all retail space in the UK. This was mainly a consequence of the demise of retailing in

tertiary locations within centres.

2.19 The decline of the traditional high street, however, should not be assumed to mean the decline of

overall town centre trading. New shopping schemes in centres or on the edge of town centres have

brought not only more efficient space into the retail hierarchy, but introduced a quality of managed

shopping environments, which could not be created in the context of the high street. Managed

shopping malls in town centres totalled 6.5 million sq m at the beginning of the 1980s. In 2000 they

comprised over 10.5 million sq m, representing a 60% rise in floorspace. As a result 18% of all

retail space in the country is now created in shopping malls located within town centres.

2.20 As a whole, the amount of retail space in town centres including both traditional and new space has

not declined. On the contrary it has risen from around 35 million sq m in 1980 to nearly 39 million

sq m by 2000, a rise of 11% over that period. Moreover, as much of this town centre development

has comprised new shopping schemes with more efficient space, the decline of the town centre

needs some careful interpretation. Town centres have now received a further boost in response to

the tightening of planning controls on out-of-centre developments in the last few years, culminating

with the publication of Planning Policy Statement 6 ‘Planning for Town Centres’, and new

developments are under construction or planned in many major centres throughout the UK.

2.21 In 1980 the out-of-town revolution was yet to emerge as the potent force that it now is. At the time

a small number of retail parks had become established and the major food retailers were beginning

to recognise the advantages of superstore trading. Consumers also began to welcome the

convenience of these new forms of shopping. However, only 10,000 sq m of out-of-centre retail

floorspace existed at the beginning of the 1980s.

2.22 The rise of out-of-town retailing was unparalleled, and by 2000 the amount of retail park space had

grown to 4.6 million sq m, representing 7.5% of all the UK retail stock. Superstores, mainly

comprising stand alone food superstores accounted for a further 8.9 million sq m or 15% of the total

retail stock.

2.23 Other shopping malls in off centre locations provided about 0.8 million sq m in 2000 compared with

only 0.1 million sq m in 1980. Out of town regional malls such as the MetroCentre and The Trafford

Centre comprised less than 80,000 sq m at the start of the period but increased to nearly one

million sq m by the end of 1998. Furthermore, with the high rate of residential construction during

the 1980s, district and local centres expanded to an estimated 6.6 million sq m in 1998.

6

2.24 There is increasing evidence that polarisation of centres is occurring across the UK, whereby large,

more dominant retail markets (both in terms of town centres and out-of-town malls) have continued

to outperform the average retail growth terms. The reduction in the amount of new floorspace

coming through the out-of-town development pipeline is likely to further inflate rents in the best

retail parks and prime locations, adding further to the divide between primary and secondary retail

property. Similarly, the more attractive and accessible town centres are likely to perform better

than the less attractive centres. However, town centre expansion will allow new opportunities to

develop within the heart of towns which could dilute sales and rental performance in some

locations, whilst encouraging it in others. The effect of such development on existing businesses

needs to be carefully monitored.

2.25 In the next twenty years the retail landscape will continue to evolve. Taking the anticipated rise in

the volume of retail sales, the expected trend in sales productivity, as well as the retail schemes

already in the development pipeline, it is reasonable to expect further increases in total retail

floorspace in major retail locations in the future.

2.26 Certainly, future policy needs to be based on creating a balance between accommodating the

dynamism of the market place, its increasing competitiveness and the widening gulf between

differing shopping locations.

Trends in Non-food Retailing 2.27 Overall, expenditure on non-food goods is increasing year on year, providing a stable platform for

the domestic industry to grow. Within this context, however, there are significant variations.

Perhaps most significantly for town centres, spending on clothing and footwear (£34.2bn in 2000)

has declined from 6.3% of the market in 1996 to 5.8% in 1999. Within this sector, ladieswear has

seen the greatest sales reductions (16% since 1995). This is attributable largely to price

reductions. In contrast, continuing innovation has created significant growth in the electrical goods

market (at about 8% per annum).

2.28 International market conditions and price deflation in some key sectors mean that many high street

names are becoming increasingly vulnerable to takeovers. The merger and consolidation of

companies is likely to lead to fewer national multiple outlets competing in the market place during

the course of any Local Development Framework period. This will have two principal effects for

town centres:

• It will drive down demand in the longer term. As demand is the engine for reinvestment, this

will reduce the attractiveness of investing in speculative redevelopment opportunities; and

7

• It will make those retailers still in the market increasingly location-sensitive. This will increase

demand from multiples for prime and ‘super-prime’ pitches, but reduce the attractiveness of

other areas. The net result may be an increased occupation of core town centre shopping units

by non-retail uses.

2.29 Key retailers, such as Marks & Spencer and the Arcadia Group, are reducing the distribution of

their operations and others, such as C&A and Littlewoods, have left the domestic market place

altogether. This is a result not only of price deflation, but also of changing shopping patterns.

Many consumers are now prepared to shop in an increasing number of outlets for specialist or

‘niche’ goods, rather than rely on household names, as was previously the case. The decision by

Asda and Tesco to stock clothing has also had a major impact on this core area of ‘high street’

trade. As demand from these major anchor retailers decreases for representation in smaller town

centres, lower order retailers and food/drink uses will occupy prime frontages.

2.30 Increased sensitivity over future viability will mean a cautious approach to new investment for many

key national retailers. Marginal locations within centres and prime locations within smaller town

centres will be increasingly rejected. Many investment decisions will be influenced by the scale of

commitment from other retailers; developers will increasingly need to promote large town centre

redevelopment schemes if they are to attract high quality retailers.

2.31 One area where significant growth is anticipated is the discount retail sector, which at the moment

accounts for only 1% of sales in the UK. Growth in sales has been strong in recent years and this

is set to continue, possibly with the aid of foreign (and particularly US) investment.

2.32 In addition, the DIY market has grown in strength considerably, in line with the expanding DIY and

home improvement culture. The market grew by 51.2% between 1996 and 2000, and in 2000

alone consumer spending in the market sector increased by 2.2%. However, the Keynote Market

Review (August 2001) anticipates that growth in the DIY market is slowing and more gradual

growth was predicted for the period 2001 and 2005. Indeed, B&Q, the leading DIY operator in the

UK, have decided to consolidate the number of stores. Despite this, spending is forecast to reach

£11bn (at current prices) by 2005.

Retail Warehousing

2.33 In terms of retail warehousing, the market is becoming increasingly sensitive to quality and location.

Many retail warehouse operators will now only accept units on major mixed-use retail parks,

leading to a decline in the popularity of free-standing units and older retail parks that are located

away from the regional road network. The market is now dominated by the likes of Homebase,

Ikea and B&Q seeking units of 10,000 – 12,000 sq m; and Matalan, Comet, Currys, Decathlon and

8

Focus seeking flagship stores of between 2,500 sq m and 5,000 sq m. Demand is weakest in the

size range where supply is greatest (of about 1,000 sq m).

2.34 Many retail parks are unable to accommodate this new demand owing to the configuration of the

existing units. In the context of low demand for the smaller ‘bulky goods’ units, many investors are

seeking to create greater flexibility by incorporating mezzanine levels into existing outlets, and to

remove restrictive conditions in order to increase the number of ‘non-bulky’ goods operators able to

utilise the space. As more fashion wear retailers are experimenting with lower cost warehouse

formats, many developers are seeking to provide fashion-led out-of-centre retail parks (‘shopping

parks’).

2.35 The demand for new Factory Outlet Centres has subsided considerably, suppressed by increasing

planning restrictions. However, these and other successful regional shopping centres, such as

Merry Hill, are under pressure to extend and to increase their overall attractiveness by introducing

complementary non-retail uses.

The Growth in E-Commerce

2.36 Many consumers who previously shopped in town centres and retail parks are now using the

internet for some of their purchases. This trend is set to continue, although the exact impact that e-

commerce will have on the high street has yet to be established accurately. Verdict Research in

1999 indicated that on-line consumer expenditure will increase by 1,000% between 1999 and 2004,

at which time it will account for over 3% of all retail sales. In 2001, total on-line sales in the UK

were estimated at £4bn (Key Note – ‘E-Commerce’, September 2002), which is anticipated to rise

to up to £7.5bn by 2005, an increase of 75%.

2.37 The most popular on-line purchases are currently books, CDs, travel, food and groceries and

computer products (Key Note, 2002). Technology is currently being developed by companies such

as Amazon that will allow on-line browsing of books, which is likely to result in this sector making

further in-roads into the on-line market. The clothing market has been slow to see the benefits of e-

commerce with most people still preferring to try on clothes prior to purchasing. Security concerns

are also still a major issue affecting all sectors of the market, with recent surveys suggesting that

24% of people do not feel comfortable giving credit card details over the internet (Key Note, 2002).

2.38 The food and grocery market is also growing fast and some estimates suggest that around 25% of

the grocery market will be sold on-line by 2008 (The Institute of Grocery Distribution, 2001).

9

2.39 As access to the internet increases through digital televisions and mobile telephones, proportionally

less money will be spent in retail units than before, as more is directed to e-commerce. The effect

of this will be to reduce spending growth and expenditure capacity. In turn this will:

• Affect the investment decisions of existing retailers, and over time, further reduce the demand

for retail premises; and

• Lead to the creation of new ‘sui generis’ retail collection centres on the edges of major

conurbations. Experiments with 10,000 – 20,000 sq m units are already underway (e.g. by

Amazon).

2.40 Furthermore, a recently published retail report by market analysts Verdict (2005) found the internet

was the fastest growing retail sector last year, attracting one in four shoppers. Indeed, Verdict

identify that with growth rates at 27.4%, the figures for buying on-line are six times better than for

the traditional retail market over the last year. The report highlights that part of this success is

because of the trebling of shoppers using broadband connections. Furthermore, the analysts

suggested that people are not only shopping in greater numbers but are also spending more as

companies improved the quality of their online offerings.

2.41 More people are also shopping through their televisions and channels like QVC, which grew by

nearly 15% last year. Yet in the high street, the amount of goods ordered in-store for home delivery

dropped by 16%, in spite of the overall increase in the home delivery market. The Verdict report

calculated that £1 in every £7 spent in the British retail sector in 2004 was on goods delivered to

the doorstep.

National Trends in Retail Trading Formats and Investments 2.42 Planning policy has reduced out-of-centre development in recent years although recent trends

indicate an upsurge in retail warehouse development. Indeed, the amount of retail warehouse park

floorspace in the development pipeline at the end of 2003 reached 2.7 million sq m. This was an

increase of some 930,000 sq m on the end of 2000, although almost 20% below the peak level in

the 1990s. However, it is significant to note that national planning policy (PPS6) intends to

challenge the format driven approach to retailing.

2.43 However, the demand for retail warehouses remains strong although it is considered that obstacles

in obtaining planning permission restricted development in the late 1990s. Despite this, current

completion levels are anticipated to remain at an annual level of between 300,000 sq m (gross) to

350,000 sq m (gross). Figure 2.4 illustrates the recent uplift in the amount of retail warehouse park

floorspace that has been coming forward.

10

Figure 2.4: Retail Warehouse Parks in the Pipeline 1992-2003

Figure 1: Retail Warehouse Parks in the Pipeline, 1992-2003

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

)

3.5

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Year

Floo

rspa

ce (m

illio

n sq

m

ProposedWith Planning ConsentUnder Construction

2.44 The total amount of floorspace in the shopping centre development pipeline reached just over 5.4

million sq m (gross) by the end of 2003. Town centre located schemes, at 4.1 million sq m (gross),

accounted for 75% of this total. This marks a significant increase on the 1993 proportion, when

town centre located schemes accounted for just 64% of the development pipeline (Figure 2.5).

Figure 2.5: Change in Location of New Shopping Centre Floorspace 1992-2003

Figure 2: Change in Location of New Shopping Centre Floorspace, 1992-2003

1814.1

8.2 9.6 1014.2

0

10

50

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Year

Pal

Snt

P

67.964.2

67.7 70.4 73.382

85.991.8 90.4 90

85.8

75.4

60

70

80

90

100

hopp

ing

Cent

re

ipel

ine

(%)

32.135.8

32.3 29.6 26.7 24.620

30

40

ropo

rtion

of T

otDe

velo

pme

Town CentreOut of Town Centre

2.45 However, it is significant to note that the proportion of out of town floorspace at the end of 2003

(25%) is significantly higher than the low of only 8% at the end of 1999. Clearly, Figure 2.5

11

highlights that a greater proportion of shopping centre development is proposed/constructed at out

of town locations, which is similar to the position prior to 1996, reflecting that advice in PPG6

g a limited impact on reducing out-of-centre retail development.

nd

(Revised) is now havin

2.46 Therefore, both Figure 2.4 and Figure 2.5 indicate uplift in out of town development, after a period

where out of town development saw a downturn in development, most notably between 1997 a

1999.

12

3 ORIGINAL MARKET RESEARCH

Introduction .01 A key element of the study was to obtain a detailed understanding of shopping patterns within the

d

rvey

.02 households was undertaken within the defined study area, which

was based on the same study area to that adopted in the 2001 Tameside Retail Study (survey

e

Figure 3.1: Household Survey by Zone

3

Borough and the potential catchment of existing centres within it and to compare this with the

results of the 2001 Study. This comparison will enable analysis of shopping patterns and will

establish whether there have been significant changes since 2001. Therefore, as highlighted within

the overall methodology adopted in Section 1 of this study, the original market research involve

the completion of a Household Telephone Survey (‘household survey’).

Household Telephone Su

3 In August 2005 a survey of 1,000

undertaken in October 2000) in order to compare and contrast the results collected. Therefore, th

study area was broken down into ten zones. The extent of the household survey catchment is

shown at Figure 3.1.

13

3.03

ne

3.04 order to identify more specific shopping patterns within the study area, this study

has also identified a core catchment for Tameside based on the findings of the household survey,

3.05 defined study area, the proportion of main food shopping

trips to facilities in Tameside has increased from 48% in 2001 to 52% in 2005 (excluding ‘varies/no

In order to provide a detailed assessment of the shopping patterns within the study area, this report

has reviewed the results gathered in October 2000 to that identified in August 2005 to exami

(where possible) potential changes in market shares and shifts in shopping patterns that have

occurred within each of the identified survey zones together with the wider study area as a whole.

Furthermore, in

which comprises zones 7 to 10 inclusive and an outer catchment comprising zones 1 to 6 inclusive.

In this respect, the core catchment focuses on the zones, which broadly replicate the Borough

Boundary, whereas zones 1 to 6 extend into the adjoining authorities of Oldham, Manchester,

Stockport and High Peak. However, it is significant to note that Mossley falls just within Zone 4 of

the identified study area.

Main Food Shopping Patterns

Since 2000, it is evident that within the

pattern’). The relative market shares within the ten zones within the study area are set out in Table

3.1.

Table 3.1: Main Food Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005 Zone 2001 2005 1 3% 6% 2 20% 21% 3 3% 18% 4 40% 54% 5 14% 15% 6 42% 51% 7 89% 88% 8 96% 95% 9 98% 97% 10 82% 82% Total 48% 52%

3.06

d the

Whilst two foodstores have closed between the completion of the 2000 survey and 2005 survey

Source: NEMS Household Survey (August 2005) & Tameside Retail Study (2001) *Includes Ashton, Denton, Hyde, Stalybridge and Mossley

It is evident that since the 2000 household survey was undertaken, four major new foodstores have

opened in the Borough, the Asda in Hyde, the Morrison’s in Denton, Sainsbury’s in Ashton an

Tesco in Stalybridge. Collectively, these four stores are identified to attract 18% of all main food

shopping trips undertaken in the study area. However, as previously highlighted the market share

achieved by facilities in Tameside within the identified study area has only increased marginally

since 2000, from 48% to 52%.

3.07

(Tesco store at Hyde together with the Shopping Giant in Denton) it is evident that these stores

14

attracted a market share of only 2%. Therefore, analysis of the household survey indicates th

new stores within the Borough appear to be primarily drawing trade from other stores in the

Borough most notably the Asda store in Ashton-under-Lyne, which has seen a fall in market share

from 15% of main food shopping tri

at the

ps in 2000 to 9% in 2005. Furthermore, the Morrison’s store in

Dukinfield and the Sainsbury’s store in Denton have also seen a fall in market share since 2000,

3.08 h the exception of zones 7, 8 and 9 have seen an increase

in market share achieved by facilities in Tameside. Indeed, within Zone 3 (which is the area

d by 500%, from only 3% in 2001 to

18% in 2005. This is due to the develop Hyde tudy

w leted. Indeed, the hous survey iden at this store es a marke of

12% from this zone. Similarly, within Zone 4, the market share has inc by 35% sin 0,

from 40% to 54%. Based on the findings of the hous survey it is evident that the de ent

of a new store at Stalybridge (whic 001) has increased the market share ach by

facilities in Tameside from this zon

.09 In comparison, in terms of the core catchment area of facilities in Tameside, which are identified to

of all

n

re of 52% of shopping trips from this zone) the market share

achieved by facilities in Tameside within this zone has fallen from 89% in 2000 to 88% in 2005. In

food

3.10 urvey results also indicate that a similar pattern has also occurred in Zone 8 where

existing facilities in Tameside achieve a market share of 95% in this zone compared to 96% in

both by 33%.

As Table 3.1 illustrates, all the zones wit

between Hyde and Stockport) the market share has increase

ment of an Asda store in since the 2001 Retail S

as comp eh ld o tifie ths ac ievh t share

reased ce 200

ehold velopm

h opened in 2 ieved

e.

3

be zones 7 to 10 inclusive it is evident that there are minimal main food shopping trips being made

to facilities outside the Borough. Indeed, within Zone 9, facilities in Tameside attract 97%

main food shopping trips undertaken in this zone. However, it is notable that the overall market

share achieved in these zones has not increased since 2000 despite the significant improvement i

non-food retail provision within the Borough. This is reflective of the high level of retention

identified in 2000 of existing facilities in Tameside. In this respect, it is evident that the new

foodstores appear to be competing with each other rather than drawing trade from outside the

Borough. Indeed, within Zone 7, despite the provision of new stores at Hyde and Denton (which

are identified to achieve a market sha

this respect, within this zone the market share achieved by the Asda store in Ashton-under-Lyne

has fallen from 16% to 7% and the Morrison’s store in Dukinfield no longer attracts any main

shopping trips from this zone having achieved a market share of 6% in 2000. This is

understandable given that a Morrison’s store has since been developed in closer proximity to

residents in this zone. Furthermore, the fall in popularity of stores together with the closure of the

Co-op in Denton as a main food shopping destination since 2000 (falling from 10% in 2000 to no

shopping trips in 2005), has also seen trade drawn to the new provision within Denton and nearby

Hyde.

The household s

15

2000. In this respect, some major stores in Tameside have seen a fall in market share, most

notably the Morrison’s in Dukinfield and the Asda in Ashton-under-Lyne. It is evident that the

recently opened Asda store at Sportscity (opened after the 2000 survey) has drawn trade from

Asda store in Ashton-under-Lyne.

Table 3.2 identifies the change in ma

the

3.11 rket share achieved by facilities in Tameside from both the

core catchment and outer catchment and compares it with the adjoining authorities of Oldham,

Manchester, Stockport and High Peak.

Table 3.2: Main Food Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005 Core Catchment Outer Catchment 2001 2005 2001 2005 Tameside 90.1% 88.2% 20.2% 27.1% Oldham 1.9% 0.5% 31.2% 28.5% Manchester 0.2% 3.4% 9.5% 12.6% Stockport 1.7% 0.5% 14.7% 11.4% High Peak 3.4% 3.4% 10.7% 14.7%

Source: NEMS Household Survey (August 2005) & Tameside Retail Study (2001)

.12 Table 3.2 illu ates that within the core catchment, facilities in Tam de have seen a marginal fall

rket s are (les tha tw percentage point ) de retail provis g

loped in the Borough sin e the co pl on f the 2001 Study D ite his re ai ev en

m et a re ins the hig t th ive ut rit , a o h ilit a he r

een a signific t re et ar sin 2 1 e m ly th uc s

store at Sportscity. In comp is facilitie in th ldh m rt have se a ll i

t share s e 2001, by % s tively c rdi y, the household su y

that peo le e trave g s ort r distan s to undertake their m in od ng indi atin

sustainable shopp p ter

o e te at m t, T ble .2 ic hie d f iliti in

side s i re d (by 34%) sinc 0.2 to 7.1 . imi rly, aci ies

n ig en n e si e 2 1 3 a d

espe vely. I compari on, as w th the core ca meside ham and

a of and 22% resp tiv y.

, the household survey suggests that improved convenience goods provision in Tameside

00%

3 str esi

in ma h s n o s spite improved ion bein

deve c m eti o . esp t , it m ns id t

that the ark sh re ma hes of e f a ho ies lth ug fac ies in M nc ste

have s an inc ase in mark sh e ce 00 du pri ari to e s ce s of the

Asda ar on s bo O a and Stockpo en fa n

marke inc 74% and 71 re pec . A co ngl rve

reflects p ar llin h e ce a fo shoppi c g

more ing at ns.

3.13 In terms f th ou r c ch en a 3 ind ates that the market share ac ve by ac es

Tame ha nc ase e 2001, from 2 % 2 % S la f lit in

Manchester a d H h Peak have also se a incr ase in market share nc 00 by 3% n

28% r cti n s i tchment of Ta , facilities in Old

Stockport have seen a fall in main food shopping market sh re 9% ec el On

this basis

has not had an impact on ‘clawing back’ expenditure that is being lost to competing centres outside

the Borough from within the core catchment. However, it is significant to note that the market share

already achieved by facilities in Tameside in 2001 was high and no catchment can ever be 1

self contained.

16

3.14

sco Extra store in Stockport, appears to have

limited impact on the market share achieved by facilities in Tameside. Indeed, the household

rt.

.15 ularity of stores such as the Co-op in Denton as a main food shopping

destination since 2000 (falling from 10% in 2000 to no shopping trips in 2005), has also seen trade

.16 Table 3.3 provides a breakdown of the market share achieved by major stores in the catchment

Table 3.3 by Key Foods Stores in the Catchment – 2000 and 2005

With regard to specific foodstores, it is evident that the impact of improved retail provision within

surrounding centres, most notably the recent Te

survey identifies that this store attracts a market share of less than 1% in the study area, although

12% of shopping trips within Zone 3 is made to this store, which is understandable given that this

zone is located closet to Stockpo

3 Furthermore, the fall in pop

drawn to the new provision within Denton and nearby Hyde.

3

both within Tameside and outside within the adjoining authorities and compares the market share

to that achieved in 2000. In this respect, it is evident that the Tesco store in Glossop has

significantly increased its market share since 2000 (by 80%) with over 75% of main food shopping

trips in Zone 5 being made to this store compared to 56% in 2000.

: Market Share achieved Store Zone (%) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overall ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 ‘00 ‘05 Within T eside am Asda, Ashton 2 15 9 2 2 2 2 0 0 16 14 6 2 8 9 16 7 46 40 31 7 14 Asda, Hyde 21 - 6 - 0 - 1 - 12 - 1 - 6 - 0 - 20 - 0 - 3 - Morrison, Den - 5 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 1 - 32 - 0 - 0 - 5 - 4 ton - 0 Morrison, D 2 1 0 0 10 9 2 2 1 1 6 0 13 0 38 34 10 6 9 6 ukinfield 1 0 Morrison, Hyde 0 1 0 1 1 3 0 1 2 3 0 0 7 2 0 0 1 6 34 26 5 4 Sainsbury’s, Ashton - 2 - 0 - 0 - 1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 18 - 1 - 1 - 2 Sainsbu Denton 1 0 2 3 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 ry’s, 33 25 6 0 1 1 4 6 6 4 Te e 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 - sco, Hyd 3 - 0 - 2 - 8 - 1 - Tesco, Droy 0 0 7 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 21 29 1 1 4 1 1 0 0 4 4 lsden 2 Tesco Stalyb - 0 - 0 - 0 - 16 0 - 0 - 0 - 7 35 - 5 - 6 ridge - - Sub-Total 4 5 13 20 2 18 26 44 12 14 31 40 66 85 69 66 88 70 72 40 45 75 Outside Tam de esi Within Manc ster he Asda, Sportscity - 0 - 27 - 0 - 3 - 0 - 15 - 1 - 4 1 - 0 - 5 -Within Oldham Asda, Oldham 20 22 0 2 0 0 6 4 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 Morrison, Ch erton 10 17 6 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 8 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 3 add 0 Sainsbury’s, m 10 10 1 0 0 0 3 7 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 Oldha 0 Tesco, Oldham 35 29 1 0 0 0 15 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 1 0 0 Within Stoc kport Asda, Stockport 0 0 0 0 15 17 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 S s, Stockport 0 0 1 0 9 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 ainsbury’ 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 T ckport - 1 - 0 - 12 - 1 - 0 - 1 - esco, Sto 3 - 0 - 0 - 3 - 2 Within High Peak Tesco, Glossop 0 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 56 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 12 5 9 Sub-Total 75 79 9 36 30 35 24 26 56 75 13 26 5 4 2 5 0 1 13 15 21 33

S

3.17 d

d by

ource: NEMS Household Survey (August 2005) &Tameside Retail Study (2001)

In terms of travelling to their main food shopping destination, the 2000 household survey identifie

that 69% of respondents travelled to the main food shopping destination by car (either as driver or

passenger). Only 16% of respondents stated that they walked, with 12% using the bus. In

comparison the 2005 Survey identified that 80% of respondents within the study area travelle

17

car (either as passenger or driver) indicating a marginal fall. Similarly, only 11% highlighted that

they chose to walk, with 7% choosing the bus.

.18 Overall, by analysing the wider study area (core catchment and outer catchment), the 2005 Survey

are of 52% for main food shopping

trips, compared to 48% in 2001.

‘ Food Shopping 3.19 W ed if people undertake ‘t ’ shopping b n their main food shops, almos

confirmed that they did visit other convenience facilit undertake this activity.

s, it is evident that the overall market share derived from the study

This is not surprising given the fact the majority of people tend to use the most convenient facilities

3

identifies that existing facilities in Tameside achieve a market sh

Top-up’

hen ask op-up etwee t 69%

ies to

3.20 In terms of ‘top-up’ shopping trip

area achieved by facilities in Tameside has increased from 53% in 2001 to 55% in 2005.

Therefore, understandably, it is evident that facilities in Tameside achieve a higher market share for

main ‘top-up’ food shopping than main food shopping. Indeed, within Zone 4 the market share

achieved by facilities in Tameside has increased from 19% in 2001 to 60% in 2005, representing an

increase of some 216%.

3.21

for ‘top-up’ shopping rather than travel further distances where there may be greater choice or a

preferred brand.

Table 3.4: ‘Top-up’ Food Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005 Zone 2001 2005* 1 6% 8% 2 12% 11% 3 4% 11% 4 19% 60% 5 5% 2% 6 45% 67% 7 80% 79% 8 98% 93% 9 100% 100% 10 90% 85% Total 53% 55%

*Excludes

Source: NEMS Household Survey (August 2005) & Tameside Retail Study (2001) ‘other’ responses

3.22

ch has remained the same). In this

respect, it is evident that despite improved convenience goods provision within the Borough since

Table 3.4 indicates that the market share achieved by facilities in Tameside has increased in four of

the zones. Significantly within the core catchment of Tameside (zones 7 to 10), the market shares

have decreased in all but one of these zones (Zone 9 – whi

the 2001 study was completed, the overall market shares achieved by facilities in the Borough for

‘top-up’ food shopping within the core catchment has reduced (although from a high base).

18

3.23

thorities of Manchester, High

Peak, Oldham and Stockport.

able 3.5: ‘T -up’ Fo Market Share A lysis – 01

Table 3.5 identifies the change in market share achieved by facilities within Tameside from both the

core and outer catchments and compares it with the adjoining au

T op od na 20 and 2005

Core Catch ent m Outer Catc ent hm 2001 2005* 2001 2005* Tameside 92.0% 90.0% 15.1% 27.0% Oldham 1.0% 0.4% 37.2% 27.4% Manchester 1.8% 5.9% 14.3% 11.7% Stockport 3.6% 1.7% 16.1% 15.6% High Peak 1.0% 1.3% 14.8% 16.3%


3.24 side, facilities in the Borough have seen

a marginal fall in market share since 2001. However, as with main food shopping, the market share

meside is significantly higher than that achieved by facilities in the

djoining authorities. However, it is evident that fac hester and High Peak have seen

creases in ‘top-up’ food shopping market shares of 227% and 30 respectively. In contrast

f in O ham a Stockp rt have seen a f in mar t share 60% a d 53% respectively.

3.25 In terms of the outer ts that the market share ieved by facilities in

meside h increa d since 2001, fr 15.1% o 27.0% an inc se of s me 79%. In

ining horities have

with the exception of High Peak, which has seen an increase of some 10%.

As with main food shopping patterns, the household survey identifies that existing facilities in the

With regard to specific foodstores in Tameside, the household survey identifies the most popular

3.27 55% of ‘top-up’ food

shopping trips undertaken in the Study Area, which is marginally higher than that achieved in 2001

3.28

*Excludes ‘other’ responses

Table 3.5 illustrates that within the core catchment of Tame

achieved by facilities in Ta

a ilities in Manc

in %

acilities ld nd o all ke of n

catchment, Table 3.5 highligh ach

Ta as se om t , rea o

comparison e mark share hieve y facil s in th ll the th et s ac d b itie e a adjo aut

decreased since 2001

Borough do not draw significant trade from outside the identified core catchment.

3.26

store to be the Asda store at Hyde, whereas the Asda store in Ashton-under-Lyne was identified as

the most popular store for main food shopping.

Overall, our analysis indicates that facilities in Tameside attract approximately

of 53%. This reflects that less ‘top-up’ convenience goods expenditure is generated in the Study

Area is being lost to centres/facilities outside the Borough.

Whilst it is evident that the market share of facilities within Tameside have increased sine 2001, in

terms of both main and ‘top-up’ food shopping, it is important to assess the difference between in-

19

centre and out-of-centre preferences. In this basis, Table 3.6 provides a breakdown of Tameside’s

market share based on in-centre and edge-of-centre provision.

6: Main Food Shopping

Table 3.Destination Survey Zone (%) 6 7 8 9 10 Total 1 2 3 4 5 Town Centre

Ashton TC 6 3 0 19 2 11 8 73 13 3 13 Hyde TC 1 2 15 2 9 0 23 0 9 52 12

Droylsden 0 7 0 1 0 38 1 1 1 0 5 Stalybridge 0 0 8 40 6 7 TC 0 0 0 16 0

Denton TC 0 5 0 0 1 1 32 0 0 5 4 Other^ 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 1

Sub-Total 7 17 15 43 12 50 64 85 63 66 42 Out-of-Centre 0 4 3 11 3 1 24 10 34 15 100 Sub-Total 10 0 4 3 11 3 1 24 10 34 15 TOTAL 52 7 21 18 54 15 51 88 95 97 81 Notes:

3.29

g

.7 provides a breakdown of customer preferences.

able 3.

^Includes other shops within the Borough including Mossley, Dukinfield, etc

Table 3.6 indicates that of the overall market share achieved by facilities in Tameside in 2005

(52%), the majority (81%) is retained by in-centre developments. With regard to ‘top-up’ shoppin

Table 3

T 7: ‘Top-up’ Food Shopping Destination Survey Zone (%) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Town Centre

A 6 2 0 4 0 3 3 72 3 10 shton TC 5Hyde TC 2 0 7 2 2 3 15 0 1 57 10 1

Droylsden 0 0 0 0 0 60 2 0 0 0 7 Stalybridge TC 0 2 0 11 0 0 0 2 7 8 49

Denton TC 0 2 2 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 4 Other^ 0 2 0 42 0 0 3 18 7 10 8

Sub-Total 8 8 9 59 2 66 53 92 77 47 72Out-of-Centre 0 2 2 0 0 0 26 2 8 8 28Sub-Total 0 2 2 0 0 0 26 2 8 8 28TOTAL 8 10 11 59 2 66 79 94 0 85 55 10Notes: ^Includes other shops within the Borough including Mo eld, Hattersley et Excludes other responses

ssley, Dukinfi c

3.31 as

Given this, the recently published PPS6 identifies out-of-centre to be (Annex A, Table 2): ‘A location

t,

evident that although some foodstores are identified to be within the defined town centre, they are

actually deemed to be out-of-centre under guidance outlined in PPS6. Indeed, within Ashton the

3.30 Similarly to main food shopping, Table 3.7 indicates that the majority of ‘top-up’ shopping trips

(85%) are retained by in-centre facilities.

However, it is significant to note in defining what facilities are in-centre and out-of-centre, this h

been based on the town centre as defined by the adopted Tameside Unitary Development Plan

(UDP). On this basis, it is significant to note that the UDP identifies the Primary Shopping Area

(Policy S4) together with broad town centre boundaries.

3.32

which is not in or on the edge of a centre but not necessarily outside the urban area.’ In this respec

PPS6 identifies edge-of-centre for retail purposes to be a location that is well connected to and

within easy walking distance (i.e. up to 300 metres) of the primary shopping area. Therefore, it is

20

existing Sainsbury’s store at Lord Sheldon Way, despite being located within Ashton Town Centre

is more than 550 metres from the defined Primary Shopping Area. Therefore, by assuming the

Sainsbury’s store is out-of-centre in retail planning terms, the proportion of expenditure retained

facilities in Tameside at in-centre or edge of centre facilities reduces from 81% to 77% for main

food shopping and 85% to 82% for ‘top-up’ shopping.

Non-food (Non-Bulky) Shopping

When asked where people went to undertake their main food shopping trips for clothes, footwear,

small household items, etc. it was evident that facilities in

by

3.33

Tameside have witnessed a marginal

increase in their overall market share achieved in the study area. Since 2001, the overall market

y

Table 3.8: Tameside Non Bulky Goods Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005

share of shopping trips for facilities in Tameside has increased from 30% to 33%. However, it

remains evident that a significant proportion of shopping trips (68%) are being made to facilities

outside the Borough. Table 3.8 provides a breakdown of market share by zone within the stud

area.

Zone 2001 2005* 1 6% 3% 2 8% 13% 3 4% 6% 4 24% 33% 5 16% 25% 6 18% 33% 7 33% 53% 8 67% 66% 9 60% 59% 10 44% 40% Total 30% 33%

S MS Household Survey (Augu ) & Tameside Retail Study (2001) ‘other’ responses

.34 As illustrated in Table 3.8, the market share has increased within six of the identified zones since

ears

hopping trips of only 4%. However, the

2005 household survey identifies the market share to be 17% within Zone 7, representing an

.35 Given this, it is important to assess the potential impact that improved provision within the

nts).

ource: NE st 2005 *Excludes

3

2001. Indeed, Zone 7 has seen an increase in market share of some 78% since 2001. It app

that the development of Crown Point North in Denton has had an impact on the market share

achieved by facilities in the Borough. In this respect, the 2001 Study identified that facilities in

Denton achieved a market share of non-bulky non-food s

increase of some 325%. In comparison, the market shares achieved by facilities in zones 1, 8, 9

and 10 have seen a marginal fall in market share since the 2001 Study.

3

neighbouring authorities of Oldham, Stockport, Manchester and High Peak have had on non-bulky

comparison goods shopping patterns in the defined study area (both core and outer catchme

21

3 Table 3.9 indicates that the market share ac.36 hieved by facilities in Tameside has increased in both

the core and outer catchments. Indeed, within the core cat arket share achieved by

f gh ved by facilities outside the Boro h. Indeed, more than half

(54%) of non-bulky non-food shopping trips undertaken in the study area are to facilities within

Borough. It is eviden ved provision within Tameside h reduced the level of non-food

shopping trips being und ies outside the Borough. Consequently, shopping trips are

b rom facilities within the adjoining authorities such a ose within Oldham, Stockport,

M r and High Peak. Indeed, it is evident that within the core catchment, the market share

ost notably in High

et share achieved in

the adjoining zones has fallen, most notably in Oldham (by 27%).

Table 3.10: Non- Bulky Goods Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005

chm e ment, th

acilities is hi er than that achie ug

t that impro as

ertaken to facilit

eing drawn f s th

ancheste

achieved by facilities within all the adjoining authorities has fallen since 2001, m

Peak (by 43%), although significantly from a low base.

3.37 With regard to the to the outer catchment identified, it is evident that despite increasing since 2001,

the market share achieved by facilities in Tameside represents less than a fifth (19%) of all non-

bulky non-food shopping trips undertaken. However, it remains evident that the market share

achieved by facilities in Tameside has increased since 2001, whereas the mark

Core Catchment Outer Catchment 2001 2005* 2001 2005* Tameside 51.7% 54.2% 10.9% 18.8% Oldham 2.5% 2.2% 23.4% 17.0% Manchester 21.7% 19.2% 33.7% 32.3% Stockport 15.9% 14.6% 18.7% 16.3% High Peak 0.7% 0.4% 3.5% 3.3%

.38 It is notable that the competition from major shopping destinations such as Manchester and

e

s a Regional retail destination.

.39 Overall, our analysis indicates that facilities in Tameside achieve a market share of non-bulky non-

food shopping trips from the study area of approximately 33% in 2005, which is comparable to that

achieved in 2001 of 30%.

.40 However, it is important to assess the breakdown of shopping trips of shopping trips to defined

centres and out-of-centre facilities within the Borough. On this basis, Table 3.11 provides a

breakdown of customer preference for non-bulky goods shopping trips.

Source: NEMS Household Survey (August 2005) & Tameside Retail Study (2001) *Excludes ‘other’ responses

3

Stockport and Oldham, have had an impact on the market shares that are achieved by facilities in

Tameside both within the core and outer catchments identified. This is understandable given th

strength of Manchester a

3

3

22

Table 3.11: Non-Bulky Goods Market Share Destination Survey Zone (%) Total Town Centre

Ashton-under-Lyne 21 Hyde 5

Droylsden 0 Stalybridge 1

Denton 5 Other^ 0

Sub-Total 32 Out-of-Centre 1 Sub-Total 1 TOTAL 33

Notes: ^Includes other shops within the Borough including Mossley, Dukinfield, Hattersley etc Excludes other responses

3.41

limited out-of-centre offer in the Borough.

3.42 s

ods’ shopping in three categories – electrical,

DIY and furniture goods.

Total figure may differ to that identified in Table 5.8 due to rounding

Table 3.11 indicates that of the non-bulky comparison goods shopping trips retained by facilities in

Tameside, 97% of the overall retention (33%) are by facilities in defined centres, most notably

Ashton Town Centre. This reflects the type of goods generally located on out-of-centre retail parks

and relatively

‘Bulky Goods’ Shopping

In addition to assessing changes in shopping patterns in food and non-bulky comparison goods it i

also possible to assess changing patterns in ‘bulky go

Electrical Goods

For electrical items, the household survey found that in terms of facilities in Tameside, Snipe

Park was identified to be the most popular destination within the study area (17%), followed by

3.43 Retail

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre (15%). Furthermore, these destinations were also identified as

3.44 are of facilities in Tameside derived

from the study area for electrical goods has fallen marginally since 2001, from 47% to 44% as

the most popular of all centres/facilities in the study area.

Based on the survey information, it is evident that the market sh

indicated in Table 3.12.

23

Table 3.12: Tameside Electrical Goods Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005 Zone 2001 2005* 1 5% 4% 2 18% 37% 3 5% 4% 4 41% 34% 5 36% 26% 6 42% 59% 7 53% 54% 8 91% 87% 9 88% 90% 10 62% 48% Total 47% 44%


3.45 As Table 3.12 indicates, the greatest market share of shopping trips is achieved in Zone 9 (90%

which has increased since 2001 from 88%. Furthermore, the mark

),

et share achieved within zones

2, 6 and 7 have also seen an increase in market share since 2001. Indeed, within Zone 2 the

-

3.46

3.47 s of the core and outer catchments identified for Tameside, Table 3.13 indicates that the

are achieved by facilities in Tameside has reduced in the core catchment (from 74.3% to

he outer catchment has increased. However, it is

evident that facilities in Tameside are the most popular within both ments.

3.48 With regard to the market sh ved by facilities in the adjoining authorities, it is notable that

the market share has increased all authorities at the expense of Tamesi

share achieved by facilities in Oldham has increased by 38%.

.49 ased in Tameside,

e reduced in all the adjoining authorities with the exception of Stockport.

market share has more than doubled, primarily due to the popularity of Snipe Retail Park in Ashton

under-Lyne.

In contrast, it is evident that the market shares achieved within zones 1, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 10 have all

seen a fall in market share since 2001, most notably within zone 5, which has seen a fall of some

28%. Furthermore, significantly, within zone 10 (which includes Hyde District Centre) the market

share has also fallen since 2001, from 62% to 48%.

In term

market sh

69.3%); whereas the market share within t

the core and outer catch

ares achie

de. Indeed, the market

3 In comparison, within the outer catchment, whereas the market share has incre

the market shares hav

24

Table 3.13: Electrical Goods Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005 Core ent Catchm Outer ent Catchm

2001 2005* 2001 2005* Tameside 74.3% 69.3% 21.6% 27.1% Oldham 1.6% 2.2% 29.8% 23.4% Manchester 4.5% 4.7% 18.3% 12.8% Stockport 14.1% 16.3% 17.6% 17.8% High Peak 1.2% 1.6% 6.4% 4.6%


3.50 Overall, our analysis identifies that facilities in Tameside retain approximately 44% of electrical

goods shopping trips in the study area compared to 47% in 2001.

With regard to in-centre and out-of-centre preferences, Table 3.14 identifies t

3.51 hat 58% of shopping

trips undertaken within the Study Area to facilities to Tameside are to defined centres (most notably

d out-of-centre in retail planning terms (e.g.

Triangle Park, Ashton Moss). On this basis, by assuming the out-of-centre definition identified by

f-centre facilities increases from 38%

to 51%. In this respect, Snipe Retail Pa

d in the Borough, which erstandably the type of r located on ail

p

T : Electrical Goods Market

Ashton). However, as previously highlighted, it is evident that some facilities although identified to

fall within the defined town centre are considere

PPS6 it is evident that the proportion of shopping trips to out-o

rk is identified to be the most popular out-of-centre retail

estination is und giv n e eta lersi the ret

ark.

able 3.14 Share Destination Survey ea (%) ArTown Centre

Ashton-under-Lyn 21 e Hyde 3


Denton 1 Other^ 0



DIY Goods

3.52 With regard to DIY goods shopping, the household survey identified that within Tameside, Snipe

hare

Retail Park was the most popular destination attracting 23% of all DIY shopping trips undertaken in

the study area. Indeed, facilities within Tameside achieve a market share of 59% within the study

area in 2005, compared to 61% in 2001. Table 3.15 provides a breakdown of the market s

achieved by zone in the defined study area.

25

Table 3.15: Tameside DIY Goods Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005 Zone 2001 2005* 1 5% 3% 2 45% 52% 3 11% 10% 4 45% 44% 5 61% 64% 6 57% 66% 7 77% 80% 8 99% 95% 9 99% 95% 10 84% 83% Total 61% % 59

S Househol Tameside Retail Study (2001) *Excludes ‘other

3.53 Table 3.15 indicates that facilities in Tameside are the most popular destinations for DIY shopping

trips in seven of the ten zones ( Indeed, within zones 8 and 9, 95% of all DIY shopping trips

within the two zones are undertaken at facilities within Tameside. However, it is notable that the

m s within these two zones have reduced marginally since 20

.54 The market shares achieved by competing facilities outside the Borough within both the core and

are illustrated in Table 3.16.

ource: NEMS d Survey (August 2005) & ’ responses

2005).

arket share 01.

3

outer catchments

Table 3.16: DIY Goods Market Share Analysis – 2001 and 2005

Core Catchment Outer Catchment 2001 2005* 2001 2005* Tameside 89.5% 87.8% 17.5% 39.3% Oldham 1.0% 1.8% 28.4% 28.4% Manchester 1.8% 1.2% 11.7% 5.2% Stockport 5.4% 6.4% 18.0% 19.5% High Peak 1.8% 0.9% 4.6% 5.2%


3.55 Table 3.16 illustrates that within the core ca ent, existing facilities within Tameside have seen a

marginal fall in market share achieved in DI ds shopping (although from a high base), with

g trade being drawn to facilities in Oldham and Stockport. However, it remains evident that

de to facilities in the Borough.

Indeed, the household survey suggests that only 12% of shopping trips are made to facilities

3.56 n

Tameside has increased significantly since 2001, from 18% to 39%, representing an increase of

tchm

Y goo

reater

the vast majority of DIY shoppi g trips in the core catchment are man

outside Tameside from within the core catchment.

In terms of the outer catchment, Table 3.16 indicates that the market share achieved by facilities i

124%. Consequently, facilities in Tameside achieve higher market shares from the outer

catchment than other adjoining authorities. However, facilities in Stockport and High Peak have

also seen increases in market share since 2001 (of 8% and 13% respectively).

26

3.57 hin the

e

Overall, facilities in Tameside retain a market share of 59% of DIY goods shopping trips wit

study area in 2005 compared to 61% in 2001. However, in terms of in-centre and out-of-centre

preferences Table 3.17 identifies that the majority of DIY shopping trips (54%) undertaken in th

Study Area are to out-of-centre facilities, most notably to Snipe Retail Park. Furthermore, this

increases to 64% based on PPS6’s definition of out-of-centre.

Table 3.17: DlY Goods Market Share Destination Survey Area (%) Town Centre



Denton 1 Other^ 1


es other shops within the Borough including Mossley, Dukinfield, Hattersley etc Excludes other responses Notes: ^Includ

Furniture Goods

3.58 For furniture goods, the househol ied that the market sh facilities in ide

has remained the same since 2001 at 41%. Therefore hold survey suggests that more

than half (59%) of shopping trips within the study area for furniture goods are made to facilities

outside the Borough. Table 3.18 provides a breakdow are achieved by facilities in

Tame zone.

nd 2005

d survey identif are for Tames

, the house

n of the market sh

side by

Table 3.18: Tameside Furniture Goods Market Share Analysis – 2001 aZone 2001 2005* 1 5% 4% 2 22% 36% 3 5% 7% 4 29% 30% 5 33% 37% 6 39% 48% 7 47% 59% 8 74% 60% 9 72% 69% 10 64% 47% Total 41% 41%


As indicated in Table 3.18, the market shares within six of the ten zones have increased since

2001, most notably within zone 2, from 22% in 2001 to 36% by 2005, representing an increase of

some 64%. In comparison, zones 1, 8, 9 and 10 have all seen a fall in market share since 2001.

In terms of the market shares achieved in the adjoining authorities of Manchester, Oldham, High

Peak and Stockport together with Tameside within the core and outer catchments, Table 3.18

indicates that there has been a fall in market share achieved by facilities in Tameside within the

3.59

3.60

27

core catchment, whereas the market share achieved by facilities in Oldham has increased

s (by 174%) within the core catchment. Therefore, the h

suggest that more sh n the core catchment are being made to facilities within

Oldham in 2005 than in 2001 at the expense of the facilities both within Tameside and within other

adjoining authorities, most notably Manchester, which has seen a fall in market share achieved

within the core catchment, of some 56% since 2001. However, in terms the core catchment, it

r ent that facilities in Tameside are the most popular destinat for furniture goods

37%). In

comparison, with the exception of facilities in High Peak (which have remained static) all the market

since 2001.

Table 3.19: Fu arke are A sis – and

ignificantly ousehold survey appears to

opping trips withi

of

emains evid ion

shopp g. in

3.61 With regard to the outer catchment identified, facilities in Tameside have seen a significant increase

in market share since 2001, from 20% to 28% (representing an increase of some

shares achieved by facilities within adjoining boroughs from the outer catchment have decreased

r e Gonitur ods M t Sh naly 2001 2005 Cor hmee Catc nt Out chmeer atC nt 2001 05* 001 05* 20 2 20Tameside 64.1% % % % 58.2 20.3 27.8 Oldham 5.3% % % % 14.5 2 .68 2 .25 Manchester 12.6% % % 5.5% 21.7 12.5 Stockport % % % % 11.6 10.9 1 .97 1 .84 High Peak 0.7% 0.4% 4.3% 4.3%


3.62

ough are to established centres, most notably Ashton Town Centre.

However, this reduces to 58% based on PPS6’s definition of out of centre facilities.

*Excludes ‘other’ responses

Overall, our analysis indicates that facilities in Tameside attract 41% of furniture goods shopping

trips undertaken in the study area, as was the case in 2001. In terms of out-of-centre and in-centre

shopping preferences for furniture goods, Table 3.20 identifies that the majority of shopping trips

(65%) to facilities within the Bor

28

Table 3.20: Furniture Goods Market Share Destination Survey Area (%) Town Centre



Denton 2 Other^ 0



Table 3.21 provides a breakdown of the market shares achieved by facilities in Tameside within a

variety of retail sectors within both the core and outer catchments.

3.63

Table 3.21: Market Shares Achieved by Facilities in Tameside and adjoining authorities

Tameside Oldham Stockport Manchester High Peak Core Outer Core Outer Core Outer Core Outer Core Outer Food

2001 92% 18% 2% 39% 3% 15% 1% 12% 2% 13% 2005 91% 27% 0% 28% 2% 15% 4% 12% 3% 15%

% Change Non-Bulky

2001 52% 11% 3% 23% 16% 19% 22% 34% 1% 4% 2005 54% 19% 2% 17% 15% 16% 19% 32% 0% 3%

% Change Bulky

2001 73% 23% 3% 29% 12% 18% 7% 19% 1% 5% 2005 72% 31% 5% 25% 11% 17% 2% 10% 1% 5%

% Change Source: NEMS Household Survey (August 2005) & Tameside Retail Study (2001) *Excludes ‘other’ responses

Table 3.21 indicates that generally the market shares achieved by facilities in Tameside w

3.64 ithin the

core catchment within the three identified categories of retailing have generally declined marginally

he

However, significantly some 30% of respondents travel by bus, which is much higher than that

ificantly higher than that identified in 2001. Consequently, the proportion

of respondents in the study area using the bus has also reduced from 30% in 2001 to 14% in 2005.

since 2001. In comparison within the outer catchment area, the market shares achieved by

facilities have increased significantly since 2001; ‘clawing back’ trade from competing facilities in

the adjoining authority areas.

Mode of Transport 3.65 In terms of mode of travel the 2001 Study identified that the majority of respondents within t

study area (59%) undertook their non-food shopping by car (either as driver or passenger).

identified for main food shopping trips (12%). In comparison, the 2005 Survey identifies that 70%

of respondents in the study area travelled by car (either as driver or passenger) to buy non-food

goods. Clearly, this is sign

29

Linked Trips

ir

ation and other centres/facilities for non-food shopping on the same trip.

In this respect, the household survey identified that more than 40% of respondents within the study

their main food shopping trip with non-food shopping.

3.67 s who

stat

the

Man

3.68

pur

for ly 0.1% of respondents within the study area stated that they undertook their

resp food shopping.

3.69 Wh

und

resp

3.70 the

inte goods. In comparison,

the 2005 household survey identified that 6% of respondents used the internet or mail order for

hold

.71 Furthermore, the 2005 Survey identified that when asked if people used the internet or TV

ndents in the study area stated yes, with the remainder (64%) indicating no.

3.72

mos

(24

3.66 The 2005 Survey asked specific questions relating to whether linked trips were made between the

main food shopping destin

area did combine

On this basis, the household survey identified that within the survey area, 51% of respondent

ed that they undertook linked trips stated that they did so at centres/facilities in Tameside, most

notably Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre (21%) and Hyde District Centre (14%). In comparison,

household survey identified that 12% of linked trips were to facilities in Oldham, Stockport and

chester.

Internet/Home Shopping

Based on analysing the two household surveys undertaken in 2000 and 2005, it is evident that the

chases on the internet/mail order have increased. Indeed, in terms of shopping on the internet

food purchases, on

main food shop via the internet. In comparison the 2005 household survey identified that 0.2% of

ondents used the internet to purchase their main

ilst there has been a marginal increase in the number of respondents using the internet to

ertake their main food shop on the internet, it remains evident that the vast majority of

ondents do not currently use the internet to undertake their main food shopping trip.

In terms of non-food goods, the 2001 Study identified that only 3% of purchases were made via

rnet or home delivery, most notably on electrical and small household

purchasing non-food goods. Again, the purchase of electrical goods (10%) and small house

goods (9%) were the most popular.

3

Shopping, 36% respo

Of those respondents using the internet for shopping purchases, CDs, music and videos were the

t popular purchases with 38% of respondents purchasing these goods, followed by clothes

%) and books (23%).

30

Sum 3.73 Bas e

follo

mary

ed on our assessment of the two household surveys undertaken, it is possible to identify th

wing key findings:

Food Shopping

The market share achieved by facilities in Tameside within the study area for main food

shopping has increased since 2001, due to improved provision wit

•

hin the Borough since 2001;

ment

ar

orough compared to 10% in 2001;

•

• s in Tameside within the study area for ‘top-up’

food shopping has also increased since 2001;

reduced the number of shopping trips in

the study area to facilities in Oldham and Stockport; and

• The majority of shopping trips retained by facilities in the Borough are to in-centre facilities,

although this reduces by assuming PPS6 definition of out-of-centre.

3.74 It is evident that minimal food expenditure is being lost from the core catchment identified.

Improved provision within the Borough has had an impact on ‘clawing back’ expenditure from

facilities outside the Borough with regard to the outer catchment area.

Non-Food Shopping

• Within the core catchment, the market share has reduced despite significant retail develop

in the Borough. However, it remains evident that facilities in the Borough are the most popul

destination within the core catchment, with only 12% of main food shopping trips being made to

facilities outside the B

• The market share achieved in the outer catchment has significant increased since 2001 20% to

27%, resulting in facilities in Tameside;

The popularity of the existing Asda store in Ashton-under-Lyne has reduced since 2001 due to

improved provision in the Borough, most notably due to the development of an Asda store in

Hyde since 2001;

Similarly, the market share achieved by facilitie

• Overall, the household surveys suggest that the improved provision that has taken place in the

Borough has had an impact on ‘clawing back’ trade from facilities in adjoining authorities rather

than increasing the market share within the core catchment, which was already very high.

Indeed, it appears that new facilities in Tameside have

• In terms of non-bulky comparison goods shopping, it is evident that the market share achieved

by facilities in Tameside within the study area has increased since 2001 from 30% to 33% to

2005. Furthermore, within both the core and outer catchments identified the market shares of

facilities in Tameside for non-bulky goods have increased. Indeed, within the core catchment,

31

facilities in Tameside are the most popular, attracting 54% of shopping trips made in the core

catchment. In comparison, with the outer catchment, although the market share achieved by

ide has increased since 2001, it remains evident that 81% of shopping

undertaken in the outer catchment are to facilities outside the Borough. This is understandable

chments, it is evident that the market share achieved by

facilities in Tameside in the core catchment has decreased since 2001, from 73% to 72% in

the

re

on of DIY goods

shopping trips, the majority of respondents for furniture (59%) and electrical (56%) goods are

.75 Overall, it is evident that facilities in Tameside are more popular for ‘bulky goods’ shopping rather

goods within the study area. Indeed, within the study area only a third

of non-food non-bulky shopping trips are made to facilities within Tameside compared to almost

facilities in Tames

given the strength of competing centres such as Manchester City Centre;

• With regard to ‘bulky’ comparison goods shopping, the household survey identifies that the

market share achieved by facilities in Tameside has increased marginally since 2001, from

47% in 2001 to 48% in 2005. Despite this increase it is evident that more than half of ‘bulky

goods’ shopping trips (52%) are to facilities outside the Borough;

• In terms of the core and outer cat

2005. However, within the outer catchment, the market share has increased from 23% in 2001

to 31% by 2005; and

• Within all three broad categories of ‘bulky goods’ (i.e. furniture, DIY and electrical goods)

market shares achieved by facilities in Tameside for DIY and electrical goods within the defined

study area have reduced since 2001 (by 3% and 6% respectively), whereas the market sha

for furniture goods has remained constant. However, with the excepti

made to facilities outside Tameside Borough.

3

than non-bulky comparison

half (48%) for ‘bulky goods’, increasing from 47% in 2001.

32

4 POPULATION AND EXPENDITURE Introduction 4.01 In assessing the future ‘needs’ of a particular centre, it is p ible to use a ‘desk base proach’

based on experience of similar market conditions and professional d assumptions.

H an approach, the definition of a centre’s true catchment or sphere of influe s

very difficult to accurately assess even when relying on local knowledge. Therefore, any future

m ndertaken on this basis will rely on quite a ‘leap of faith’ and the robustness of

the results is always uncertain.

4.02 W g Green acknowledge that there are limitations to survey rese

relation to the samples that can be achieved in a larger cat ent, the results provide important

b tors as to consumer preferences in relation to where people live and shop. This

e nalysis of a particular area, which helps to evaluate the actual draw of major s and

how they imp n the market share of smaller centres. There f co eting

c f-centre development) can be highlig easily.

4.03 Therefore, the use of specifically commissioned survey res ch is fundamental in informing a

study that will effectively identify the likely capacity for future retail floorspace within Tameside.

Catchment Definition

4.04

its

‘offer’ and the proximity of other large centres.

m

oss d ap

judgement an

owever, for such nce i

odelling of ‘need’ u

hilst White Youn arch, particularly in

chm

road indica

nables a centre

act upo fore, the threat o mp

entres (and out-o hted ore m

ear

In defining the catchment area for the study, it is important to consider the nature of convenience

and comparison shopping trips. Trips made to food stores are generally undertaken within a limited

distance whereas comparison goods may involve longer trips to access a broad range of products

and compare prices. Often the extent of a centre’s catchment is determined by a combination of

current retail

4.05 In this respect, Table 4.1 illustrates the distance and drivetime of the main competing centres fro

main existing centres in Tameside (Ashton-under-Lyne, Denton, Hyde and Stalybridge).

33

Table 4.1: Drivetimes from Main Tamesid Ce entres and Competing Centres Centre From Ashton-under-Lyne Kilom Drivetime (mins) etres Oldham 7 11 Glossop 1 17 2 Manchester 13 19 Stockport 1 15 5 Rochdale 21 25 The Trafford Centre 3 28 0 Centre From Denton Kilom Drivetime (mins) etres Ashton-under-Lyne 5 7 Stockport 1 10 0 Manchester 1 13 1 Glossop 13 14 Oldham 1 14 4 Rochdale 24 25 The Trafford Centre 25 23 Centre From Hyde Kilometres Drivetime (mins) Ashton-under-Lyne 5 7 Glossop 10 11 Stockport 13 12 Manchester 14 15 Oldham 16 16 Rochdale 26 27 The Trafford Centre 28 25 Centre From Stalybridge Kilometres Drivetime (mins) Ashton-under-Lyne 3 4 Glossop 9 13 Oldham 10 15 Manchester 15 22 Stockport 17 18 Rochdale 23 28 The Trafford Centre 32 31

005)

.06 of 1,000 households was undertaken within the defined catchment set out

in Section 3. The catchment area adopted is the same as that adopted in the household survey

Source: AA Autoroute (2

4 In August 2005 a survey

undertaken as part of the Tameside Retail Study, undertaken by CB Hillier Parker (January 2001),

which was based on post code sectors. It is notable that the defined catchment goes beyond the

Tameside authority area in order to provide evidence of shopping patterns from the surrounding

sub-region.

4.07 The defined catchment has been broken down into ten survey zones, which has enabled us to

identify shopping patterns from different areas of the Borough together with the wider area. The

survey zones adopted as part of the study are identified in Table 4.2 and have been based on

postal codes at a four digit level (e.g. OL6 6).

34

Table 4.2: Post Codes by Survey Zones Survey Zone P de Sectors ost Co1 OL1 – 1, 2, 3, 4

O 3, 4, 5 OL8 – 1, 2, 3, 4 OL9 8, 9 L4 – 1, 2, – 0, 6, 7,

2 M11 – 1, 2, 3, 4 M

M18M40 – 0,1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 12 – 5, 6

– 7, 8

3 SK2 – 5, 6, 7 SK5 – 6, 7, 8

SK6 – 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 SK22 – 1, 3, 4

4 O , 7 OL5L3 – 5, 6 – 0, 9 5 SK13 – 0, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8 6 M35 – 0, 9 M43 – 6, 7 7 M34 – 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 8 O , 8, 9 OL7L6 – 6, 7 – 0, 9 9 S SK1K14 – 4 6 – 4, 5

SK15 – 1, 2, 3 10 SK14 – 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8

.08 the basis for the household survey undertaken. Furthermore, population and

expenditure data is provided on a survey zone basis, in addition to the catchment area as a whole.

4.09

reflect

the differing population within each zone.

4.10 t

.11 The population within each postal code zone has been calculated using MapInfo TargetPro base

ns

NS

4.12

ll by 0.07% (or 406) to 614,150 by 2010. However,

this is anticipated to increase by 0.43% (or 2,625) between 2005 and 2016. In this respect, zones

4.13 MapInfo) are provided for each of the ten survey zones. For the

purposes of this study White Young Green have forecast population growth at 2005, 2010 and

2016. Table 4.3 provides a detailed breakdown of the estimated/forecast population change within

each survey zone through to 2016.

4 These zones formed

Achieved Sample

In completing the sample for the household survey, a target of 100 respondents within each zone

was identified. Once the survey was completed the number of respondents was weighted to

A copy of the questionnaire and full tabulations of the Tameside Shopping Survey are contained a

Appendix III.

Catchment Population

4

data. MapInfo provide population forecasts for each year up to 2016. These population projectio

are produced at Census Output area and extend the figures from the 2001 Census, utilising O

population projections.

The adopted catchment area identified for the purposes of this study contains a resident population

of 614,556 (2005 estimate), which is set to fa

1 to 7 inclusive are identified to see an increase in population between 2005 and 2016, whereas

zones 8 to 10 inclusive are identified to see a fall in population.

Population figures (derived from

35

Table 4.3: Population by Survey Zone (2005 – 2016) Survey Zone 2005 2010 2016 % Change

(2005-2016) 1 139,762 139,675 140,230 +0.33 2 80,359 80,139 80,410 +0.06 3 113,719 114,106 115,253 +1.35 4 24,003 24,011 24,095 +0.38 5 32,829 33,170 33,695 +4.35 6 44,262 44,248 44,427 +0.37 7 47,199 47,090 47,245 +0.10 8 43,377 43,145 43,188 -0.44 9 56,096 55,745 55,744 -0.63 10 32,950 32,821 32,894 -0.17 TOTAL 614,556 614,150 617,181 +0.43

Source: MapInfo TargetPro Base 2005 (2001 based)

Retail Expenditure 4.14 In order to calculate convenie d comparison expen per capita, White Young Green

have utilised MapInfo Target ports (previously referred to as Illumine Rep hich

provide detailed information on local consumer expenditu which take into account the socio-

e c characteristics of the local resident population. For the forecasting of this expenditure

sed’ forecasts at 2001 prices.

ng

r with actual growth rates for the period 2001 and

2004, which are identified in Brief 05/2 to be +9.6%, +8.7% and +9.3% respectively for comparison

ed that these growth rates are the most

plied the actual growth rates identified in Brief 05/2 of +1.9%,

wth rates have been applied to the population projection

4.17

nce an diture

Pro base re orts), w

re and

conomi

through to 2016, the study has used URPI’s ‘goods ba

4.15 In respect of the ‘goods based’ approach adopted for this study, the consumer retail expenditure

forecasts are derived from MapInfo Brief 05/2, which was published in September 2005. Taki

into account the time horizon of the study this study has adopted URPIs most conservative ‘ultra

long term’ figures (+3.8% per annum) togethe

goods.

4.16 For convenience goods expenditure this study has utilised the forecast growth rates identified in

Table 2 of Brief 05/2 of +0.8% per annum prior to 2011 and +0.9% after 2011 as discussions

between MapInfo and White Young Green have indicat

robust. In addition, the study has ap

+0.6% and +1.6% respectively. These gro

model outlined above for each survey zone.

Using these forecasts the study has produced expenditure estimates for each survey zone in 2005,

2010 and 2016. The assessment takes into account both retail expenditure growth and population

change. Tables 4.4 and 4.5 provide a summary of the estimated growth in retail expenditure per

capita within the survey areas.

36

Table 4.4: Convenience Expenditure Estimates per capita per annum (2005 – 2016) 2005 2010 2016 1 £1,815 £1,889 £1,991 2 £1,715 £1,785 £1,882 3 £1,986 £2,067 £2,179 4 £2,158 £2,246 £2,368 5 £1,489 £1,549 £1,633 6 £1,963 £2,043 £2,154 7 £1,971 £2,051 £2,162 8 £1,915 £1,993 £2,101 9 £1,994 £2,075 £2,187 10 £1,945 £2,024 £2,134

Source: MapInfo TargetPro base da and URPI Brief 05/2

Table 4.5: Comparison Expenditure Estimates per capita per annum (2005 – 2016)

ta (2005)

2005 2010 2016 1 £3,080 £3,712 £4,643 2 £2,794 £3,367 £4,211 3 £3,541 £4,267 £5,337 4 £3,986 £4,803 £6,003 5 £ £2,913 3,510 £4,390 6 £3,368 £4,059 £5,077 7 £3,393 £4,088 £5,113 8 £3,267 £3,937 £4,924 9 £3,470 £4,181 £5,229 10 £3,370 £4,060 £5,079

Source: MapInfo TargetPro base dat URPI Brief 05/2

4.18 As can be seen from the figur tlined in Table 4.4, it is anticipated that expenditur capita

5 6 (approximately 10%)

compared to considerable growth in comparison goods expenditure per capita of some 51%

4.19 of

ated to

Main Food and ‘Top-up’ Shopping

a (2005) and

es ou e per

on convenience goods will increase slightly between 200 and 201

between 2005 and 2016 (Table 4.5).

Convenience Goods Expenditure

It is estimated that the resident population within the defined catchment generates £1,157.01m

convenience goods expenditure in 2005 (at 2001 prices). By 2016 this expenditure is estim

be £1,274.45m, an increase of some 10% since 2005.

4.20 survey, respondents were specifically asked questions in relation to the

proportion of money they spend on their main food shopping and ‘top-up’ shopping. Analysis of

nt on main

food shopping, with the re t on ‘to re, in o alyse

the survey results for both main and ‘top-up’ shopping trips, this study has sub-divided the total

the ten survey zone g this 83/17 split.

As part of the household

these results indicates that some 83% of total convenience expenditure is being spe

main ning 17% spe p-up’ ing. Therefo shopp rder to an

c diture for eaonvenience expen ch of s usin

37

4 Tables 4.6 and 4.7 provide a summary of.21 the ‘main’ and ‘top-up’ expenditure on convenience

goods per capita per annum within the ten survey zones.

Table 4.6: ‘Main’ Convenience Expenditure in the Study Area Survey Zone 2005 2010 2016 1 £1,506 £1,568 £1,653 2 £1,423 £1,482 £1,562 3 £1,648 £1,716 £1,809 4 £1,791 £1,864 £1,965 5 £1,236 £1,286 £1,355 6 £1,629 £1,696 £1,788 7 £1,636 £1,702 £1,794 8 £1,589 £1,654 £1,744 9 £1,655 £1,722 £1,815 10 £1,614 £1,680 £1,771

Source: MapInfo Brief 05/2 & MapInfo TargetPro Base Report (2005)

Table 4.7: ‘Top-up’ Convenience Expenditure in the Study Area Survey Zone 2005 2010 2016 1 £309 £321 £338 2 £292 £303 £320 3 £338 £351 £370 4 £367 £382 £403 5 £253 £263 £278 6 £334 £347 £366 7 £335 £349 £368 8 £326 £339 £357 9 £339 £353 £372 10 £331 £344 £363

4.21

05.

05 the

is estimated to generate £196.69m of convenience goods shopping, increasing to

£204.53m by 2010, representing an increase of £7.84m (or 4%) between 2005 and 2010.

016, ‘top-up’ convenience expenditure is identified to increase to £216.66m, an

increase of £19.96m (or 10%) between 2005 and 2016.

4.22

Table 4.8: Convenience Goods Expenditure within the Catchment Area (2005-2016)

Source: MapInfo Brief 05/2 & MapInfo TargetPro Base Report (2005)

By applying these expenditure estimates per capita to the identified population of the study area,

convenience goods expenditure on main food shopping is estimated to be some £960.32m in 20

This expenditure is set to increase by 4% between 2005 and 2010, from £960.32m to £998.60m

and by 10% between 2005 and 2016 to £1,057.80m. With regard to ‘top-up’ shopping, in 20

study area

Furthermore, by 2

Table 4.8 provides a breakdown of expenditure on ‘main’ and ‘top-up’ convenience goods within

the defined study area.

Year Main Food Shop (£m) ‘Top-up’ Shop (£m) Total (£m) 2005 960.32 196.69 1,157.01 2010 998.60 204.53 1,203.13 2016 1,057.80 216.66 1,274.45 Growth (2005-2016) 97.47 19.96 117.44

Source: White Young Green (2005)

38

Comparison Goods Expenditure

By 2016 the population within the wider catchment is estimated to generate £3,035.81

4.23 m of

comparison goods expenditure, increasing from £2,005.62m in 2005 and £2,415.18m in 2010. This

n increase of some £1,030.19m (or 51%) since 2005 and £620.63m (or 26%) since

2010. The study estimates that the defined catchment has an average expenditure per capita of

4.24

URPI Brief 05/2 as +3.8% per annum. It was previously evident when examining

individual types of products within this total spend, that spending on different goods was forecast to

ific

cal and DIY goods expenditure. The approach adopted in Brief

05/2 is the same approach advocated in PPS6, which stipulates that when assessing quantitative

l development, expenditure levels should relate to the class of goods to be sold

within the broad categories of ‘convenience’ and ‘comparison’ goods. However, both ‘bulky’ and

e

represents a

£3,264 at 2005 rising to £3,933 by 2010 and to £4,919 by 2016.

For the purposes of this study, comparison goods expenditure has been divided into five

categories: those which are considered ‘bulky goods’ (electrical, furniture and DIY goods) and

those that are referred to as non-bulky goods (clothing and footwear together with household

goods). In this respect, although the ultra long term growth for comparison goods as a whole is

identified in

increase at different rates. However, the latest Brief 05/2 (September 2005) does not distinguish

between the various comparison goods types, unlike the earlier Brief 98/3, which identified spec

trends in furniture, clothing, electri

need for additiona

‘non-bulky’ goods within the comparison goods sector have been analysed for the purposes of this

study in order to provide a qualitative assessment. In this respect, the performance of different

goods as identified by the household survey has been identified in order to assess if there are any

particular qualitative issues relating to specific retailing not currently well provided for in th

Borough.

Electrical Goods

By utilising expenditure information derived from MapInfo TargetPro base and the growth rates for

comparison goods expenditure identified in Brie

4.25

f 05/2, it is estimated that within the defined study

area an average of £608 per capita per annum will be spent on electrical goods (2005 estimate).

all comparison goods expenditure within the identified catchment area.

ng

This represents 19% of

4.26 By 2010, expenditure per capita is identified to increase to £732 by 2010. Furthermore, it is

estimated that by 2016 expenditure on electrical items will increase to £916 per capita, representi

growth of 51% between 2005 and 2016.

39

4.27 By applying these per capita expenditure figures to the catchment population, it is estimated that

the total expenditure on electrical goods will be some £373.41m in 2005 increasing to £449.72m in

2010 and to £565.36m by 2016 (an increase of £191.94m between 2005 and 2016).

DIY Goods

4 By utilising the 2001 price estima.28 tes for ‘Hardware and DIY Goods’ identified in MapInfo TargetPro

database and the comparison goods growth rates stated in Brief 05/2, it is estimated that within the

apita per annum, representing a growth of 51% between 2005

and 2016.

4.29

Furniture Goods

defined catchment approximately £321 per capita per annum will be spent on DIY and hardware

goods in 2005. This represents 10% of all comparison goods expenditure within the catchment

area. By 2016 it is estimated that the average spend on DIY and hardware goods within the

catchment area will be £484 per c

By applying these expenditure figures to the catchment population, it is estimated that the total

expenditure on DIY and hardware goods will be some £197.13m in 2005, rising to £298.41m by

2016 (an increase of £101.27m).

4.30

r coverings and household textiles’ (as defined by

MapInfo). This represents 12% of all comparison goods expenditure within the catchment area.

iture is anticipated to increase to £610 per capita per annum by 2016, again

representing a growth of 51%.

4.31 the

sing

£376.21m by 2016 (an increase of £127.75m).

Clothing a ar

It is estimated that within the defined catchment in 2005 that on average approximately £404 per

capita per annum will be spent on ‘Furniture, floo

This expend

By applying these per capita expenditure figures to the identified population, it is estimated that

catchment will generate expenditure on furniture goods totalling some £248.27m in 2005. U

the forecasts in Brief 05/2, the level of expenditure for furniture goods is anticipated to increase to

nd Footwe

4.32 Within the define tchm it is tima hat rox ly £ pe ita on

, which represents 27% of all comparison goods expenditure

defined catchment. This expenditure is anticipated to increase to £1,331 per capita per

annum by 2016, representing growth of 51% between 2005 and 2016.

d ca ent es ted t app imate 797 r cap will be spent

clothing and footwear goods (2005)

within the

40

4.3 When applying the per capita expenditure figures to the identified population within the ca3 tchment,

i tima he ge penditu

£542.88m i . Usi sts in s a

footwear is ated t o £82 by 2016 betwee

and 2016.

Household Comparison Goods

t is es ted that t catch t will men nerate ex re on clothing and footwear totalling some

n 2005 ng the foreca Brief 05/2, the level of expenditure for clothe nd

anticip o i e tncreas 1.56m an increase of £278.68m n 2 5 00

4.34

and

.35 Therefore, in respect of these goods, it is estimated that in 2005 approximately £1,047 per capita

ther comparison goods not previously highlighted within the defined

catchment, which represents 32% of all comparison goods expenditure (£3,263). Furthermore, this

.36 On this basis, in 2005 the defined population is estimated to generate approximately £643.72m on

4.37

6 the

ain relatively unchanged. The

breakdown between ‘bulky’ and ‘non bulky’ comparison goods is set out in Tables 4.9 and 4.10.

In order to estimate the level on other comparison goods, such as books, jewellery, watches, etc.

this study has deducted the above four goods categories highlighted (electrical, furniture, DIY

clothing and footwear goods) from the MapInfo TargetPro base estimates from the total available

comparison goods expenditure.

4

per annum will be spent on o

is anticipated to increase to £1,579 per capita per annum by 2016, representing an increase of

51%.

4

other comparison goods. This is anticipated to increase to £974.28m by 2016, representing an

increase of £330.55m between 2005 and 2016.

Summary

With consistent forecast growth rates being applied to all the identified ‘bulky’ and ‘non-bulky’

goods categories highlighted above (as identified in Brief 05/2), it is estimated that by 201

proportion of spend on ‘bulky’ and ‘non-bulky’ goods will rem

Table 4.9: Breakdown of Comparison Goods Expenditure per Capita within the Catchment

Year Furniture & Carpets

DIY & Hardware

Electrical Clothing & Footwear

Household Goods

TOTAL

£ % £ % £ % £ % £ % £* % 2005 404 12 321 10 608 19 883 27 1,047 32 3,264 100 2010 487 12 387 10 732 19 1,064 27 1,262 32 3,933 100 2016 610 12 484 10 916 19 1,331 27 1,579 32 4,919 100

ay not add up due to rounding

Source: MapInfo (2005) * M

41

Table 4.10: Comparison of Retail Expenditure in ‘Bulky’ and ‘Non Bulky’ Goods (2 005-2016) Year Bulky Goods (£m) Non Bulky Goods (£m) TOTAL (£m) Furniture DIY Elec Clothing Household trical 2005 248.47 197.13 373.41 542.88 643.72 819.01 (41%) 1,186.60 (59%) 2,005.62 2010 299.25 237.40 449.72 653.67 775.14 986.37 (41%) 1,428.81 (59%) 2,415.18 2016 376.21 298.41 565.36 821.56 974.28 1,239.98 (41%) 1,795.84 (59%) 3,035.81

Source: White Young Green (2005)

4.38 Table 4.10 indicates that collectively ‘bulky’ goods expenditure within the defined hment is

16, from £819.01m to £1,239.98m. In

bulky comparison goods expenditure is estimated to increase by £609.24m

ulky

Tameside’s Market Share

4.39 within

is

4.40

e study

significantly, whereas the number of

respondents within each survey zone is broadly the same).

4.41 fined

search to understand where people within the study area

actually shop for a variety of goods. A critical element of the overall study has involved the

completion of 1,000 household interviews within the defined study area. By analysing the results

from the survey it has been possible to understand the likely levels of expenditure that is captured

by facilities in the Borough. The estimated market shares of retail expenditure are highlighted

overleaf:

catc

estimated to increase by £420.97m between 2005 and 20

comparison, non

between 2005 and 2016, from £1,186.60m to £1,795.84m. Overall, the actual proportion of ‘b

goods’ expenditure generated in the defined catchment is estimated to represent 41% of all non-

food expenditure.

Having calculated the likely levels of expenditure that are generated by the population living

the defined study area it is also important to understand what proportion of this expenditure

currently attracted to retail facilities within Tameside.

The amount of trade that is captured by a particular area or centre within a defined study area is

often referred to as its ‘market share’. Market shares can be estimated calculating the likely

turnover of existing retail properties and then applying this to the money available within th

area. However, this method relies on a number of assumptions including the likely trading

performance of local stores. (It is important to note that the expenditure ‘market share’ may differ

slightly to the market share of shopping trips identified in Section 3 of this study as the amount of

expenditure generated in different zones may differ

The most accurate way to estimate the potential market share of a particular centre within a de

catchment is to undertake market re

42

Table 4.11: Convenience Goods – Tameside’s Existing Provision’s Market Share Zone Main Food Shopping Trip Market Share

(%) ‘Top-up’ Food Shopping Trip Market

Share (%) 1 4 9 6. 5.2 21.0 10.0 3 18.0 9.0 4 53.7 41.6 5 14.7 1.7 6 50.5 60.6 7 88.2 75.0 8 95.0 86.9 9 96.8 99.7 10 81.8 83.6 TOTAL 42.0 37.3

S Household Survey (20 nd White Y Green an

.42 It is evident from Table 4.11, that the core catchment for facilities in Tameside appears to be

.43 In comparison, the survey results show that there is limited retention in zones 1, 3 and 5, which is

,

oes contain part of

Tameside Borough (Droylsden), it is notable that facilities in Tameside retain approximately half of

provide more sustainable

development. Indeed, it is evident that significant shopping trips are being made to Morrison’s at

4.44

ved by facilities in the Borough including Ashton-under-Lyne, Hyde, Stalybridge,

Droylsden, Dukinfield and Denton.

ource: 05) a oung alysis

4

concentrated within zones 7 to 10 inclusive. Although it is evident that facilities in Tameside are

successful in attracting more than half of main foods shopping expenditure from zones 4 and 6.

This is reasonable given that these zones contain Mossley (Zone 4) and Droylsden (Zone 6).

4

understandable given that these zones cover the adjoining local authority areas of Oldham

Stockport and High Peak respectively. Indeed, within Zone 1 90% of main food shopping

expenditure is spent at facilities in Oldham. Similarly, within Zone 5, 78% of main food shopping

expenditure is retained by facilities in Glossop. Within Zone 6, which d

main food shopping expenditure, most notably the Tesco at Droylsden (29%) and Asda in Ashton

(9%). Therefore, there appears scope for improved provision in this part of the Borough,

particularly given the limited size of the Tesco store at Droylsden. Indeed, White Young Green

consider that enhanced provision is likely to improve retention levels and

Failsworth (21%) and Asda at Sportscity (15%).

In terms of facilities within centres in the Borough, Table 4.12 provides a breakdown of the market

shares achie

43

Table 4.12: Convenience Goods – Market Share Zone Main Food Shopping Trip Market Share

(%) Ashton Hyde Stalybridge Droylsden Dukinfield Denton Other 1 5.3 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 3.0 2.0 0.0 7.0 1.0 8.0 0.0 3 0.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 4 20.0 2.1 15.8 1.1 10.5 1.1 3.2 5 2.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 6 10.5 0.0 0.0 37.9 1.1 1.1 0.0 7 7.5 22.6 0.0 1.1 0.0 57.0 0.0 8 77.0 0.0 8.0 1.0 9.0 0.0 0.0 9 10.5 10.5 40.0 1.1 33.7 1.1 0.0 10 3.1 55.1 6.2 0.0 6.1 11.2 0.0 TOTAL 10.6 9.8 5.5 4.0 5.0 7.0 0.1

S ousehold Survey (200 ung Green analysis

4.45 Table 4.12 indicates that facilities in Ashton-under-Lyne are the most popular within the study area

a t share of 10.6% of main food shopping expenditure, most notably from Zone 8

in Hyde achieving a market share of 9.8%

from the study area.

4.46

89m (or 41.2%) of all convenience

goods expenditure generated in the defined study area (£1,157.01m).

4.47

diture generated. On this basis, our

analysis indicates that existing facilities in the Borough retain £319.14m of convenience goods

).

4.48 Q ating to where pe hop for specific non-fo ods were included wit

h From thes tions, it was possible t ertain the percentage le

that shop at facilities within Ta (both in centre and out-of-centre) as their last sh

tion.

ource: H 5) an ite Yod Wh

ttracting a marke

(77%). The second most popular destination is facilities

The study identifies that facilities within the Borough generate approximately £403.63m of

convenience goods expenditure as a ‘main food’ shop and £73.26m on ‘top-up’ shopping. Given

this, existing facilities in Tameside are identified to retain £476.

In terms of the core catchment of facilities in Tameside (i.e. zones 7 to 10) existing facilities achieve

a market share of 91% of all convenience goods expen

expenditure generated in the core catchment of Tameside (£352.01m

uestions rel ople s od go hin the

ousehold survey. e ques o asc of peop

meside opping

destina

Table 4.13: Comparison Goods – Tameside Borough’s Market Share

Goods % of people within the Defined Study Area using facilities in Tameside – in-centre and out-of-centre

Ashton Hyde Stalybridge Droylsden Dukinfield Denton Other TOTAL Electrical 29.5 2.4 1.4 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 34.2 Furniture 23.5 3.8 1.1 0.5 0.0 1.9 0.2 31.0 DIY 34.1 8.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 44.3 Clothing & Footwear 15.0 3.2 0.3 0.3 0.0 4.4 0.0 23.3 Household Goods 17.6 4.9 1.4 0.6 0.1 2.4 0.0 27.0 TOTAL 21.4 4.2 1.0 0.4 0.1 2.3 0.1 29.5

Source: Household Survey (2005) and White Young Green analysis

44

4 Table 4.13 indicates that of existing cent.49 res in Tameside, Ashton-under-Lyne (including out-of-

centre facilities) is the most po stin all non ttrac ket

o 21%, m n e l and DIY goods (30% and 34% y is res

it is eviden er- ains mber of retail wareh facilitie nipe R

Park and Ashton Retail Park. In respec e 4.14 provides a b own of

achieved by fac ton- r-Lyne Town Centre and at the r

T rison Goods – on-unde Marke re

pular de ation for -food categories a ting a mar share

f over ost notably i le actric respectivel ). In th pect,

t that Ashton-und Lyne cont a nu ouse s at S etail

this t, Tabl reakd the market share

ilities in Ash unde espective retail parks.

able 4.14: Compa Asht r-Lyne t ShaGoods % of people wi e Define y Area u shton-u yne thin th d Stud sing A nder-L Tow re O entre OTAL n Cent ut-of-C TElectrical 3 29.5 11.9 17.Furniture 11.6 12.0 23.5

23.6 34.1 DIY 10.5 Clothes & Footwear 14.4 0.6 15.0 Household Goods 16.4 1.1 17.6 TOTAL 13.8 7.6 21.4


Understandably, Table 4.14 indicates that existing out-of-centre facilities are the most popular

destinations for ‘bulky goods’ (i.e. furniture, DIY and electrical goods), which is reflective of the

good provision within Ashton-under-Lyne. Indeed, Snipe Retail Park contains a number of retail

warehouses including B&Q

4.50

Warehouse and Currys.

4.51 From the results of the household survey and the subsequent modelling, it would appear that

existing facilities in Tameside are attracting a total of £591.66m of comparison goods expenditure

from the defined study area in 2005 (Table 4.15).

Table 4.15: Comparison Goods Expenditure – All Centres Goods Expenditure (£m) Town Centre Out-of-Centre TOTAL Electrical 62.52 65.12 127.64 Furniture 44.16 32.82 76.98 DIY 30.14 57.13 87.26 Clothes & Footwear 121.94 4.26 126.21 Household Goods 164.93 8.64 173.57 TOTAL 423.69 167.97 591.66


4.52 re

Furthermore, the turnovers of defined centres and out-of-centre facilities in the Borough a

provided at Table 4.16.

45

Table 4.16: Comparison Goods Turnover Goods Expenditure (£m) Electrical Furniture DIY Clothes Household TOTAL Ashton1 108.98 58.48 67.22 57 113.01 429.26 81.

Town Centre 44.31 28.70 22.01 78.17 105.68 251.64 Ashton Retail Park 9.30 2 1.43 30.19 15.98 6.33 0.4

Snipe Retail Park 2 35.91 7 5.90 104.62 48.20 2.97 2.9Triangle Park 0.49 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86

Hyde 8.94 9.41 17.41 17.54 31.72 85.02 Town Centre 8.49 6.37 5.48 16.67 30.40 60.83

Manchester Road 0.00 0.82 10.72 0.40 0.98 11.65 Mottram Road 0.45 2.22 1.20 0.47 0.34 4.23

Stalybridge 5.17 2.73 0.69 1.77 9.13 19.49 Droylsden 1.60 1.30 0.38 1.47 3.57 8.32 Dukinfield 0.78 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.80 1.81 Denton 1.96 4.68 0.87 23.87 15.35 46.73 Other 0.21 0.38 0.46 0.00 0.00 1.06 TOTAL 127.64 76.98 87.26 126.81 173.57 591.66


From the results of the household survey and the subsequent modelling, it would appear that

existing facilities in Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre are attracting £251.64m of comparison go

expenditure from the defined study area, which represents more than 42% of all comparison goods

expenditure retained by facilities in Tameside. By including the edge and out-of-centre facilities the

turnover of Ashton increases to £429.26m representing 73% of comparison goods expenditure

retained in the Borough.

The remaining turnover (£162.40m) is derived from other centres and facilities within the Boro

4.53

ods

4.54 ugh,

most notably Hyde, which achieves a turnover of £85.02m (by including the facilities on Manchester

iture retained by

facilities in Tameside. Denton District Centre ng Crown Poi rth) achieves a comparison

g 46.73m (or 8%). In compa other centres in the Borough such a

Stalybridge, Droylsden and field achie llective turnove 0.68m, which i tive

of the limited retail provision in these centres.

F owth in Expenditure Attracted meside 4.55 W st growth in conv nce shoppin icted at +0.8% num up to 201

+0.9% thereafter, it is estimated that facilities in Tameside will experience an increase in

c ce goods expenditure of £47.99m between 2005 and 20 market s).

Road and Stockport Ro resent dad), rep ing 14% of comparison goods expen

(includi nt No

oods turnover of £ r on is s

Dukin ve a co r of £3 s reflec

orecast Gr to Ta

ith foreca enie g pred per an 1 and then

onvenien 16 (at current share

n Retail Park is out-of-centre 1 Assumes Ashto

46

Table 4.17: Convenience Expenditure Available to Retail Facilities in Tameside Market Share

(%) Expenditure Available to Tameside - £m

2005 2010 2016 Convenience Main 42.0 403.63 419.41 444.28 Top-up 37.2 73.26 76.08 80.60 Total Convenience 41.2 476.89 495.49 524.88

4.56 With regard to expenditure on comparison goods, the existing market share achieved by facili

Tameside would result in an increase of £301.32m between 2005 and 2016, which would be

available for new comparison retail facil

ties in

ities in the Borough. Of this expenditure growth £148.55m

is identified to be for ‘bulky goods’ with the remainder (£152.76m) in non-bulky comparison goods.

4.57 Based o main centres within the Borough (i.e. Ashton, Hyde,

nditure available of

tail facilities in

Ashton-under-Lyne. In comparison, Hyde would see an increase of £44.96m between 2005 and

1 2016.

Given the limited retail provision in Stalybridge and Droylsden, the analysis indicates that there will

g een 2005

and 2016. Clearly, it is evident that Ashton-under-Lyne is the dominant retail destination in the

Borough (for both bulky and non-bulky goods) followed by Hyde then Denton.

Table 4.18: Comparison Expenditure Available to Retail Facilities in Tameside

n current market shares for the

Stalybridge, Droylsden and Denton), Table 4.18 indicates that there will be expe

£221.13m in comparison goods between 2005 and 2016 to support additional re

20 6 with Denton witnessing an increase in expenditure of £23.69m between 2005 and

be rowth in comparison goods market share of £9.08m and £3.82m respectively betw

Market Share (%)

Expenditure Available to Tameside - £m

2005 2010 2016 Ashton-under-Lyne Non-Bulky 16.4 194.58 234.32 294.52 Bulky 28.7 234.68 283.09 355.87 Sub-Total 21.4 429.26 517.41 650.39 Hyde Non-Bulky 4.2 49.26 60.01 75.42 Bulky 4.4 35.76 43.40 54.56 Sub-Total 4.2 85.02 103.41 129.98 Stalybridge Non-Bulky 0.9 10.89 12.86 16.16 Bulky 1.0 8.59 9.86 12.40 Sub-Total 1.0 19.48 22.72 28.56 Droylsden Non-Bulky 0.4 5.03 5.72 7.18 Bulky 0.4 3.28 3.95 4.96 Sub-Total 0.4 8.32 9.67 12.14 Denton Non-Bulky 3.3 39.22 47.15 59.26 Bulky 0.9 7.52 8.88 11.16 Sub-Total 2.3 46.73 56.03 70.42 Other Non-Bulky 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bulky 0.1 1.06 1.18 1.49 Sub-Total 0.1 1.06 1.18 1.49 Total Non Bulky Goods 25.3 299.78 360.06 452.54 Total Bulky Goods 35.6 291.89 350.36 440.44 Total Comparison 29.5 591.66 710.42 892.98

47

4.5 In order for Tameside to capture proje8 cted growth in comparison goods expenditure it is necessary

to enhance future retail provision, thereby ensuring that this growth is not all lost to competing

cilities in Tameside do not see a decline in market share. As highlighted at

Section 6 of this study, significant retail development has taken and is taking place in adjoining

4.59

into a requirement for additional floorspace. It will

e necessary to take account of:

E

• Expected changes in shopping patterns (including e-commerce);

• The current capacity and efficiency of retail floorspace within the town centre; and

ss productivity and current development commitments.

centres and centres/fa

competing authorities.

However, if an excess of comparison goods expenditure manifests itself within the defined

catchment area, this does not translate directly

b

• xisting development proposals;

• Future changes in busine

48

5

Introduction

5.01 is study seeks to provide important evidence that will assist in the future development

of the LDF process, it is important at this stage to reflect upon key policy advice and how the

• Tameside Unitary Development Plan (2004).

.02 Paragraph 1.3 of PPS6 notes that the Government’s key objectives for town centres is to promote

• ent of existing centres; and

ment in such centres and

encouraging a wide range of services in a good environment accessible to all.

5.03 ext of

paragraph 1.3. These include:

•

arly

• , competitive and innovative retail, leisure, tourism and other sectors, with

improving productivity; and

ld be

5.05 raph 2.16

noting that local planning authorities should work in conjunction with stakeholders and the

PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Given that th

national guidance may impact upon the development of policies locally. The key texts, which have

been considered as part of our study, include:

• Planning Policy Statement 6 ‘Planning for Town Centres’;

• Regional Planning Guidance for the North West- RPG13 (March 2003); and

Planning Policy Statement 6 – Planning for Town Centres (March 2005)

5

their vitality and viability by:

Planning for the growth and developm

• Promoting and enhancing existing centres, by focusing develop

There are other Government objectives which should be taken into account in the cont

Enhancing customer choice by making provision for a range of shopping, leisure and local

services, which allow genuine choice to meet the needs of the entire community, particul

socially-excluded groups;

Supporting efficient

• Improving accessibility, ensuring that existing or new development is, or will be, accessible

and well-served by a choice of means of transport.

5.04 In order to deliver the Government’s objectives, paragraph 2.1 notes that development shou

focused in existing centres in order to strengthen and, where appropriate, regenerate them.

A positive and proactive approach to planning is encouraged by the guidance, with parag

49

community to, inter alia, assess the need for new floorspace for retail, leisure and other main

centre uses, taking into account both quantitative and qualitative considerations.

In assessing the need and

town

5.06 capacity for additional retail and leisure development, paragraph 2.33

notes that:

in identifying sites for appropriate development to serve communities in these areas, additional weight should be given to meeting these qualitative deficiencies.’

5.07 In terms of qu

docu

dema tic assessment of:

• population levels;

• s in productivity in the use of floorspace.’

ing

• Provision is made for a range of sites for shopping, leisure and local services, which allow

5.09

.10 The guidance in paragraph 2.41 states that Local Planning Authorities should ensure when

c d

funct located in the right

e its role and function.

‘Local planning authorities should place greater weight on quantitative need for additional floorspace for the specific types of retail and leisure developments. However, local planning authorities should also take account of qualitative considerations. In deprived areas which lack access to a range of services and facilities, and there will be clear and demonstrable benefits

antitative need for additional retail development when preparing its development plan

ments, paragraph 2.34 notes that a local planning authority should assess the likely future

nd having a realis

‘Existing and forecast

• Forecast expenditure for specific classes of goods to be sold, within the broad categories of comparison and convenience goods;

Forecast improvement

5.08 In terms of qualitative need, the guidance states at paragraph 2.35 states that: ‘a key consideration

for a local planning department will be to provide for consumer choice by ensuring that:

• An appropriate distribution of locations is achieved, subject to the key objective of promotthe vitality and viability of town centres and the application of the sequential approach, to improve accessibility for the whole community; and

genuine choice to meet the needs of the whole community, particularly the needs of those living in deprived areas.’

The guidance further states at paragraph 2.36 that in addition to the above, other considerations

that may be taken into account include the degree to which shops may be overtrading.

5

sele ting sites for development that the scale of opportunities identified are related to the role an

ion of the centre and its catchment. Appropriate development should be

typ of centre to ensure that it fits and complements

50

5 In terms of local centres, given their characteristics the guidance considers .11 that it would be

inappropriate as a location for large scale new development. Therefore, Local Planning Authorities

5.12 equential approach to site selection whereby Local Planning Authorities should

select appropriate sites for allocation within identified centres where an identified need is to be met.

lowing order:

ion

lable within the development plan document period, taking

account of an appropriate scale of the development in relation to the role and function of the

f

sport and which are close to the centre and have a high likelihood of performing

links with the centre.

5.13 identify

s

Authorities should have appreciation for business models and should take into account business

5.14

pact that potential

development could have on identified centres within the catchment. In addition, Local Planning

• The impact on car use traffic and congestion.

are to consider an indicative upper limit for the scale of development likely to be permissible in

different types of centres.

PPS6 adopts the s

All options in town centres should be thoroughly assessed before less central sites are considered

for development of town centre uses. Paragraph 2.44 sets out the sequential approach that is

required. A development should be considered in the fol

• First locations in appropriate existing centres where suitable sites or buildings for convers

are, or are likely to become avai

centre; and then

• Edge-of-centre locations with preference given to sites that are or will be well connected to

the centre; and then

• Out-of-centre sites with preference given to sites that are or will be well served by a choice o

means of tran

When considering sites Local Planning Authorities should in consultation with stakeholders

an appropriate range of sites to allow the accommodation of the identified need, it also recognise

that Local Planning Authorities should be flexible and realistic when drawing up such sites and

should discuss this with developers and operators. It is also recognised that Local Planning

models in terms of scale, format, car parking provision and the scope for disaggregation.

When considering potential sites for allocation either in edge-of-centre or out-of-centre locations the

statement also suggests that Local Planning Authorities should assess the im

Authorities should ensure that locations are accessible when selecting appropriate sites for

allocation. These should be:

• Whether the site is or will be accessible or well served by a choice of means of transport,

especially public transport, walking and cycling, as well as by car; and

51

Regional Planning Guidance for the North West- RPG13 (March 2003)

d

ed

.16 The RPG (now RSS) recognises that following the decline of traditional manufacturing and related

5.17

5.18

ntly the economic

strength and social regeneration with the NWMA. The Borough of Tameside falls within the

5.19 ure and Office

Development’ states that ‘development plans, town centre management initiatives and other

n and improve all of the town and

y h the enticement of new retail, leisure and/ or a

s primary shopping centres.

.20 In line with Central Government advice a sequential approach should be adopted to determine the

nsport.

5.21

pments should be attracted away from out-of-

centre locations and so an escalation of activities in such locations should be avoided.

5.15 Regional Planning Guidance for the North West (RPG13), which became the statutory Regional

Spatial Strategy (RSS) on the 28th September 2004 following the provisions of the Planning an

Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, was adopted in March 2003. The new RSS is due to be publish

in January 2006.

5

industries, emphasis must be placed on making the Region prosperous and competitive by

encouraging the sectors with most possibility of growth.

The overriding aim of the RSS is asserted as being to promote sustainable patterns of spatial

development and physical schemes.

A North West Metropolitan Area (NWMA) is identified in RPG13 within which the utmost priority will

be given to development and resources which support and augment significa

catchment of this area and thus will benefit from a concentration of investment and regeneration

resources.

In specific consideration of town centres, Policy EC8 ‘Town Centres- Retail, Leis

strategies should recognise the continued need to protect, sustai

cit centres in the region.’ This is to be done throug

diversity of uses within existing town centres, predominantly toward

5

location of retail developments, and these must always be in close proximity to public tra

However, it must be acknowledged that: ‘no need has been demonstrated to create new or to extend

existing out-of-centre regional or sub-regional shopping and leisure facilities.’

In addition, ‘while retailing is central to the strength of the Region’s city and town centres, it is

important to accommodate a full range of uses.’ As a result new developments should provide a

mixture of uses which will serve to invigorate places, facilitate urban regeneration and social

inclusion, and lessen the need to travel. Such develo

52

.22 The Tameside Unitary Development plan is the strategic plan for the Tameside area, which

ossley and Hattersley as

small district centres in addition to the centres of Audenshaw and Longendale area. It was adopted

5.23 In term

picture ancillary activities

uld s

ch are fre

Ashton itionally edge-of-town developments have taken place through

f food

and co n-food shopping is recognised as being restricted to a

sing sive retail park at The Snipe between Ashton and Audenshaw.

5.24

each

eir individual identities. It identifies a

hierarchy of settlements which it seeks to support through the Plan. These are:

• Denton, Droylsden, and Stalybridge, as district centres; and

5.25 nhance

environmental quality and appearance, to support and develop their role in providing office and other o

ed through developing a plethora of attractions and amenities, fostering an

attractive environment, facilitating good accessibility and attracting continual investment in new

5.26 l developments, cites town centres as the preferred

location for developments that attract many trips. In order to determine which sites will be brought

forward for development a sequential approach will be adopted for new retail development, with

Tameside Unitary Development Plan (2004)

5

includes Ashton-under-Lyne as the Borough’s sub-regional shopping centre, Hyde as a large

district centre, Denton, Droylsden and Stalybridge as district centres, M

in November 2004.

s of town centres and shopping the Unitary Development Plan sets out the current retail

in the Borough (Policy 1.7). It asserts that the focus for shopping and

sho remain on the established town centres, together with support for local centres and parade

whi quently fragile. It recognises that enhancements have recently been undertaken in

and Stalybridge. Add

schemes in Ashton, Hyde, Stalybridge, Droylsden and Denton, including the development o

nvenience store units. Out-of-town no

le, expan

Policies within the Unitary Development Plan reflect national guidance and regional policy and

advice. Policy S1 of the Unitary Development Plan seeks to maintain and develop the role of

of the significant settlements in Tameside whilst preserving th

• Ashton, as the Borough’s sub-regional shopping centre;

• Hyde, as a large district centre;

• Mossley and Hattersley, as small district centres.

This programme of investment and improvement will comprise: ‘…measures to e

employment, to improve their accessibility by public and private transport and for pedestrians, and t

make them safer by designing out crime.’ (Page 57). Moreover, the supporting text underlines the

vital role which town centres have to play in delivering sustainable development. It is envisaged

that this will be achiev

development and revitalisation of existing buildings.

Policy S2, in relation to new town centre retai

53

town centres being the primary preference. However, it also notes that there is currently no

pressing need for supplementary floorspace in Ashton.

With regards to new retail developments outside of town centres Policy S3 states that permission

for large-scale retail out of town development will only be approved if:

5.27

need for the proposed development, and b) The development complies with the sequential approach in which first preference should be

s

acceptable loss to vitality and viability of any nearby town centre, and

g

e) ificantly extend journey patterns.’

5.28 Polic e of retail to non-retail uses will not be

s

a div

howe s.

5.29 Retail core ap

ich ld be encouraged in the

wer-order settlements of Denton, Droylsden and Stalybridge.

5.30

s

ties in local proximity.

5.31 Policy S6 ‘New local shopping developments’ permits the development of additional small-scale

retail outlets serving local need as long as these do not upset the strength or feasibility of existing

centres, will not detract from the surrounding environment, and will cause traffic problems within the

surrounding vicinity.

5.32 Policy S7 will allow food, drink and amusements centres provided that they are not at the expense

of local amenity, they do not generate a hazard to other road users, and that they do not

detrimentally alter the character of the area.

‘a) There is a proven

town centre locations, where suitable viable sites are available, followed by edge-of-centre sitein locations that are accessible by a choice of means of transport, and

c) The development would not result in un

d) The development would not result in unacceptable increase in congestion on the surroundinhighway network, and The development would be accessible by public transport from a wide area and would sign

y S4 states that in primary shopping areas the chang

allowed if this would overshadow and dominate retail uses. Outside of the primary shopping area

ersity of uses may be permitted. Diversification of leisure uses in Ashton Town Centre,

ver, is encouraged to create active day-time frontage

s are identified within the defined centres of Ashton and Hyde on the proposals m

wh should be supported, whilst a greater array of different uses shou

lo

Change of use in local shopping centres, as discussed in Policy S5, will not be permitted unless

continued retail use is unviable, if it would result in environmental improvements, and if the need

of the local population can still be met by from other facili

54

5.3 The provision of built recreation, leisure and tourism development is permitted with town centres by 3

Policy S8. Outside of town centres such facilities will be allowed only if a need exists and

the sequential approach. In addition, new developments should enhance local

environments and cause no adverse impact on adjacent highways. Weight is given to improving

5.34

,

a) Suitable arrangements for parking, servicing and access to and from the highway, including pedestrians, cyclists and disabled people, and for convenient access by public

rt where appropriate, with no unacceptable impact on the surrounding highway network, and

he

table impact on residential amenity including d

e) Minimisation of opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour.’

5.35

t

subsequent to

recreational opportunities at local and neighbourhood level, especially in deprived areas.

Policy S9 states that:

‘The layout, design, external appearance and operation of proposed retail and leisure developmentswhich are acceptable in relation to other relevant policies in this plan, will be required to be of high quality and to meet the more detailed criteria;

access bytranspo

b) Building design and use of materials which relate well to local features and complement or enhance the character of the surrounding areas, and

c) Suitable landscaping and screening, including retention of exiting features such as trees andhedges where practical, which enhance the appearance of the development and minimise tvisual impact of plant storage and service areas, and

d) No unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties through noise, fumes, lighting, litter, traffic and other disturbance, and no unaccepconsideration of hours or operation, an

Finally Policy S10 will permit the refurbishment of existing out-of-centre retail locations provided

that they are in accordance with Policy S3 ‘New developments outside Town Centres’. It identifies

such locations as being; the non-food Snipe Retail Park, and free-standing food superstores a

Foundry Street, Dukinfield and Oldham Street, Denton.

55

6 S

.01 in the previous section of this report, it is evident that since 2001, the market shares

with the adjoining authorities of High Peak, Manchester, Oldham and Stockport (in both food and

rt

ajor

retail proposals. Clearly, any proposed retail development within the adjoining authorities could

t could

.02 Consultants recently completed a retail study in September 2004 on behalf of the Council, which

al

6.03

urvey) it is important to assess what developments are proposed in

the northern part of High Peak Borough. In this respect, it is notable that the Retail Study did not

.

6.04

nt within town centres to aid redevelopment. Although no specific retail

study has been utilised by the Council, it is evident that there are likely to be a number of retail

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND STRATEGIES IN ADJOINING LOCAL AUTHORITY AREA

Introduction 6 As highlighted

non-food shopping) within both the core and outer catchments have altered. On this basis, as pa

of this study discussions took place between the relevant Council and White Young Green to

discuss the key strategies and aspirations each Council have for their area including any m

have an impact on the future retail capacity within Tameside and the likely market shares tha

be achieved.

High Peak

6

assessed retail capacity in the Central Area of the Borough, namely the towns of Whaley Bridge,

Chapel-en-le-Frith and New Mills. The report concluded that there was capacity for addition

convenience floorspace in New Mills and Whaley Bridge by 2011 and capacity for additional

comparison floorspace within the three towns collectively of 1,222 sq m (gross) by 2011 at current

market share, although this could increase to 3,722 sq m through ‘clawing back’ expenditure that is

currently being lost to competing centres.

However, given the influence of Glossop Town Centre on shopping patterns within the study area

(as reflected by the household s

assess capacity for Glossop. Notwithstanding this, discussions between High Peak Borough

Council and White Young Green have indicated that within the town there are both a number of

commitments and proposals for non-food uses. These include a 1,858 sq m (gross) retail

development that is currently in progress at an edge-of-centre location, part of which includes a

KFC and a public house, whilst a 1,858 sq. m (gross) Focus DIY store has recently opened

With regard to the Council’s aspirations in terms of retailing, the main schemes operating are

Regeneration Areas which are advocated by the Local Plan. In this respect, the Council aim to

focus retail developme

development opportunities coming forward in the Glossop and northern part of the Borough in the

near future. In this respect, the continued improvement of the retail offer in High Peak may have an

impact on shopping patterns in the identified study area, most notably in the eastern zones (e.g.

56

Zone 10). However, it is unlikely that any major schemes will be developed within the Borough

(most notably around Glossop) in the short to medium term that will

have a significant impact on

shopping patterns within Tameside.

6.05

6.06

development plan identify the importance of Manchester City Centre’s role as a commercial centre

the North

6.07

nt

ctors.

e economic

performance of the city centre.

6.08

dale Centre on the

north side, which has created a new store for Next fronting Exchange Square together with a

shop units. Retail space in the centre has increased by 27,870 sq m to reach a total of

130,000 sq m. Other major schemes include the proposed development of an Ilva (one of

hich will

se

a

Manchester

Consultants are currently in the process of producing a retail study on behalf of Manchester City

Council, which is due to be finished in December 2005. In the meantime the Manchester Unitary

Development Plan (UDP) is used in assessing further retail development in the Borough.

In this respect, the adopted Manchester UDP identifies Manchester City Centre as the main

administrative, commercial centre in the north of England. Therefore, policies within the

in serving not just the city of Manchester and the Greater Manchester conurbation but

West Region and beyond.

However, it is notable that there have been a number of successful residential schemes in the city

centre over the past few years. However, the Council are now seeking to suppress further

residential development in the city centre and encourage more retail and commercial developme

instead and are working hard to capture significant levels of investment to develop these se

Given this, Manchester City Council in partnership with the Manchester City Centre Management

Company have produced a Strategic Plan for the period 2004 to 2007. The purpose of the

Strategic Plan is to provide an agreed framework for continued regeneration, investment and

service improvement in the city centre with the main focus of the plan to strengthen th

In terms of retail development within the city centre, there has been significant development in

recent years including the Triangle development and the expansion of the Arn

further 75

Denmark’s largest furniture retailers) furniture store of 11,000 sq m at Piccadilly Basin, w

‘kick-start’ the retail element of the wider regeneration. In addition, retail floorspace is proposed

within the Royal Exchange redevelopment, which will include 15 boutiques ranging in size from 39

to 93 sq m.

6.09 Other major retail development that has taken place recently includes a major new retail park at

Cheetham Hill to the north of the city centre (Manchester Fort Shopping Park), with the first pha

comprising some 20,348 sq m of retail space, including a B&Q Warehouse (9,661 sq m), Comet,

57

dedicated George Asda, TK Maxx, The Link and Boots. The second phase will bring the total

development up to 29,728 sq m and comprises a further 19 units.

n Asda Wal-Mart. In this respect, the Council identify that some centres,

most notably Openshaw is underperforming. Therefore, the Council identifies scope to redevelop

e

6.11 iscussed for a

redevelopment of the area to incorporate new shopping, leisure and commercial development. In

hton Old Road and

being bounded by Turton Street and Fairfield Road. However, from White Young Green’s

e.

6.12

pact on shopping patterns within Tameside.

6.13

ouncil’s policy is to sustain and enhance the role of Oldham Town Centre as a

sub-regional shopping centre and planning policies are designed to ensure that it remains the main

6.14 in

m such as Chadderton. Therefore, whilst the Council want to

improve Oldham Town Centre as a retail destination they do not wish to significantly expand the

6.10 In terms of the Council’s retail aspirations for other centres in the City, it is notable that the focus for

regeneration is seen as being district centres on the eastern side of the Borough (which

significantly borders Tameside) following on from the significant development at Sportscity in recent

years, which includes a

these areas by providing significant new retail floorspace although no formal proposals have been

identified as yet. Similarly, a study of Newton Heath District Centre is to be drawn up by

consultants on behalf of the Council to guide a development framework. The guide will examine

how to develop the centre into a viable and attractive retail destination following a period of declin

With particular regard to Openshaw District Centre, plans have been d

light of this, public consultation has been undertaken on a number of different options proposed for

the scheme. Furthermore New East Manchester and development partner Dransfield Properties

Ltd have been in talks aiming to secure a major retailer to anchor the scheme and occupy a 7,711

sq m (83,000 sq. ft) supermarket, which will locate in a site fronting onto As

discussions with Manchester City Council it is apparent that whilst proposals have been discussed

no planning application has yet been lodged and it is unclear when and indeed if one will be mad

As such, the Council wishes to secure Openshaw’s regeneration in the long term, and does not

envisage the proposals for its regeneration to be brought forward in the near future.

Understandably given the importance of Manchester City Centre as the regional centre, significant

retail development has occurred in recent years (much since the completion of the 2001 Study),

which will continue to have an im

Oldham

Oldham Town Centre is the main administrative and shopping centre for the Borough.

Consequently, the C

focus of shopping activity in the Borough.

Furthermore, the Council also want to maintain the vitality and viability of other key centres with

the Borough in addition to Oldha

58

town centre at the expense of these centres, which are considered to provide an important ro

meeting the requirements of the local population.

As part of improving Oldham Town Centre, the Oldham Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) togeth

with the North West Development Agency have produced a masterplan for the town centre

(‘Oldham Beyond’), which sets out a vision for the Borough of Oldham including a specific vision for

Oldham Town Centre.

The masterplan for the town centre highlights the importance of Oldham as a key cent

only centre within the Borough that can fulfil a sub-regional role. The masterplan identifies some

24.5 hectares of land available for extension within the town centre. However, much of this land is

also identified as part

le in

6.15 er

6.16 re, being the

of the proposed Metrolink expansion to Oldham and given the uncertainty

regarding the future position of the Metrolink expansion; there is uncertainty with regard to how

.17 Notwithstanding this, current plans for additional retail development make provision for a managed

6.18 II

mprehensive

Clegg Street for 15,330 sq m (gross) of retail development

(including 5,100 sq m redeveloped space within the Town Square Shopping Centre). The site will

6.19 A further retail development opportunity (25,000 sq m gross) exists on part of the Tommyfield

n with improvements to the market itself. In addition, consent has recently

been granted for 2,300 sq m of new retail floorspace in the existing food court of the Spindles

6.20

much of this land is available for additional town centre development.

6

expansion of the Central Shopping Core (CSC) to further strengthen its attraction as the Borough’s

primary shopping centre with a view to recapturing the significant proportion of retail expenditure

currently being lost to the nearby town centres of neighbouring boroughs.

Sites for the expansion of the retail core have been identified at Clegg Street (including the Grade

listed old town hall) and at Tommyfield Market. Although there is no up-to-date co

retail capacity assessment for the Borough, the Council acknowledge that need is known to exist

for a significant amount of additional comparison goods floorspace. In this respect the

development plan allocates a site off

also comprise a cinema and bowling alley and a developer to take the site forward has recently

been approved by the Council.

Market, in associatio

Shopping Centre.

Planning permission also exists to extend the Town Centre Shopping Centre out to the Old Town

Hall. This would result in an additional 10,219 sq m (gross) of new retail floorspace and this would

enable the centre to be anchored by a further department store as well as improving access to

eastern part of the town centre.

59

6.21

currently underperforming despite benefiting from 8,667 sq m (gross) of Open-A1

non-food planning consent. However, the Council are keen to see the retail park linked more

d

h

)

ess

.22 With regard to recent convenience goods development, a new supermarket (Sainsbury’s) has been

y.

6.23

for

)

Chadderton/Failsworth. In Greenfield, Tesco have applied for a convenience goods only store of

en

an

Alexandra Retail Park located to the south of Oldham Way, is identified by the Council to be

outdated and

effectively with the town centre to encourage linked trips. Consequently, the retail park benefits

from a number of permissions and proposals, including in 2004 planning permission being grante

to remodel the retail park increasing the floorspace to approximately 9,475 sq m (gross) of retail

development, restricted to the sale of ‘bulky goods’, with the exception of 2,787 sq m, whic

benefits from Open-A1 non-food planning permission and a further 4,645 sq m which could be

developed for ‘bulky goods’ retailing. Furthermore, there is a further proposal for the

redevelopment of a larger site (i.e. the existing retail park and adjoining Council owned vacant land

13,442 sq m (gross) of non-food retailing, however the Section 106 Agreement is still in the proc

of being negotiated.

6

built at Union Street (8,360 sq m gross) to the south west of the town centre since the 2001 Stud

Elsewhere in the Borough, the Council have recently granted permission for a new edge-of-centre

Asda store (5,481 sq m gross) at Shaw District Centre. There is currently a planning application

the redevelopment of Failsworth District Centre, which includes both food and non-food uses

totalling some 8,000 sq m (gross). Additionally there is a valid permission for 4,924 sq m (gross

foodstore, although non-food retail development is also allowed on the site. Furthermore, extant

planning permission exists for three ‘bulky goods’ units (each 929 sq m gross) at

2,323 sq m (gross). Although the Council minded to approve the scheme, the application has be

‘called-in’ by the Secretary of State.

6.24 It is evident that significant development is proposed in Oldham, both within the town centre and

the surrounding centres, which is likely to have an impact on shopping patterns in the defined study

area in the future.

Stockport

6.25 The Council’s ambition for Stockport Town Centre is to make the most of its potential by creating a

sub-regional centre that matches the aspiration and affluence of the Borough. The Council beg

this process by adopting the Town Centre/M60 Gateway Regeneration Plan, a vision for the future

development of Stockport Town Centre and M60 motorway corridor. Retail and evening economy

studies were commissioned in 2003 and reported in 2004 to investigate the future of these sectors

and identify opportunities for investment and growth. Informed by these studies a consortium led

60

by BDP was appointed in February 2004 to prepare a detailed masterplan for the centre of

Stockport.

The Masterplan itself comprises major redevelopment in the town centre including Mersey Square,

a major new piece of public realm straddling the

6.26

A6 viaduct; a new public transport interchange

bringing bus, rail and the proposed Metrolink together, a major expansion to and improvement of

way Shopping Centre and New Princes Street to extend the core retail offer in

Stockport; and Station Approach/Grand Central Scheme as the focus for leisure uses and the

that the

is

been made thus far.

6.27 Notwithstanding this, recent major retail developments and commitments in Stockport include a

non-food retail development at Knightsbridge Court/Great Portwood Street (7,572 sq m gross) of

non-food retailing, the Satnam development at Water Street/Brewery Street, which benefits from

consent for 10,220 sq m (gross) of non-food retail development, the potential redevelopment of

Bridgefield Street (10,000 sq m gross) within the town centre, which provides an opportunity to

expand the town’s comparison ‘high street’ retail offer and the Garfield Street site has planning

permission for 465 sq m (gross) of non-food retail floorspace. Furthermore, since the completion of

the 2001 Study, a Tesco Extra store at Tiviot Way has been developed in Stockport.

6.28 Elsewhere within the Borough, Waitrose are proposing a new store (up to 4,500 sq m gross) at

Cheadle Hulme, which may have a limited impact on drawing trade from Tameside.

6.29 It is evident there are currently significant commitments and proposals within and outside Stockport

Town Centre for additional non-food retail development (over 28,000 sq m). However, this is

unlikely to have significant impact on shopping patterns within Tameside given its location.

Other Major Developments/Proposals

6.30 In addition it is also important to take into account other retail developments/proposals within the

region which may have an impact on shopping patterns in the study area. In this respect, The

Trafford Centre was identified to be a popular destination for non-food shopping, attracting 3% of all

non-food shopping trips in the study area. In this respect, it is significant to note that a John Lewis

store has been developed at The Trafford Centre since the last study was completed, and planning

permission has recently been granted to extend the shopping centre by some 18,581 sq m of retail

floorspace in addition to 630 more free parking spaces (to be known as ‘Barton Square’), which will

the Mersey

evening economy, with St Peter’s Square linking through to the Marketplace. It is intended

retail floorspace in the Merseyway will be doubled. Ultimately, the Masterplan for the town centre

proposes to deliver a net additional floorspace of around 106,570 sq m, the majority of which

considered to be in the retail sector. However although the first stage of the Masterplan has been

approved, little progress has

61

be open in early 2007. It is intended that Barton Square will target the high quality home market

with a variety of units offering furniture, kitchens, bathrooms, home furnishings and other items that

. Clearly, this development is likely to have an

impact on shopping patterns in the study area, due to The Trafford Centre’s good accessibility from

.31 ent of the retail offer is taking place in the adjoining

authorities which are likely to improve competing centres attractiveness as a retail destination (both

tain

are not currently available at The Trafford Centre

the study area and Tameside Borough.

Summary 6 It is evident that significant enhancem

for food and non-food goods). Therefore, it is important that the Council seek to continue to

improve the retail offer in Tameside, focusing primarily on Ashton-under-Lyne in order to main

its position in the hierarchy.

62

7 ASSESSMENT OF VITALITY AND VIABILITY OF DEFINED CENTRES

.01 s sec ton-

under-L

Unitary and Stalybridge, Denton and Droylsden District Centres.

The Imp

.03 nin Policy Statement 6 ‘Planning for Town Centres’ (2005), emphasis the need for local

their town centres and how they are changing over time.

contri s the aims of sustainable development.

7.04 een concern nationally about the health of town centres. Changing

e private car, working patterns and the resulting

op cases, lose out to large out of town retail and

Trafford Centre). Furthermore, a new threat to town centres is the

nd internet shopping.

It is important that established centres in Tameside remain competitive in light of increased

is,

strengths, alleviate its weaknesses and

continually improve the facilities it provides to the community. Successful town centres must

7.06 The Town Ce

1.

2. oint for any retail strategies that may be produced and will assist

in retail planning within Tameside;

Introduction

7 Thi tion of the report assesses the vitality and viability of the defined town centres of Ash

yne, together with Hyde, which is identified as a large district centre in the Tameside

Development Plan

ortance of Town Centres

7.02 Town centres have an important role to play in any borough. They form a focal point for the

community and provide a wide range of services that are accessible to the whole population,

including retail, employment, leisure, education and transport.

7 Plan g

authorities to monitor the ‘health’ of

Indeed, a vital and viable town centre helps to foster civic pride and local identity and can

bute toward

In recent years there has b

patterns in the ownership and dependence on th

sh ping patterns have seen town centres, in many

leisure complexes (e.g. The

growth in e-commerce a

The Purpose of the Health Check

7.05

competition and continue to attract shoppers, visitors and businesses to the town. To achieve th

the town centres must continually strive to build on its

respond effectively to the changing needs and demands of its users.

ntre Health Checks in Tameside serve a number of very important functions:

It will help to assess the success of retail policies in the existing Tameside Unitary

Development Plan and will assist in the formulation of appropriate policies;

It will provide a starting p

63

3. It will provide useful baseline data that will facilitate a process of monitoring that can be

undertaken each year to assess how the town centre is performing over time;

It will allow positive and negative aspects of the town centre to be identified and

appropriate action taken;

4.

5. It will provide data that can be used to compare the performance of town centres in

main

6. it will allow schemes and

strategies to be drawn up to help improve the town centres for its users.

7.07 This health check, whilst focusing specifically on economic factors, will also look at other issues

such as transport provision and the environment, it incorporates information gained on the key

centr include:

nd out-of-centre

• Proportion of vacant street level property;

non-domestic property;

• Pedestrian flows;

te of the town centre environmental quality.

h

gauge the principal reasons for visiting the centre, general attitudes towards the

facilities on offer and any qualitative improvements that would encourage a greater use of

e

pendix

Tameside to other neighbouring centres in the region and to ensure that the centres re

competitive; and

By looking at retailers’ and shopper’s perception of the town

indicators that PPS6 (paragraph 4.4) suggest should be used to help assess the health of town

es. These

• Diversity of town centre uses;

• The amount of retail, leisure and office floorspace in edge-of-centre a

locations;

• Retailer representation and intentions to change representation;

• Shopping rents;

• Commercial yields on

• Accessibility;

• Customer and resident’s views and behaviour;

• Perception of safety and occurrence of crime; and

• Sta

7.08 Our assessment has been informed by a combination of ‘desk based’ research, ‘on the ground’

observations and original survey work, including:

1. An on-street survey of customer attitudes in Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre. A researc

company conducted interviews with 221 visitors to Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre in

order to

the centre. Fieldwork took place between Monday 15 and Tuesday 23 August 2005. Th

tabulated results of these surveys along with the questionnaire are contained at ApI.

64

.09 ments have been consulted and referred to in the text

riate:

• on-under-Lyne Town Retail Stud une 2000)- Co nrad Ritblat Erdman

);

• stria

• A Vitality and Viab e position in Greater Manc r 1997;

• shton Town Centre R ecembe 98) - GVA Grimley;

•

• BC Vitality Reports ); an

• side Retail Study (Ja 2001) - CB Hillier Parker.

de lies at the east of the Greater Manchester metropolitan area, bound to

ester, Stockport to the south and High Peak to the east.

ow illustrates the main town centre’s position within the hierarchy of centres within and

zons Europe ‘UK Shopping Index (2003/04)’.

ng town centres, stand alone

centres. The index is based on a weighted

sion of multiple retailers and anchor

7.12 e classed as a ‘Sub-Regional Centre’ and

ping venues.

ces in the

2. A postal survey of existing businesses in the centres of Ashton-under-Lyne, Hyde,

Denton, Stalybridge and Droylsden in order to assess the commercial confidence in the

centres and to seek views on their strengths, weaknesses and opportunities. The

questionnaire and results are contained at Appendix II.

3. A household survey of residents within the defined Study Area to indicate shopping

patterns within the Borough, including mode of transport and reason for visiting. The

questionnaire and results are contained at Appendix III.

7 In addition to the above, the following docu

where approp

Asht Centre y (J lliers Co

(CCRE

AGMA 1999 pede n survey;

AGM ility base lin heste

A etail Study (D r 19

AGMA Monitoring Report (1999);

Tameside M and Viability (1995, 1996 d

Tame nuary

The Regional Hierarchy

The Borough of Tamesi7.10

the north by Oldham, to the west by Manch

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre is the main retail area in the Borough and acts the sub-regional

centre.

Table 7.1 bel7.11

outside the Borough based on the Management Hori

This index ranks the top 1,672 shopping venues in the UK, includi

malls, major retail warehouse parks and factory outlet

scoring system which takes account of each location’s provi

store strength.

The MHE Rankings identifies Ashton-under-Lyne to b

ranked 171st nationally in 2004, which places it in the top 10% of all UK shop

Furthermore, between 2001 and 2004, Ashton-under-Lyne’s position has improved 15 pla

65

rankings of centres. In comparison, nearby Oldham has fallen 35 places to 156th during the same

period. It is notable that Snipe Retail Park in Ashton-under-Lyne is also identified as a shopping

destination being ranked 863rd, which is joint with Stalybridge but significantly higher than

Droylsden (912th) and Denton (1,194th). However, it is evident that Hyde and Stalybridge hav

seen the greatest improvement of centres in the Borough in their rankings since 2001 (of 32

e

and 68

places respectively). In comparison, Droylsden has seen a fall in ranking of 84 places since 2001

-la-Zouch in the East Midlands and being

is Denton.

and is now ranked equal with centres such as Ashby-de

classed by the MHE Rankings as a ‘Local’ centre, as

Table 7.1: The Regional Shopping Hierarchy Centre Location Grade Rank 2003-2004 Rank 2000-2001 Change in Rank Manchester Major Regional 2 3 +1

The Trafford Centre Major Regional 32 30 -2

Stockport Regional 67 65 -2

Bury Sub-Regional 143 121 -22

Oldham Sub-Regional 156 121 -35

Ashton-under-Lyne Sub-Regional 171 186 +15

Rochdale Sub-Regional 171 136 -35

Hyde Major District 374 406 +32

Glossop Minor District 685 614 -71

Ashton (Snipe Retail Park) Minor District 863 - -

Stalybridge Minor District 863 931 +68

Droylsden Local 912 828 -84

Denton Local 1194 - -

General Descriptio he Tow tre

Source: Management Horizons Europe: UK Shopping Index (2003/2004)

Ashton-under-Lyne

n of t n Cen

7.13 A r-Lyne Centre is located in eastern f Greate chester s ght

k est of Manchester re, located in clo imity to 60 and M

motorways.

.14 within and around

entre (15,334 sq

m) which comprises retailing over two floors and the

Ladysmith Shopping Centre (15,613 sq m) containing

partially covered units. Further retailing is located on

Market Place, which includes the open air market

(Figure 7.1), and on Warrington Street. Secondary

retailing is located on Stamford Street and Old Street

and Penny Meadow.

shton-unde Town the part o r Man ome ei

ilometres w City Cent se prox the M 67

7 Retailing is concentrated mainly

two shopping centres, the Arcades C

Figure 7.1: Ashton Open-air Market

66

7 Although the town centre is relatively compact it also contains a variety.15 of uses on top of its retail

base, including the Town Hall and Coun oge Art gallery an rary

on Old Street, and the Hippodrome Thea nally, a umber of il u d

in the ‘Old Town’ on e Street, Penny M ow and t

in bs, caf nd nigh adding to the centre g eco ’.

7.16 F rovision o iling and leisure is provided by

main retail area of the town centre. Although not

includes retailers such as Next,

Comet, Currys, B&Q, and Carpet Right. Although

cil offices, t ther with the d Central Lib

tre. Additio n non-reta ses are locate

Georg ead he eastern end of Stamford Street

cluding pu es, a tclubs s ‘evenin nomy

urther p f reta

Ashton Retail Park, located in close proximity to the

located within the town centre, additional retailing is

provided at the out-of-centre Snipe Retail Park (Figure

7.2) comprising 15,329 sq m of retail floorspace,

which is situated approximately two kilometres west of

the town centre and Figure 7.2: Snipe Retail Park

comparison retailers dominate the area, services are provided in the form of a Pizza Hut and

McDonalds restaurants.

Diversity of Uses

Tables 7.2 and 7.3 below illustrate the retail composition of Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre in

2001 and at 2005 and compare it with the national average. This analysis is based on information

derived from Goad and Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council.

Table 7.2: Retail Composition Aston-under-Lyne Town

7.17

Centre

Sector No. of Outlets

%* of Outlets Floorspace (sq m)

%* of Floorspace

2005 2005 GB 2005 2005 GB

Convenience 24 5.2 7.9 14,725 14.9 12.6

Comparison 157 33.8 34.9 34,244 34.6 36.8

Service 216 46.6 48.4 36,399 36.7 43.4

Vacant 67 14.4 8.8 13,722 13.8 7.2

TOTAL 464 - 99,090 -

Source: Experian Goad (April 2005)

*May not total 100 due to rounding

67

Table 7.3: Retail Composition of Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre, 2001 Sector No. of

Outlets %* of Outlets Floorspace

(sq m) %* of Floorspace

Ashton Change 01-05

Ashton Change 01-05

Convenience 27 5.0 -0.2 3,159 4.3 +10 Comparison 218 40.4 -9.0 31,517 42.5 -9.3 Service 191 35.4 +7.8 29,027 39.1 -4.8 Vacant 103 19.1 -5.7 10,443 14.1 -0.8 TOTAL 539 - 74,146 -

.18 Table 7.2 indicates that at 2005 the convenience sector in Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre

rea

7.19 nvenience sector has declined since 2001 in terms of number of

units (by 3 units or 11%) the amount of floorspace occupied by this sector has greatly increased (by

Source: Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (2001) *May not total 100 due to rounding

7

comprises only 5.2% of outlets compared to the national average (7.9%). However, the proportion

of convenience floorspace (14.9%) is above the national average (12.6%), owing to the inclusion of

a large format food store, Asda, which is located to the south of the town centre, in the survey a

identified by Goad.

Table 7.3 shows that whilst the co

11,566 sq m or 366%). The total convenience floorspace figure has increased substantially since it

was measured through the AGMA Monitoring Report in 1999, which saw the total number of

convenience units at 44 and gross floorspace of only 792 sq m. However this survey excludes

Wellington Road and was derived utilising a different methodology, so it is significant to note that

these figures are not directly comparable. Tables 7.2 and 7.3 suggest that whilst the number of

convenience units has declined since 2001, the convenience floorspace has increased, reflectin

the changing needs of modern convenience

g

retail.

.20 arison to the

national average, with the on of comparison floorspa w the national average

( the pro rtion o ariso ts in 20 .8%) is low the n al

a 34.9%). By contra he figu btaine MA Moni Report s

t ts of 230 with a total floorspac

7.21 F ble tha e num f com on outle Ashton-u Lyne Town Centre

( y Goad) has de sin 01 (b r 28%), ilst non-foo ail floorsp as

i 2,727 sq m or 9%).

.22 portion of outlets (46.6%) is below the national average

(48.4%). Similarly, the proportion of floorspace given over to the service sector in Ashton-under-

7 The comparison sector in Ashton-under-Lyne is relatively poorly represented in comp

proporti ce (34.6%) belo

36.8%). In addition, po f p com n uni 05 (33 a elso b ation

verage ( st t res o d by the 1999 AG toring aw a

otal number of uni e of 3,143 sq m.

urthermore, it is nota t th ber o paris ts in nder-

as defined b clined ce 20 y 61 o wh d ret ace h

ncreased (by

7 In terms of the service sector, again the pro

Lyne Town Centre (36.7%) is also below the national average (43.4%). However, Table 7.3

highlights that the service sector in Ashton-under-Lyne has improved since 2001, with the number

68

of units increasing by 25 units or 13%, whilst the proportion of total floorspace has improved from

29,027 sq m in 2001 to 36,399 sq m in 2005, an increase of 7,372 sq m or 25%. This reflects a

national trend of growth in the leisure and service sector representation in town centres. Service

sector units are predominately located within the secondary shopping area and take the form o

bars and pubs together with numerous take-away and

f

fast-food outlets.

.24 As would be expected from a town of Ashton-under-Lyne’s size, the centre performs an important

s.

Moss,

e.

tudy

on-

iled information has been derived from Experian

(Goad Category Report) and a breakdown of the town centre in April 2005 is provided below. In

terms of convenience goods sector, Table 7.4 identifies that the town centre is dominated by a

number of small format outlets, most notably bakers and confectioners, although supermarkets

account for the vast majority of floorspace.

Table 7.4: Convenience Sector Composition of Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre (2005)

7.23 Overall, Tables 7.2 and 7.3 indicate that whilst the total proportion of retail floorspace has increased

in Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre since 2001 (by 24,944 sq m or 34%), the number of retail

outlets has decline significantly from 539 in 2001 to 464 in 2005, a fall of 75 units or 14%.

7

administrative function and incorporates government offices, public utilities and commercial office

Furthermore, the town centre does have a limited number of leisure and cultural venues which

serve both residents and visitors to Ashton-under-Lyne, including the leisure centre on Oldham

Road, a museum within the Town Hall, in addition, to a cinema and bowling facility at Ashton

located outside the town centr

7.25 In addition to assessing the change in retail composition in Ashton Town Centre in 2005, this s

provides a more detailed analysis of the type of retailers (both food and non-food) within Asht

under-Lyne Town Centre. In this respect, deta


% of Outlets Floorspace (sq m)

% of Floorspace

Ashton GB Ashton Ashton GB Bakers & Confectioners 7 1.40 1.48 622 0.60 0.66 Butchers 1 0.20 0.61 139 0.14 0.28 CTN 4 0.80 1.18 288 0.28 0.47 Convenience Stores 0 0.00 0.50 0 0.00 0.39 Fishmongers 0 0.00 0.11 0 0.00 0.04 Frozen Foods 3 0.60 0.26 938 0.91 0.62 Greengrocers 0 0.00 0.32 0 0.00 0.14 Grocers & Delicatessens 2 0.40 0.67 167 0.16 0.37 Health Foods 2 0.40 0.47 102 0.10 0.21 Markets 0 0.00 0.11 0 0.00 0.80 Off Licences 0 0.00 0.54 0 0.00 0.30 Shoe Repairs 2 0.40 0.41 74 0.07 0.10 Supermarkets 3 0.60 0.69 12,393 12.03 6.56 TOTAL 24 4.80 7.36 14,723 14.29 10.93

Source: Experian Goad Category Report (April 2005)

.26 As previously highlighted the proportion of convenience units is below the national average whilst

floorspace is above the national average. A more detailed assessment confirms that this situation

7

69

is due to the presence of three medium/large supermarkets within the town centre as identified by

Goad, which collectively account for 8 e to ce, w the other conven

u account for just 16%. In terms of tion utlets dably the sma

r te, with ‘Bakers and Con ctione pres g 29% of all units, followed by

‘ cco and News’ comprising 1

7.27 H roportion of units, only ‘Fr Foo .60%) is above the national av e

( perian. More er, wi ards to conven floorsp only th

w ozen Foods’ (0 %) an s’ (1 ) are above the ab

t 47% and 83% respectively).

7.28 O ident that the convenienc ector orly sented in terms of the number

u nder-Lyne Town Centre. F rmor he an of the rmarke

f e excluded, then both the oporti outlets and floorspace wou well be

t ery single sma retail art from ‘frozen foods’, unde forms

a rage.

7.29 T a detailed brea own mpari goods ers (as

identified in the Goad Category Report) within A -und ne To ntre in 2005 and

c ational average.

4% of th tal floorspa hereas all ience

nits together p rropo of o , u derstann ller

etailers domina fe rs’ re entin

Confectionary, Toba 7%.

owever, in terms of p ozen ds’ (0 erag

0.26%) as identified by Ex ov th reg i ence ace, at

hich is given over to ‘Fr .91 d ‘Supermarket 2 %.03 ove

he national average (by

verall, it is ev e s is po repre of

nits within Ashton-u urthe e, if t om lya supe t

loorspace wer pr on of ld be low

he national average. Ev ller er, ap rper

gainst the national ave

able 7.5 below provides kd of a variety of co son retail

shton er-Ly wn Ce

ompares them to the n

70

Table 7.5: Comparison Sector Composition of Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre (2005) Sector No. of

Outlets % of Outlets Floorspace

(sq m) % of Floorspace

Ashton GB Ashton Ashton GB Antique Shops 0 0.00 0.47 0 0.00 0.22 Art & Art Dealers 2 0.40 0.66 111 0.11 0.31 Booksellers 1 0.20 0.63 37 0.04 0.48 Carpets & Flooring 1 0.20 0.49 111 0.11 0.48 Catalogue Showrooms 1 0.20 0.18 567 0.55 0.56 Charity Shops 8 1.60 1.80 660 0.64 0.88 Chemists & Drugstores 2 0.40 0.95 1,273 1.24 1.28 Children’s & Infants Wear 6 1.20 0.68 808 0.78 0.54 Clothing General 9 1.80 1.81 2,713 2.63 2.51 Crafts, Gifts, China and Glass 4 0.80 1.37 390 0.38 0.60 Cycles & Accessories 1 0.20 0.20 84 0.08 0.13 Department & Variety Stores 2 0.40 0.65 4,199 4.08 5.24 DIY & Home Improvement 2 0.40 0.68 158 0.15 1.12 Electrical & Other Durable Goods 8 1.60 1.53 818 0.79 1.18 Florists 3 0.60 0.76 158 0.15 0.25 Footwear 8 1.60 1.37 1,496 1.45 0.96 Furniture Fitted 1 0.20 0.33 706 0.69 0.25 Furniture General 12 2.40 1.13 2,341 2.27 1.66 Gardens & Equipment 0 0.00 0.06 0 0.00 0.06 Greeting Cards 8 1.60 1.08 929 0.90 0.64 Hardware & Household Goods 6 1.20 1.22 5,054 4.91 1.82 Jewellery, Watches & Silver 12 2.40 1.71 567 0.55 0.65 Ladies & Menswear & Acc 4 0.80 0.62 427 0.41 0.59 Ladies wear & Accessories 17 3.40 3.72 3,047 2.96 2.58 Leather & Travel Goods 2 0.40 0.24 158 0.15 0.11 Menswear & Accessories 5 1.00 1.03 855 0.83 0.71 Music & Musical Instruments 0 0.00 0.20 0 0.00 0.11 Music & Video Recordings 2 0.40 0.44 427 0.41 0.39 Stationers 1 0.20 0.55 1,041 1.01 0.62 Office Supplies 0 0.00 0.09 0 0.00 0.11 Other Comparison Goods 4 0.80 0.69 316 0.31 0.52 Photographic & Optical 1 0.20 0.22 84 0.08 0.09 Second-hand Goods, Books, etc 0 0.00 0.25 0 0.00 0.11 Sports, Camping & Leisure Goods 6 1.20 0.97 1,905 1.85 1.03 Telephones & Accessories 3 0.60 0.96 307 0.30 0.43 Textiles & Soft Furnishings 5 1.00 0.89 799 0.78 0.61 Toiletries, Cosmetic & Beauty Products 4 0.80 0.71 780 0.76 0.66 Toys, Games & Hobbies 4 0.80 0.89 557 0.54 0.59 Vehicle & Motorcycle Sales 1 0.20 0.29 121 0.12 0.57 Vehicle Accessories 1 0.20 0.26 242 0.23 0.25 TOTAL 157 3 1.40 32.76 34,246 33.24 31.93

Source: Experian Goad (April 2005)

7.30 B he Goad Category Report su arise ve, viden he com on se

well represented in Ashton, wi pro tion o pari utlet %) co able t

national average (32.76%). Furthermor e pr ion of floorspac o

(33.24%) is above the natio ge .93% eed le 7.5 demonstrate t the t

centre is well repre er o eas, nota Footw urnitu neral’ a

‘ eisure Goods’. H ever sign t to no at there margin

d e in the methodology adopted xper pro thei ary Report and

the analysis identifies, the Summary Report utilised at Table 7.2

e (both units and floorspace) is below the

disparity and in order to provide a comparison with Ashton’s retail composition in 2001, White

ased on t mm d abo it is e t that t paris ctor is

th the por f com son o s (31.40 mpar o the

e, th oport e given over to this sect r

nal avera ( 13 ). Ind , Tab s tha own

sented in a numb f ar most bly ‘ ear’, ‘F re ge nd

Sports, Camping and L ow , it is ifican te th is a al

ifferenc by E ian in viding r Summ

Category Report. Indeed, as

identifies that the proportion of comparison floorspac

national average. In comparison, the Category Report utilised at Table 7.5 identifies that the

proportion of comparison floorspace in Ashton is marginally above the national average. Given this

71

Young Green consider that the floorspace figure identified in the Summary Report provided b

Experian (Table 7.2) should be considered in assessing the broad retail composition of the town

centre.

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre is well provided for in terms of ‘Hardware goods’ which accoun

for almost 5% of all floorspace, markedly above the national average of 1.83%.

y

7.31 t

In addition there

are a high number of ‘Jewellery, Watch and Silver’ units, representing 2.40% of all outlets

7.32

les’. This is partially

understandable as DIY and vehicle and motorcycle sales are generally located in edge-of-centre or

7.33 -

puters), DIY, hardware and garden items and furniture

and carpets, which are identified as the four main categories used in analysing shopping patterns in

od Retail Type (2005)

compared to the national average of 1.71%. In terms of floorspace, other well represented

comparison goods retailers include ‘Children’s and Infants wear’, with 0.78% of the floorspace

devoted to such retailers, compared to 0.54% nationally, and ‘Stationers’ occupying 1.01%

compared to the national average of 0.62%.

In contrast, Table 7.5 indicates that Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre provides a limited range of

retailers with regard to a number of comparison goods categories identified by Experian, including

‘Booksellers’, ‘DIY and Home Improvements’ and ‘Vehicle and Motorcycle sa

out-of-centre locations at large format and easily accessible sites.

Table 7.6 provides a breakdown of comparison retail units and floorspace within Ashton-under

Lyne Town Centre in the broader categories of: non-bulky (including clothes, books, records, toys,

etc.), electrical items (including home com

the defined catchment (Section 3).

Table 7.6: Breakdown of Comparison Sector by Non-FoSector No. of



Ashton GB Ashton Ashton GB Non-Bulky 117 23.40 25.00 23,588 22.89 23.53

Clothing & Footwear 49 9.80 9.23 9,346 9.06 7.89 Other 68 13.60 15.77 14,242 13.83 15.64

Bulky 38 7.60 7.23 10,294 10.00 7.52

Electrical 11 2.20 2.49 1,124 1.09 1.61 DIY 8 1.60 1.90 5,212 5.06 2.94

Furniture & Carpets 19 3.80 2.84 3,958 3.85 3.00

Other Comparison Goods*1 2 0.40 0.55 362 0.35 0.82

TOTAL 157 31.40 32.76 68,126 33.24 31.93

Source: Experian Goad (April 2005) * May not total 100 due to rounding

1 Includes ‘Vehicle & Motorcycle sales’ and Vehicle Accessories’

.34 Table 7.6 indicates that in terms of the proportion of outlets, whilst there will be some overlap

between the categories identified by Experian (e.g. Department Stores will sell a range of bulky and

7

72

non-bulky goods) the proportion of non-bulky goods (23.40%) is below the national average

(25.00%) whilst t ulky l average (7

H assessin fic comparison g ailers, it is notable that the propo

‘ and carpet’ s (3.80%) is well the national av (2.84%). On this basis, it

is evident that Ashton is well provided for in th rtion of ot -

bulky comparison good ilers (40%) is belo national avera ).

f units in this sector

(25.00%). By breaking this down it can be seen

e

l

e

ace

, the proportion of non-bulky goods floorspace within the town centre (22.89%)

is below the national average (23.53%).

7.37

.38 siness survey undertaken as part of this Study identified that

he proportion of b goods (7.60%) is above the nationa .23%).

owever, by g speci o tods re rtion of

Furniture retailer above erage

is sector. In addition, the propo her non

s reta w the ge (0.55%

7.35 In terms of non-bulky goods, Table 7.6 illustrates that overall the proportion o

(23.40%) is slightly below the national average

that whilst the proportion of ‘Clothing and Footwear’ retailers (9.80%) is above the national averag

(9.23%), the proportion of ‘Other’ non-bulky retailers (13.60%) is significantly below the nationa

average (15.77%). With regard to bulky goods the proportion of units (7.60%) is comparable to th

national average (7.23%). However, of the three types of bulky goods, it is evident that only the

proportion of ‘Furniture and Carpet’ good outlets (3.80%) is above the national average (2.84%).

This is attributable to a high number (12) of ‘Furniture’ outlets in the centre.

7.36 With regard to comparison goods floorspace, as previously highlighted, the proportion of floorsp

given over to the comparison goods floorspace is above the national average. However, it is

notable that the proportion of bulky goods floorspace (10.00%) is above the national average

(7.52%). In contrast

Overall, it is evident that Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre is strongly represented by bulky

comparison goods particularly in the furniture and carpet sector. Within this category the town

centre includes a number of furniture outlets.

7 In terms of the diversity of uses, the bu

44% of respondents considered there to be a good mix of existing town centre uses. However,

equally 44% of businesses considered that there were too many non-retail uses.

Retailer Representation

Table 7.7 illustrates the scale of Ashton-under-Lyne’s retail offer relative to other competing

centres.

7.39

73

Table 7.7: Retail Composition of Competing Centres Centre Convenience

Floorspace (sq m) Comparison Floorspace

(sq m) Service (sq m)

Total1

(sq m) Manchester* 13,025 139,085 77,193 229,303 Stockport* 16,165 82,479 17,011 115,655 Ashton* 14,725 34,244 36,399 85,368 Oldham * 16,611 43,980 11,715 72,306 Hyde* 20,104 20,188 7,386 47,678 Stalybridge^ 2,236 7,833 8,340 18,409 Denton^2 4,270 6,400 7,139 17,809 Droylsden^ 6,770 4,710 5,635 17,115

Source: * Derived from Experian Goad eside Metropolitan Borough Council (2001) relates to convenience, comparison and service floorspace only

7.40 e of the retail sector in Ashton-under-Lyne is greater than the four

other town centres in the Borough and is greater than nearby Oldham. Understandably, retail

ifi

Lyne (by 169% and 35% respectively). However, the co ce sector in Ashton- Lyne is

g that achieved in Manchester, although it is evident that Hyde Town Cen

most convenience goods retail provision of all the neighb authorities.

.41 With regard to Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre, within the convenience sector, key national

.

7.42

Boots, Woolworths and WH Smith. National multiples are primarily located within the

Ladysmith Centre and the Arcades Shopping Centre.

^ Derived from Tam 1 – Total floorspace 2 – Excludes Crown Point North, Denton

Table 7.7 indicates that the siz

floorspace in Manche ignific t identster and Stockport is s ant greater than tha ed in Ashton-under-

nv eneni u -nder

reater than tre has the

ouring

7

multiples present in Ashton-under-Lyne include Asda, Sainsbury’s, Lidl, Iceland and Kwik Save

The town centre also contains many smaller format and independent retailers, most notably in the

frozen food sector.

Despite its limited size, the comparison sector of Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre contains a

reasonably good representation of key national multiples including Marks & Spencer, Argos, Next,

Wilkinson,

Intentions to Change Representation

The majority of businesses surveyed (57%) indicated that they had plans to alter their existing

business in the next five years. In this respect, of those respondents who stated that they were

looking to alter their business, 44% stated that they were looking to refurbish or extend their

existing floorspace. However, 44% of respondents stated that there were considering closing or

relocating either to a competing centre of to an out-of-centre location. On this basis, the main

reasons cited by business for relocating included: poor trading since the market burnt down and th

old parts of the town lacking from investment with all investment focused on the market and

shopping centres.

The business survey indicated that 46% of

7.43

e

the

7.44 traders in Ashton-under-Lyne are trading poorly with

38% trading moderately. Only 15% stated that they trading well or very well. More than half of the

74

businesses surveyed (52%) considered that business has declined over the past five years, again

11% considering that business has improved. The main issues cited as having a constrain

influence on trading performance were inadequate customer car parking, lack of footfall within th

town centre and

st

ing

e

poor location of their premises. Poor security and inadequacy of current premises

ranked lowest on the list of issues perceived to be constraining business performance. Manchester

City Centre was considered to be the biggest competitor to businesses in Ashton-under-Lyne.

Retailer Requirements

Table 7.8 sets out retailer requirements within Ashton Town Centre as derived from the Focus

Database (September 2005).

7.45

Table 7.8: Summary of Retail Requirements within Ashton Town Centre, 2005

Number of Requirements Minimum Floorspace (sq m)

Maximum Floorspace (sq m)

Convenience 2 669 1,068 Comparison 22 9,351 25,525 Service 5 367 539 TOTAL 29 10,387 27,132

.46 It is evident that there is a healthy level of demand from businesses seeking representation in

own centre for different

sizes of units). Retailers include Debenhams, the Body Shop, Farmfoods, Pizza Hut and TK Maxx.

ove pas ear an

equal to the high achieved i ctobe 02, s sting t the cen seeing strong l

demand.

S vel Vaca s

Source: Focus Database (September 2005) – uses falling within specific retail trade categories as defined by Experian Goad.

7

Ashton-under-Lyne; with a total of 29 requirements listed seeking up to 27,132 sq m of floorspace

(although a single retailer may express more than one requirement in a t

T ent level o rese n (2 abov e avehe curr f rep ntatio

n O

9) is

r 20

e th

ugge

rage

tha

r the

town

t ten y

tre is

s (25) d is

retai

treet Le ncie

7.47 T of vacant units in a en dic f how the ce

for

positive as well as negative reasons (e.g. the opening of a new retail centre elsewhere in a town

.

rime locations. Despite these issues,

it is still a useful indicator of performance.

he number with town c tre can provide a good in ation o ntre is

performing. However, care should be taken when interpreting figures. Vacancies can occur

may draw retailers from older properties or more peripheral areas of the town). Vacant units will be

found in even the strongest town centre and are simply an indicator of the level demand in a centre

For example some properties may lay vacant because they are poorly maintained, unsuited to

modern retailing requirements of simply not being actively marketed. Conversely, a low vacancy

rate does not necessarily mean that a centre is performing well. For example, if there is a

proliferation of charity shops and other uses not usually associated with a town centre it may be a

sign of decline, particularly where these uses are located in p

75

7.48 In 2005 there were 65 vacant retail units which represent 13% of all retail outlets in Ashton To

Centre, which is significantly above the national average (7.91%). As a proportion of total

floorspace, vacancies account for 12,570 sq m or 12%, which is more than double the national

average (5%).

wn

r

en

n.

7.49 Vacancies are generally located to the south of the town centre in secondary retailing areas,

particularly along Stamford Street Central and Old Street. The southern area of the town centre,

particularly on the western end of Stamford Street Central, provides a potential opportunity fo

redevelopment. Furthermore, it is significant to note that a number of vacancies are located in the

St Petersfield area, which is vacant awaiting demolition to make way for new development. Giv

this, it is considered that a significant proportion of vacancies are part of a more positive pla

Commercial Rents and Yields

Zone A rents (the rental value of the first six metres depth of floorspac7.50 e in retail units from the shop

window) reflect retailers’ perception of the town centre. As retailers consider rents to reflect the

7.51 entre

Table 7.9: Prime Pitch Zone A Rents (£/sq m) – 1996 to 2004

margin between turnover and operational costs (plus profit), the better the trading prospects the

higher the rent that the operator will be willing to pay.

Table 7.9 below records the change in prime pitch Zone A rents in Ashton-under-Lyne Town C

over the period 1997 to 2005 relative to other centres in the sub-region.

Centre June

‘97 June ‘98

June ‘99

June ‘00

June ‘01

June ‘02

June ‘03

June ‘04

June ‘05

Ashton 700 700 700 808 808 862 862 862 1023

Bury 808 915 1,023 1,023 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,131

Manchester 2,154 2,962 3,231 3,231 3,015 3,015 3,231 3,231 3,231

Oldham 700 808 808 808 808 862 1,185 1,185 1,185

Rochdale 969 969 1,023 1,023 1,023 1,023 1,023 1,023 1,077

Stockport 1,723 1,938 1,992 2,046 2,046 2,154 2,046 2,046 2,046

Source: Focus Town Centre Reports (June 2005) based on Colliers CRE’s opinion of open market Zone A rents

Table 7.9 indicates that Zone A rents in Ashton-under-Lyne have increased by 46% between 1

and 2005, increasing from £700/sq m in June 1997 to £1,023/sq m in June 2005. This indicates a

strengthening of the perceived trading prospects of the centre between 1997 and 2005. From

discussions with local agents currently marketing properties in the town centre, current retail leve

within vacant units within the primary shopping zone (Arcades Centre) approximate rental levels o

between £500/sq m to £600/sq m were identified. However, within the secondary shopping area,

typical rental values were around £180/sq m to £200/sq m.

7.52 997

ls

f

76

7.53

erstandable given the strength of competing centres. However, with

regard to changes in rental levels, only Manchester (50%) and Oldham (69%) have experienced a

7.54 property.

A ‘yield’ represents the relationship between the rental income that a property is likely to command

the

a simple benchmark which the property

s of different shopping centres. Many

uire for a particular property, including: the

growth; the certainty of income; lease

ing can be put.

7.55 05) indicates that yields in Ashton-under-

and January 2005. In comparison the nearby

Accessibility

Rental levels in Ashton-under-Lyne at June 2005 are lower than those achieved in all nearby

competing centres. This is und

rise in rents above that experienced in Ashton-under-Lyne (46%) between 1997 and 2005.

Furthermore, PPS6 advises that a key indicator for vitality is the commercial ‘yield’ in retail

and its capital value, expressed as a percentage. Town centre yields broadly represent the

market’s assessment of the risk attached to investing in a particular centre; the higher the yield,

greater the risk involved in investment. Yields provide

market uses to assess the comparative attractivenes

considerations determine the yield an investor will req

physical condition of the building; the potential for rental

arrangement; and the range of uses to which the build

The Valuation Office Property Market Report (January 20

Lyne have remained static at 7% between April 1994

centres of Manchester, Bury, Rochdale and Oldham have all experienced falling and then rising

commercial yields, whilst Stockport has experienced a marginal rise over the same period, as

identified in the Property Market Report. A rise in yields represents a decrease in investor

confidence in an area.

7.57

et

(estimated 200 spaces), Union Street (180 spaces) and Henrietta Street (estimated 140 spaces).

el, although the Arcades car park provides multi-storey parking which is linked to the

shopping centre and the reminder of the town centre. Indeed, The Arcades Shopping Centre car

car th Shopping Centre is currently not used and as such there has been

inco

7.56 Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre is located on the A627 in close proximity to the M60 and M67

motorways. Phase Two of the Ashton Northern by-pass is also imminent. Additionally the A635

provides direct access to Manchester City Centre. Ashton is placed approximately 20 miles from

Manchester airport and within an hour’s drive of Sheffield, Leeds and Merseyside.

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre benefits from many public and privately operated car parks as

well as on-street spaces. The main pay and display car parks are located along Camp Stre

As such there is a significant amount of car parking in Ashton-under-Lyne, which is generally

surface lev

park itself has won awards for its high safety and cleanliness standards. However, the multi-storey

park serving the Ladysmi

a loss in car parking serving the town centre. Moreover, the Old Swan Street car park, which

rporates an estimated 170 spaces, is currently being used to accommodate the temporary

77

ope

par

7.58 t

par ford Street Central. Taxi ranks are also present within the town

centre at the northern end of Market Street and on Old Street near the Ladysmith Centre.

7.59 d

retail area along Warrington Street, Bow Street, Old

Chaumont Way,

this part of town centre, although the market draws

shopping area. This is probably as a result of the poor reta

.60 Ashton-under-Lyne’s bus station, located on Water Street, a

core of the town centre, d

as mainline services connect

that the Metrolink light rapid transport system will extend to

hav

7.61

Street car park (7%), followed by Cotton Street car park

n air market whilst Ashton Market Hall is renovated, and as such a significant element of car-

king is currently out of use.

In addition to the off-street parking provided throughout Aston-under-Lyne Town Centre, on-stree

king is available along Stam

A one-way system is in operation in the Old Town, and there is evidence of investment in roads an

realignment to allow more space for pedestrians at the eastern end of Stamford Street Central

(Figure 7.3). Ease of movement in the town centre is

aided by the pedestrianisation schemes in the main

Street, Market Street, Fletcher Street,

Wellington Street and Wood Street, together with the

compact nature of the town centre. However, the open

air market on Market Place affects movement by foot in

people to this part of the centre. Footfall is highest within th

Centre and the Ladysmith Shopping Centre, and decreases

as well as the limited parking facilities when compared to th

Town Centre.

7

terminus and is well located in the

Centre. Further bus stops are located adjacent to the Town

linked to the town centre but h

access to the town centre. After a period of some uncertain

e now recommenced with Government regarding the pr

In respect of accessibility issues, the on-street survey unde

following:

• 39% of visitors travelled into the centre by bus, train or

by car and 20% by foot;

• The most popular car park was the Henrietta Street Car

people who travelled to Ashton by car. The second mo

78

Figure 7.3: Repaving along Stamford Street

the primary

il offer available in the secondary areas,

cts as both a through station and

irectly adjoining The Arcades Shopping

ing to Manchester. It is also intended

Ashton-under-Lyne and have direct

Metrolink.

d the

, Crown Street car-park and Union

e vicinity of the Arcades Shopping

as you move further from

e northern side of Ashton-under-Lyne

Hall. The railway station is less well

ty over this proposal, meaningful talks

oposed arrival of the

rtaken as part of this study identifie

coach, with 40% accessing the centre

Park, which was used by 19% of

st popular car park was the Camp

Street car park (all at 2%). However, on-street parking also proves popular with 18% of people

travelling by car using on-street parking facilities;

• 70% of shoppers found it easy to park in the centre; and

• The vast majority of respondents (82%) considered the price of car parking to be either very

7.62

on-under-

Lyne to be difficult, with 56% finding it easy. In addition, 69% of respondents did not find Ashton-

reasonable or acceptable.

In addition, household surveys undertaken as part of this study asked specific questions relating to

various aspects of Ashton-under-Lyne. Only 26% of respondents found parking in Asht

under-Lyne congested and difficult to move around. Furthermore, just 33% of respondents found

the price for parking to be at an unreasonable level, with 43% rating it as reasonable.

Perception and Occurrence of Crime

The on-street survey of visitor7.63 s to Ashton Town Centre undertaken as park of the ‘Review of Retail

in Ashton Town Centre’ Study indicated that the vast majority of shoppers (97%) felt safe walking

7.64 oppers considered that personal safety had not improved

over the past 12 months, although 24% stated that there had been an improvement.

n

d more

secure car parks (44%).

C viour

through the centre during the day. However, this figure fell to only 18% at night.

The 2005 Study identified that 48% of sh

7.65 Furthermore, 70% of respondents felt that increased CCTV would improve safety within the tow

centre, followed by increased policing/patrolling (67%), improved street lighting (55%), an

ustomer Views and Beha

7.66 I Ashton-unde ne, the on-stre survey underta n in

2 llowing:

• tors stated that their m son for visiting the centre was to buy non-food goods,

ed by food goods (37%), for rk (8%), and w ow shopping (3%);

• 70%) visit Ashton der-Lyne town centre at least once a week;

• ers (67%) visited the centre d o its close pro ity to home; an

• hoppers visiting the centre did not perform more than one task during their visi

ops

rt of this study ascertained that 46% of respondents visiting

n terms of shopping patterns of visitors to r-Ly et ke

005 identified the fo

40% of visi ain rea

follow wo ind

Most shoppers ( -un

The majority of shopp ue t xim d

46% of s t.

7.67 Ashton-under-Lyne’s main strengths were perceived in 2005 to be: ease of getting around sh

(75%), followed by markets (59% of respondents rated these as good), accessibility by public

transport (58%), range of non-food shops (56%) and quality of shops (55%). In addition the

household survey undertaken as pa

79

Ashton-under-Lyne did so mainly due to the choice and range of shops, followed by its’ proximity to

home (23%), and to visit the market (9%). Furthermore it identified that a third of shoppers visited

the town centre once a week or more.

In terms of improvements, when asked to rate which measures wo

7.68 uld encourage them to visit the

town centre more often, 26% would like to see more high street shops, followed by cheaper car

t

cheaper parking would do this, followed by increased choice and range of shops (6%).

7.69 In c ea

visi

stated

that

hav

7.70 e

hou r parking to be the most popular, followed by increased choice

and range of shops and more parking.

parking and more quality shops (both 24%), and more superstores/supermarkets (18%), 11% fel

omparison, the household survey identified that 74% of respondents within the wider study ar

t Ashton-under-Lyne, most notably from zones 6, 7, 8 and 9 (attracting more than 80% of

respondents in each). Of those who stated that they never visited Ashton-under-Lyne 40%

it was too far from home, although significantly 5% considered it dirty and 5% considered it to

e a poor range of shops.

In terms of what improvements would encourage people to visit Ashton-under-Lyne more often, th

sehold survey identified cheape

Retailer Views

The results of 7.71 the business survey are contained at Appendix II. The principal findings of the

survey in respect of retailer’s perceptions of the town centre are summarised as follows:

Table 7.10: Retailers’ Views of Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre

Perception Good (%) Average (%) Poor (%) Don’t Know (%) Range of Shops and Services 26 52 22 0 Location and quality of Car Parks 11 22 67 0 Foodstore Provision 22 48 26 4 Pricing of car parks 0 4 89 7 Shopping Environment 7 52 37 4 Pedestrian Environment 33 48 19 0 Security 44 37 11 7 Personal Safety 22 63 7 7 Access by Public Transport 37 48 11 4 Signage 33 41 22 4 Cleanliness 22 44 33 0 Entertainment/Leisure 26 48 19 7 Cultural Facilities 7 19 41 33 Events (e.g. farmer’s market) 33 44 22 0 Public Toilets 22 19 44 15 Market 11 41 44 4

7.72

r’s

The survey results suggest that the centre’s main strengths are perceived to be security; its

accessibility by public transport; pedestrian environment; signage; and events, such as the farme

market. The pricing of car parks and the location and quality of car parks are identified to be the

poorest aspect of the town centre.

80

7.73 The findings of the business survey appear to reflect the findings of the on-street survey of visito

to Ashton-under-Lyne. Indeed, whilst 70% of visitors

problem with obtaining a car parking spac

too high. Similarly, the main strengths of Ashton

movement within the town centre and access by publ

In respect of measures to improve the town centre, the busi

• More independent specialist traders, more parki

centre were identified as the measures most w

improvements to the town, with each gaining the support of 80% or more of businesses;

• Significant support is also expressed (by more than 70% of businesses) for increased

choice/range of shops, improved street paving, more quality restaurants, more organised

events, improved security and the provision of public toilets are all considered to improve the

town; and

• Less than half of businesses (44%) consider that another foodstore in the town centre would

improve the town centre.

rs

to Ashton identified that they did not have a

e, the majority (55%) considered the cost of parking to be

were identified to be ease of pedestrian

ic transport.

7.74 ness survey indicated the following:

ng and greater promotion/marketing of the

idely accepted as being capable of delivering

.75 f businesses consider the market to be beneficial to the town centre trade.

ed up.

Environmental Quality

7 Significantly 93% o

Indeed, several businesses cited that the market is crucial to business and rebuilding should be

speed

.76 The pedestrian shopping streets located in the main retail area, together with the Arcades

Shopping Centre, provide an attractive shopping

environment. This is enhanced further by a mix of

old buildings most notably around Market Square

including the Town Hall. This is supported by the

2005 on-street survey, which identified that 44% of

respondents rated the attractiveness of buildings as

good, whilst just 18% rating cleanliness and

maintenance as poor. However, many of the streets

surrounding the town centre are of poorer quality particularly within the secondary shopping areas,

many of which contain a poor shopping offer. Furthermore, many of the surrounding streets

contain poor quality units. Moreover, there is a need to improve linkages between outlying car

parks and core retail units and the multi-storey car park situated above the Ladysmith Shopping

Centre is currently not in use and detracts from the quality of the town centre. Notably however the

Ladysmith Shopping Centre (Figure 7.4) has recently been refurbished; by doing this it has been

successful in improving the appearance of the town centre.

7

Figure 7.4: Ladysmith Shopping Centre

81

7 The primary shopping area is clean and street furniture is pres.77 ent in the form of benches, bins,

lighting are well integrated together with parts of the

town centre tree lined. Furt

p )

par attractive setting, incorp

f ppea

be a cond

sho e

b lack

li destrian use of

the the evening. Pedestrian crossings are provided, and sections of the road are

ra estrian movement through the area. But there is

e t and there are several boarded up properties which

d environmental quality of the a condary shopping area in general makes

p re, Penny ounds the town centre on the

no tract estrians and

con

SWOT Synthesis

hermore, the

edestrianised part of Old Street (Figure 7.5

ticular creates an

in

orating

lower boxes and being tree lined, and

well used route by pedestrians. The se

a rs to

ary

pping area by contrast contains limited s ating,

of ins and greenery and there is a noticeable

ghting, which may discourage pe

area during

ised along Stamford Street in order to ease ped

vidence of fly-posting along Stamford Stree

etract from the rea. The se

oor use of upper floors. Furthermo Meadow, which b

rthern side, is busy with traffic which de s from the shopping experience for ped

strains pedestrian movement.

Figure 7.5: Pedestrianisation of Old Street

7.78 ssment has been undertaken and summarised in Table

7.11:

From the above analysis, a SWOT asse

82

re Table 7.11: SWOT Analysis of Ashton-under-Lyne Town CentStrengths Weaknesses

An increased r the Regional Hierarchy;

nted convenienc ctor, portion of floorspace above the

ge; g retail floorspace since 2001;

representation of key naples compared to the natioge; ing demand from businesses seek g

Increasing rental levels indicating investor confidence in the town centre;

A declini er of retail units since 01;

Above av on cant units and floorsPoor perform ce of local bu es in ecent ye

qua omer parkLack of hig lersTemporary oor market; an

Poor env tal quality in the secondary shopping areas of the town centre.

anking in

A well represewith the pro

e se

national avera Increasin Good tional

multiavera

nal

Grow in

ng numb20

erage proportipace;

of va

r

anars;

siness

Inade te cust ing;

h order retai ind

; d

ironmenrepresentation in Ashton-under-Lyne;

Town Centre draws from a wide catchment;

Good accessibility by car and public transport;

Performs and important administrative role Opportunities Threats

Redevelopment of the market hall; Potential development at United Utilities

site, which could expand the town centre retail offer; and

Development of the multi-storey car park serving the Ladysmith Shopping Centre.

Lack of visitors; Increased competition from Manchester

and other out-of-centre visitors; and Delay in rebuilding market hall.

General Description of the District Centre

Denton District Centre

Road

rt

d to the

north of the existing centre along Stockport Road, and a Morrison’s supermarket has been

7.80 rket which operates three days a week, as

l.

7.79 Denton is located in the south west of the Borough in close proximity to both the M67 and M60

motorways. The retailing aspect of the town centre is focused around the busy Manchester

and Hyde Road, which run east to west and form the secondary retailing area, and along Stockpo

Road running north to south, providing the primary retailing locality. A recent addition to Denton

has seen a major retail shopping park, the ‘Crown Point North Shopping Park’, constructe

developed, which extends the centre eastwards along Hyde Road.

As well as the retailing offer Denton has an open air ma

well as Denton Town Hall and Denton Swimming Poo

Diversity of Uses

Table 7.12 below illustrates the retail composition of

outlets number and floorspace, compared with the res

7.81 Denton District Centre at 2001 in terms of

pective UK national averages in 2005.

83

Table 7.12: Retail Composition Denton District Centre Secto7 No. of



2001 2001 GB 2005 2001 2001 GB 2005

Convenience 15 8.9 7.9 4,270 23.4 12.6

Comparison 64 38.1 34.9 6,400 35.0 36.8

Service 81 47.6 48.4 7,139 39.0 43.4

Vacant 8 4.8 8.8 475 2.6 7.2

TOTAL 168 - 18,284 -

01)

rthermore, a new Morrison’s store has recently opened,

which has not been taken into account in Table 7.12. Although the number of comparison sector

units (38.1%) is above the national average (34.9%), the proportion of floorspace which these units

t

7.83

west of

Manchester Road. Furthermore, there remain a number of vacant units within the recent Crown

Point North Shopping Centre development. The secondary shopping area of Denton District

7.84

base. Opening in 2004 and encompassing 15,544 sq

t. The units

themselves are partially covered and are surrounded by surface level car parking. The area is well

lit, with trees incorporated and low pavements and pedestrian crossings aid movement by foot.

Source: Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (20 * May not total 100 due to rounding

7.82 With regard to the convenience sector in Denton District Centre this can be seen to be performing

relatively well, with both number of outlets (8.9%) and proportion of floorspace (23.4%) above the

national average (7.9% and 12.6%). Fu

occupy (35.0%) is below the national average (36.8%), implying a high number of small units.

However, it is significant to note that Table 7.12 does not include the recently developed Crown

Point North Shopping Centre, which has significantly increased the offer, comprising large forma

modern retail floorspace. Whilst the number of service sector units (47.6%) is comparable with the

national average (48.4%), the amount of floorspace which they occupy (39%) is also below the

national average (43.4%).

At the time of White Young Green’s site visit, it was evident that Denton District Centre contained a

high number of vacant units, predominately in the secondary shopping area to the

Centre is characterised by a high number of services, in particular take-away food units.

The Crown Point North Shopping Centre (Figure 7.6) is a recent addition to the retail offer within

Denton and has served to strengthen the areas’ retail

m of retailing space (with permitted development for

12,598 sq m mezzanine throughout the units), the

purpose built park consists of a number of national

multiples within the comparison sector, such as JD

Sports, TX Maxx, Boots, H & M, Virgin and Burtons,

as well as a McDonald’s restauranFigure 7.6: Crown Point North Shopping Centre

84

7.85 Another recent addition to the retailing in Denton is provided by the Morrison’s supermarket an

petrol filling station located on Hyde Road. This store is well used and offers a large customer car

park with new pavements and pedestrian crossings adjoining it.

Overall, the shops located within the central retailing area of Denton comprise generally

independent retailers with the exception of Farmfoods and Ethel Austin. Furthermore, Denton

contains a Post Office, a newsagent, and several supermarkets and pharmacies. Indeed, the

household su

d

7.86

rvey identified that of those respondents who visited Denton, 70% considered that the

range and choice of shops to be sufficient.

businesses considered that there are too many cafes, take aways,

pubs, which are closed during the day.

Customer Views

7.87 The majority of local businesses (87%) consider that there are too many non-retail uses within the

town centre. Indeed, most

7.88 T ld survey identified that 33% of the study area visit Denton, most notably from its

immediate catchment, reflecting the limited catchment of the centre despite the development of

several retailers have occupied units since the survey was undertaken). Of those respondents who

r the

by

sed choice

and range of shops and a department store were considered the most prevalent.


he househo

Crown Point North (although settled shopping patterns to the facility are still be established and

visited Denton, over a quarter (28%) visited at least once a week. A third of respondents who

never visit the centre stated that it is too far way from home or work. However, 10% conside

centre to have a limited range of choice and shops and 4% considering it to be poorly accessible

public transport. In terms of encouraging respondents to visit Denton more often, increa

7.89 The majority of businesses (60%) indicated that they had plans to alter their existing business in the

next five years. However, of those respondents who stated that they were seeking to alter their

business, 44% indicated that they are planning to close or relocate out-of-centre. In comparison,

7.90 ly

considering that trade has improved. Significantly, the recent development at Crown Point North

56% of respondents stated that they were seeking to extend or refurbish their existing floorspace.

The retailer survey indicated that most retailers (56%) are trading poorly or moderately (31%). On

13% stated that they were trading well or very well. Accordingly, more than half of businesses

(56%) consider that performance had declined over the last five years, with no businesses

was identified by the majority of businesses (69%) as being the biggest competitor to trade,

followed by major supermarkets.

85

7.91 The main issues cited as having a constraining influence on trading performance were la

visitors to Denton and the

ck of

poor quality of the town centre shopping environment. Inadequacy and

location of current premises and competition form other town centres nearby ranked lowest on the

highl hat there was a need for free parking in the town centre and improved integration with

ow

son’s and Crown Point

North.

list of issues perceived to be constraining business performance. A number of businesses

ighted t

Cr n Point North/Morrison’s and the town centre. Accordingly, a number of businesses consider

that the older part of the town centre is now a secondary retail area to Morri


Table 7.13 sets out reta7.92 iler requirements within Denton District Centre as derived from the Focus

Database (August 2005).

Table

7.13: Summary of Retail Requirements within Denton District Centre, 2005

Number of Requirements Minimum Floorspace (sq m)

Maximum Floorspace (sq m)

Convenience 1 204 325 Comparison 2 93 232 Serv 2,275 ice 5 1,290 TOT 2,832 AL 8 1,587

ined by Experian Goad.

ace. Demand is

expressed from Pizza Hut, JD Wetherspoon and Vodafone. The current level of requirements is

the highest level experienced and is well above the average of the last ten years (two).

Source: Focus Database (August 2005) – uses falling within specific retail trade categories as def

7.93 It is evident that there is reasonable demand from businesses seeking representation in Denton,

with a total of eight requirements listed seeking up to 2,832 sq m of floorsp

Accessibility

7.94 Parking within Denton is available both on-street and off-street. To the rear of the Co-op store

stre parking provided elsewhere in the town

c et car p ailable hester Ro

7.95 W n movement, this is restricted by Manchester Road and Stockport R d

w tre, both of which re very busy with vehicular traffic. However, pedes

c rovided to aid movement. Pavements within Denton Distri entre are wide and

c ewal work, so of which have been completed. The Jubilee Squa part

of the centre contai edestrianise rip which also movement through this area.

7.96 C stops are located within retailing area with regular services to Manchester

Centre and other nearby centres.

there is a large off-street car park, with additional off- et

entre together with on-stre ark g avin along Manc ad.

ith regard to pedestria oa

hich dissect the cen a trian

rossings are p ct C

urrently undergoing ren me re

ns a p d st aids

overed bus the City

86

7.97

the it

easy;

t in; and

• 62% found the price of parking in Denton to be at a reasonable level.

Cust

The NEMS Household Survey, conducted in 2005, identified the following in relation to

accessibility:

• Just 25% of respondents found Denton difficult to park and access, with 59% finding

• 68% of those who visited Denton did not find it congested and difficult to move abou

omer Views and Behaviour

ms of shopping patterns of visitors to Denton, the household survey undertaken in 2005

ifies the following:

7.98 In ter

ident

•

3%), the Crown Point North

•

n once a fortnight; and

• 70% found the range and choice of shopping in Denton to be sufficient.

hops would be beneficial.

46% of visitors stated that their main reason for visiting the centre was as a result of the

choice and range of shops, followed by closeness to home (1

(9%) and to visit friends and family (6%);

29% of visitors frequented the centre rarely, followed by 27% who visited once a week or

more, 22% less than once a month and 10% less tha

7.99 In terms of improving Denton, although most people did not know what could be done (81%), 5%

thought that an increased choice and range of s

Retailer Views

The principal findings of the survey in respect of retai

summarised as follows:

Table 7.14: Retailers’ Views of Denton District Centre

7.100 lers’ perception of the town centre are


.101 The survey suggests that the centre’s main strengths are perceived to be its access by public

transport and foodstore provision. The market, events in the district centre and entertainment and

7

87

leisure facilities were considered the poorest elements of Denton. Indeed, almost all businesses

(94%) idered the market to be poor with severa esses highlighted that the town used to

f s a ident

t t s conside h entre.

7.102 I ve the district centre, the survey ind g:

• More independent and specialist traders, in nd range of shops, more parking

r promotion of the centre wer s the measures most widely accepted as

provemen rt of 80% or

more of local businesses;

• mprov d street cleaning, more entertainment and leisure

s and improved security in the centre, with more than 60% of businesses considering

ements to the district; and

• Less than a third of businesses consider that more national multiples and improved street

rovements to the centre. Indeed, half of local businesses consider

s would harm the centre;

cons l busin

lourish when the market was busy and there i need to revive the market. However, it is ev

ha the majority (56%) of businesse r t e market to be beneficial to the c

n respect of measures to impro icated the followin

creased choice a

and greate e identified a

being capable of delivering im ts to the district, with each gaining suppo

There is also majority support for i

facilitie

e

that this would deliver improv

paving would deliver imp

that more national multiple

Environmental Quality

7.103 Ample street furniture is provided within Denton including flower boxes and baskets, street lighting,

Figure 7.7: Jubilee Square

bins, telephone boxes and benches, which are

ts to the west of Manchester Road provide

rn end of

links

to the Victoria Park, the market when not in use does not enact an inviting appearance.

painted a uniform dark blue colour. These are well

maintained and add to the environmental quality of the

area. The area is also generally clean with no clear

evidence of vandalism, graffiti or fly-posting. However

both Manchester Road and Stockport Road create a

high level of noise pollution. In addition, many units

appear to be poorly maintained with poor use of upper

floors, and the heavy concentration of take-away uni

dead frontages during the day due to the type of protective shutters utilised. The southe

Stockport Road contains an area set aside for use by the open air market, around Jubilee Square

(Figure 7.7). Whilst the area around the Town Hall is well maintained and attractive, fostering

SWOT Synthesis

From the above analysis, a SWOT assessment has been undertaken and summarised in Table 7.104

7.14:

88

Table 7.14: SWOT Analysis of Denton District Centre Strengths Weaknesses

A strongly represented convenience sector; Increasing retail offer;

Too many non-retail uses within the

Growing demand from retailers for representation in the town;

ificant rec nt.

primary shopping area of the town centre;

Majority of retailers identified to be

r the pas Lack o

ngeste centre; or qual wn centr ping

environm Market.

Good accessibility by a variety of modes of port; and

trading poorly; Declinitrans

Sign ent investme

ng trade ovef visitors;

t five years;

Co Po

d townity of to e shop

ent; and

Opportunities Threats

Increased customer car parking; ove linkages from the ‘old’ to n Point North and Morrison’s;

market area; and

Crown Po rth and Morr d More nation es aw om the ‘old’ town

Impr townCrow

Development of Oldham Batteries site n

int No ison’s; an al multipl ay fr

.

ensuring good linkages with the towcentre;

Improve Greater promotion of the centre.

Droylsden District Centre


Droylsden is located to the east of Manchester, inside the M60 ring-road. The retailing area of the

town is formed around the junction of Manchester Road and Ashton Road.

Droylsden is a relatively compact centre which

incorporates a variety of retail unit types. The primary

shopping area centres around The Droylsden Centre

Shopping Arcade, with units partially covered and in

one section completely covered. A retail park (figure

7.8) is located in the northern part of the district centre

exists that was developed at the former C

7.105

7.106

o-op site

since the 2001 Study and comprises large, modern,

7.107 public realm offer and consists

of a pedestrianised area with a taxi rank, incorporating trees, flower boxes, phone boxes, benches,

Figure 7.8: Retail Park in Droylsden

purpose built units, together with an open air market area (3,716 sq m gross). A Tesco

supermarket exists to the south of the centre along Manchester Road. Secondary retailing is

focused along Fairfield Road and Moorside Street.

Villemomble Square in the centre of Droylsden is a major part of the

bins and a clock.

89

Diversity of Uses

7.108 Table 7.15 shows the retail composition of Droylsden District Centre at 2001, compared to the

national averages from 2005.

Table 7.15: Retail Composition Droylsden District Centre



%* of Floorspace

2001 2001 GB 2005 2001 2001 GB 2005

Convenience 21 14.5 7.9 6,770 39.6 12.6

Comparison 63 43.4 34.9 4,710 27.5 36.8

Service 61 42.1 48.4 5,635 32.9 43.4

Vacant 0 0.0 8.8 0 0.0 7.2

TOTAL 145 - 17,115 -


The convenience sector is well represented within Droylsden, accounting for 14.5% of all units

compared to a national average of 7.9%, and occupying 39.6% of all floorspace compare

7.109

d to a

national average of 12.6%. With respect to the comparison sector, whilst the number of

comparison units (43.4%) is greater than the current national average (34.9%), the proportion of

tre.

ll

rsely, as the retail park was developed at the former Co-op

site (4,810 sq m), it is considered that the proportion of convenience floorspace will be lower than

reas.

f shops; however, it is

notable that there are a number of retailers from the lower end of the retail market in addition to

several charity shops. Indeed, the retail park, although containing only national multiples, includes

.111 The majority of local businesses (66%) consider that there is a good balance of shops and non-

retail uses in the district centre.

comparison floorspace (27.5%) is significantly below the national average (36.8%). However, it is

notable that Table 7.15 does not include the retail park located to the rear of The Droylsden Cen

Therefore, it is considered that the proportion of floorspace given over to the comparison sector wi

be above the national average. Conve

that identified in Table 7.15, where it is identified to be significantly above the national average.

The service sector is seen as being fairly weak within Droylsden District Centre, with both the

number of outlets (42.1%) and the amount of floorspace (32.9%) below the national average

(48.4% and 43.4% respectively). There were no vacancies identified in the Droylsden District

Centre in Table 7.15. However, at the time of the site visit, vacancies were noted within both the

primary and secondary shopping a

7.110 The centre, in addition to retailing, also includes a library together with a number of offices situated

above retail units. Generally the district centre contains a good range o

retailers such as Wilkinsons, Savers, Quality Saver and Peacocks.

7

90


7.112 T surveye cate had no alter their existi

b he next f years. Furthe re, 15% are pl ing to refurbish or

e premises. Only 1 are planning to cease trading in the next five yea

7.113 H sses (50%) indicate that they are trading moderately. However, 38% stated that

they are tradi mpared to 1 indicating that they were tradin ll or very well.

F businesses surveyed stated that business has decli over the last five

y stating that trade has improved. Competition form major superma

a tres in Tameside were id tified by businesses as the main tors to tra

Accessibility

he majority of businesses d (69%) indi d th heyat t pla to ns ng

usinesses in any way over t ive rmo a nn

xtend their existing 5% rs.

alf the busine

ng poorly, co 3% g we

urthermore, half the ned

ears, compared to 25% rkets

nd other cen en competi de.

7.114 The main issues cited as having a constraining influence on trading performance were lack of day

visitors; the poor quality of the district centre shopping environment; inadequate customer parking

and competition from major supermarkets. Poor location and inadequacy of their premises were

ranked lowest on the list of issues perceived to be constraining business performance.

retail park, which provides free parking and is well used. The Tesco store also has a dedicated

s

app

7.116 Movement around the primary shopping area is relatively easy and the area is busy, whilst the

secondary area, particularly Fairfield Road, has lower footfall. Pedestrian crossings aid movement

across Manchester Road and Ashton Road, which dissect the centre and restrict pedestrian

movement. However, these are only located at the cross-road junction where all four roads meet.

In the vicinity of the retail park pavements are lower and wide and are well linked to The Droylsden

Centre, with bike racks provided.

en picking up and dropping off passengers.

7.115 A large car park is located immediately behind The Droylsden Centre in front of the market and the

cu tomer car park. An additional pay and display car park is situated off Moorside Road, but this

ears to be poorly used.

7.117 Covered bus stops are provided within the centre, with space available for buses to pull-in off the

busy Manchester Road wh

Retailer Views

7.118 The principal findings ct of re f the dis

s as follows:

of the survey in respe tailers’ perception o trict centre are

ummarised

91

Table 7.16: Retailers’ Views of Droylsden District Centre Perception Good (%) Average (%) Poor (%) Don’t Know (%) Range of Shops and Services 6 37 56 0 Location and quality of Car Parks 20 40 40 0 Foodstore Provision 47 41 6 6 Pricing of car parks 13 25 44 19 Shopping Environment 0 56 44 0 Pedestrian Environment 19 56 25 0 Security 25 6 44 25 Personal Safety 13 38 44 6 Access by Public Transport 56 38 0 6 Signage 20 73 13 0 Cleanliness 13 56 31 0 Entertainment/Leisure 0 31 44 25 Cultural Facilities 0 25 31 44 Events (e.g. farmer’s market) 0 25 50 25 Public Toilets 0 44 44 13 Market 0 6 88 6

7.119 The survey suggests that the centre’s main strengths are perceived to be its accessibility by public

transport and foodstore provision. The market, range of shops and events within the district centre

were seen as the poorest elements. Indeed, almost half of businesses surveyed (47%) considered

that the market has a detrimental impact on trade in the district centre, with 88% considering it

poor.

7.120 In respect of measures to improve the district centre, the business survey indicated the following:

of

ntre and improved security were most widely acknowledged as measures that would

improve the centre, with each gaining support of 70% or more of businesses;

esses for more parking, more quality

ts a tre; and

• er that roved public

er improvements to the f businesses considered

harm tra


• Increased choice and range of shops, more independent/specialist shops, greater promotion

ce

• t was also expressed by more than Suppor 60% of busin

restaurants and more organised even s providing improvements to the cen

Less than a third of businesses consid

transport would deliv

a foodstore in the centre or imp

centre. Indeed, 44% o

that a new foodstore in the centre would de.

7.121 T within Droylsden District Centre as derived from the Focus

Dat

T mary of Retail Requirements w lsden District Centre, 2005

able 7.17 sets out retailer requirements

abase (August 2005).

able 7.17: Sum ithin Droy Number of Requirements Minimum Floorspace

(sq m) Maximum Floorspace

(sq m) Convenience 2 446 743 Com 232 parison 1 93 Service 1 93 79 TOTAL 4 618 1,068

Source: Focus Database (August 2005) – uses falling within specific retail trade categories as defined by Experian Goad.

92

7 It is evident that there is.122 limited demand from businesses seeking representation in Droylsden, with

a total of four requirements listed seeking up to 1,068 sq m of floorspace. Demand is expressed

from Pizza Hut, Farmfoods and Card Warehouse.

nmental Quality

Enviro

.123 Significant street furniture is located in the primary shopping area, most notably around

on two

t

t

n the

nd could benefit from improvement, particularly

7

Villemomble Square (Figure 7.9) which is all painted

uniformly in red. Villemomble Square is an attractive

feature although the busy roads which bound it

sides are not considered to be an asset. The marke

area is clean and has recently been repainted,

although some graffiti is evident, whilst the adjacen

retail park is clean and modern. However, i

secondary shopping area, particularly along Fairfield

Road, units have a more run-down appearance a

with regard to the upper floors, which are poorly utilised. In comparison, the primary shopping area

is generally well maintained and clean.

SWOT Synthesis

Figure 7.9: Villemomble Square

7.124 From the above analysis, a SWOT assessment has been undertaken and summarised in Table

7.18:

Table 7.18: SWOT Analysis of Droylsden District Centre Strengths Weaknesses

Recent investment in the district centre; Strong convenience sector with the

d balance and non-in the primary shop streets; Most retailers ar nding to n in

; ding pe ance of loes;

Ease of movement in the district centre;

by p ic transpo

Poorly represented service sector; Lack of visitors;

quality of the district centre i nt;

Inadeq er parkinMarket area; aLimited d ment opp es.

proportion of floorspace and units above national ave

Poor shoppthe

Goorage;

of shopsg

retail uses pin

e inte remaiDroylsden

Good trabusiness

rform cal

and Good access

ubl rt.

ng environmeuate custom g;

nd evelop ortuniti


Greater promotion of the town centre; and Create better linkages between Tesco and

the remainder of the town centre.

Competition from major supermarkets and other centres in the Borough; and

Development of a new foodstore in the town centre.

93

Hyde District Centre

General Descriptio he Dist ntren of t rict Ce

Figure 7.10: The Clarendon Square Shopping Centre

7.125 H Centre located i South Boroug ose proximity to the

M

7.126 The district centre i sed aro e main public

s Clarendo re where an o arket

g area is

Clarendon Square Shopping Centre (18,587 sq m),

ary

supermarket is

located to the east of the centre.

yde District is n the of the h on the A57 and in cl

67.

s ba und th

pace of n Squa utdoor m

is frequently held. The main shoppin

with Market Street performing a role in incorporating

the Town Hall and lower order uses such as take

always, public houses, and charity shops.

Furthermore, there is a current proposal to extend the

Clarendon Square Shopping Centre. Clarendon

Street, which runs alongside Clarendon Square Shopping Centre (Figure 7.10), provides a prim

role for services and shops in the district centre. A Morrison’s supermarket is located adjacent to

the district centre to the North between Clarke Way and Mottram Way, whilst Asda

Diversity of uses

Tables 7.19 and 7.20 illustrate the retail composition of Hyde District Centre in 2001 and 2004 in

terms of outlet numbers and floorspace, based on information provided by Goad and Tames

Metropolitan Borough Council.

7.127

ide

Table 7.19: Retail Composition of Hyde District Centre



%* of Floorspace

2004 2004 GB 2004 2004 GB

Convenience 27 9.5 9.3 20,104 35.6 16.9

Comparison 125 44.2 48.0 20,188 35.7 53.1

Service 72 25.5 32.5 7,386 13.1 22.1

Vacant 59 20.8 10.3 8,807 15.6 7.9

TOTAL 283 - 56,485 -

Source: Experian Goad (2004) *May not total 100 due to rounding

94

Table 7.20: Retail Composition of Hyde District Centre 2001 Sector No. of



2001 2001 Change 2001 2001 Change 01-04 01-04

Convenience 29 8.1 +1.4 4,135 11.2 +24.4

Comparison 156 43.4 +0.8 19,700 53.0 -17.3

Service 129 35.9 -10.4 10,240 27.7 -14.6

Vacant 45 12.5 +8.3 2,910 7.9 +7.7

TOTAL 359 - 36,985 -


.128 Hyde District Centre has 56,435 sq m of floorspace in 283 outlets (as identified by Experian Goad -

.

ened in 2001. However, Tables 7.19 and 7.20

indicate that the number of convenience retail units has declined since 2001 (by two units or 7%),

which maybe due to the impact of the Asda store. In comparison the amount of convenience

7.129 The comparison sector does not perform as well with both the number of outlets (44.20%) and

proportion of floorspace (35.70%) being below the national averages (48.0% and 53.10%

f

7.131

Hyde,

st 21% of all units, which is more than double the national average (10.30%).

Furthermore, the proportion of vacant floorspace (15.60%) is also almost double the national

average (7.90%). Whilst a high vacancy rate does not necessarily mean that a district centre is

for

umber of vacant units and proportion of floorspace they occupy has

7

2004). In this respect, the convenience sector is well represented with the number of outlets

(9.50%) and floorspace (35.60%) above the national average (of 9.30% and 16.90% respectively)

This has been aided by the Asda store which op

floorspace has increased greatly from 4,135 sq m in 2001, to 20,104 sq m in 2004, an increase of

15,969 sq m or 386% due primarily to the development of the Asda store.

respectively). In comparison to the position in 2001, the comparison sector has declined in terms o

number of units (by 31 or 20%), whilst the amount of comparison floorspace has marginally

increased over the same period (by 488 sq m or 2%).

7.130 Service outlets are also below the national average in terms of both the number of outlets (2.50%

compared to a national average of 32.50%), and proportion of floorspace (13.10% compared to a

national average of 22.10%). Tables 7.19 and 7.20 show that the service sector has weakened

since 2001, both in terms of proportion of floorspace and number of outlets. Indeed, the proportion

of floorspace has fallen by 2,854 sq m or 28%, and the number of outlets has decreased by 57

units or 44%. This represents a major decline in service sector within Hyde District Centre.

Vacant units within Hyde District Centre are identified to be above the national average in terms of

both floorspace and the number of units. Indeed, Experian Goad identify 58 vacant outlets in

representing almo

performing badly, the high number of vacant outlets apparent in Hyde does present a cause

concern. In addition, the n

95

increased significantly since 2001. In this respect, the number of vacant units has increased by 14

or 31%, whilst the propo ce h or 2

7.132 As well as the retailing offer in Hyde, the district centre also contains a number of further uses,

offices, being the location for the Tameside and Glossop Primary Care Trust and Tameside MBC.

7.133

7.134

’s principal shopping streets, with 46% considering that there are too many

non-retail uses, most notably on Market Street.

rtion of vacant floorspa as in d by 5,897 sq m crease 03%

including the Town Hall, a theatre along Corporation Street and a number of medical services and

Although there are few vacancies in The Clarendon Centre, the centre is dominated by lower order,

shops. The shopping centre also incorporates a market hall comprising an indoor market on two

floors, which is well used and sells a diverse range of goods.

The majority of businesses (54%) consider that there is a good balance of shops and non-retail

uses along the centre


High street multiples present in Hyde include Superdrug, Argos, Bon Marche, Specsavers, B

and Woolworths, which are primarily located in The

7.135 oots

Clarendon Centre. The district centre also

contains a Lloyds TSB, Post Office and Co-op.


The majority of businesses surveyed (56%) indica

business in any way over the next five years. Signif

were seeking to extend or refurbish their existing flo

The retailer survey indicated that most retailers in Hy

almost a third (29%) stated that they are trading

over the past five years; compared to almost a

(the highest of all centres in the Borough), with the main competition identified to be from ret

parks, major supermarkets and other centres in the Borough. The main issues cited as having a

constraining influence on trading performance were high rents/overheads (88% of businesses

surveyed lease their property), inadequate customer car parking, competition from major

supermarkets and lack of visitors to Hyde. Poor location and inadequacy of premises together with

poor security were ranked lowest on the list of issues perceived to be constraining business

performance.

7.136 ted that they had no plans to alter their existing

icantly, 44% of respondents stated that there

orspace.

7.137 de are trading moderately (64%), although

poorly. Indeed, 38% stated that trade has declined

quarter (23%) stated that turnover has improved

ail


7.138 Table 7.21 sets out retailer requirements in Hyde District Centre as derived from the Focus

database (August 2005).

96

bTa le 7.21: Summary of Retail Requirements within Hyde District Centre, 2005 Number of Requirements Minimum Floorspace

(sq m) Maximum Floorspace

(sq m) Convenience 1 204 325 Comparison 10 2,114 5,045 Service 1 46 139 TOTAL 12 2,364 5,509


g

e

ver the past

ten years (of eight).

Commercial Rents and Yields

7.139 It can be seen that there is a reasonable level of demand from businesses wishing to locate in

Hyde, with a requirement for 12 retailers seeking up to 5,509 sq m of floorspace. Retailers seekin

representation include Gamestation, O2, Superdrug, Vodafone and Peacock Stores. Comparing

the number of current requirements in Hyde with previous years, retailer demand is shown to hav

fluctuated considerably over the last ten years between a low of five in 1997 and 1998 to a high of

15 in 2002. However, the current level of demand is notably higher than the average o

7.140 In 2004, the retail yield in Hyde was at 7% which has remained constant since 2002, and

represented a fall from 7.5% which had been present since 1994. This stability indicates a

Accessibility

relatively stable investor confidence in the centre.

.141

the M67 motorway which links to th bital

motorway and direct access to Manch er via the

A ree main car parks und Hyde

D ovide cheap and free car

parking. Ho r parks woul

r tment as they currently

s n down appearance. Hyde is well

c transport with the s station located to the north of the shopping area

a he train stati -minute walk from the sh ing located

G orbury Street to the west. The bus station (Figure 7.11) has rece ceived a mu

million pound investment; consequently it boasts a modern appearance and incorporates state of

7 Hyde District Centre is located in close proximity to

e M60 or

est

57. There are th aro

istrict Centre that pr

wever, the ca d benefit from

efurbishment and inves

ustain a ru

onnected by public bu

djacent to the M67 and t on is a five ops be on

reat N ntly re lti-

Figure 7.11: The N yde Bus Station ew H

the art technology. Pedestrian movement within the centre is eased by the presence of pedestrian

crossings around the centre. However, Market Street is busy with traffic and presents a barrier to

unrestricted movement.

The 2005 NEMS Household Survey identified the following with regard to accessibility in Hyde: 7.142

97

• The majority (60%) of those who visited Hyde did not find parking and access to be

problematic;

74% did not find Hyde congested and difficult to move around; and

56% found the price of parking to be at a reasonab

•

• le level.

Cus

tomer Views and Behaviour

erstandably given the limited retail offer in Hyde, the househo7.143 Und ld survey identifies that Hyde

a

that

choi choice of services

(6%), and the choice of leisure facilities and presence of the market (both at 5%). The vast majority

of respondents who visited Hyde (69%) found the choice of shopping to be sufficient.

7.144 so at least once a week (36%), followed by rarely

than once a fortnight (11%).

dr ws trade principally from its immediate catchment. Furthermore, the household survey found

of those respondents who visited Hyde, the most popular reason for doing so was due to the

ce and range of shops (46%), followed by its proximity to work (16%), the

Those who did visit Hyde predominately did

(26%), less than once a month (18%), and less

Retailer Views

The principal findings of the survey in respect of retai

as follows:

Table 7.22: Retailers’ Views of Hyde District Centre

7.145 lers’ perception of the centre are summarised


ion and access by public transport. Events such as farmers markets, entertainment/leisure

provision and pricing of car parks were identified as the poorest aspects. In contrast the household

survey identified that the majority (56%) of people who use Hyde District Centre consider car

parking to be reasonable. Indeed, the centre contains a significant provision of free parking.

.147 In respect of measures to improve the centre, the survey indicated the following:

7.146 The survey business suggests that the centre’s main strengths are perceived to be its foodstore

provis

7

98

• Increased choice/range of shops, improved street paving, more parking, more entertainment

ents, im

meas the centre, with each

f busi s

• ition, the majority of businesses (at l a independent and

specialist traders, improved street cleanin ovision of public

nt

• r that more national multiples or a foodstore in the district

centre would deliver improvements to the centre. Indeed, 29% of businesses state that a

d more national multiples wo the centre.

E v

and leisure facilities, more organised ev

centre were the most widely accepted

proved security and greater promotion of the

ures that would improve

gaining support of more than 80% o

In add

ne ses;

st 60%) indicated that more e

g, more cultural facilities and the pr

toilets would also deliver an improveme

Less than a fifth of retailers con

to the centre; and

side

foodstore an uld harm

n ironmental Quality

7.148 The Clarendon Square Shopping Centre has and well-maintained appearance as

do the shops along Clarendon Street. The

landscaped Clarendon Square is an attractive

inclusion in the public realm and the Victorian Town

Hall is a particularly striking feature. Street furniture is

ure

ll with the surrounding urban form of

e shopping experience most notably at

7.149 The secondary shopping areas away from the Clarendon Square Shopping Centre, particularly

those on the southern end of Market Street have a rather run-down appearance. Additionally, the

SWOT Synthesis

a clean, modern

prevalent and includes flower boxes, trees, hanging

baskets, bike stands, phone boxes, bins and covered

benches. Good use is made of upper floors on the

majority of units throughout the centre. Such furnit

is painted in a uniform dark green colour which blends we

buildings and creates complementary assets, aiding th

Market Place (Figure 7.12).

proximity of such a busy road to the main shopping area does not present an attractive shopping

environment.


7.23:

Figure 7.12: Market Place

99

Table 7.23: SWOT Analysis of Hyde District Centre Strengths Weaknesses

Strong conven ctor, particularly in terms of floorsp hich has increased

1; are seeking to remain in

roportion of traders in the ugh indicating that trade has improved the past five rs; hy requirem lers seeking

representation in the centre; and

Poorly re e sector, which s declin ce 2001;

High leve cancies, e proportion ies and fl ace above the nati l average;

ack of h et multiplqua omer park nd

Poor provi of entertain t and leisure facilities.

ience seace, w

since 200 Most retailers

Hyde; Highest p

Boroover

Healtyea

ent from retai

presented servicha ed sin

ls of vaof vacanc

with thoorsp

onaigh stre L es;

Inade te cust ing; a sion men

Good accessibility by public transport.


Potential to improve the district centre performance linked with the strength of the convenience sector.

Lack of visitors to Hyde; Competition from retail parks, major

supermarkets and other centres in the Borough; and

High rents.

Stalybridge District Centre


7.151 Stalybridge is located in the centre of the Borough and

retailing is focused on Market Street, Melbourne Street

and Grosvenor Street. Market Street (Figure 7.13)

forms the core of the centre’s night time economy

incorporating numerous bars and pubs, whilst retailing is

located within the rest of the centre. Located outside

the main shopping area on Acres Lane is a new Tesco

foodstore.

Figure 7.13: Market Street

Diversity of Uses

Table 7.24 indicates the retail composition of St7.152 alybridge District Centre in 2001, in comparison

with the national average.

100

Table 7.24: Retail Composition of Stalybridge District Centre 2001 Sector No. of



2001 2001 GB 2005 2001 2001 GB 2005

Convenience 30 13.3 7.9 2,236 11.7 12.6

Comparison 105 46.5 34.9 7,833 41.0 36.8

Service 77 34.1 48.4 8,340 43.7 43.4

Vacant 14 6.2 8.8 680 3.6 7.2

TOTAL 226 - 19,089 -


7.153 Table 7.24 highlights that the convenience sector within Stalybridge is well represented in terms of

number of units, accounting for 13.3% of outlets compared to a national average of 7.9%.

However, the proportion of floorspace given over to the convenience sector (11.7%) is below the

7.154

nits (46.5%) is also above the national average (34.9%). The service

sector in 2001 occupied over a third of all units (34.1%), well below the national average (48.4%).

to

nd 3.6% of

floorspace is identified to be vacant compared to a national average of 7.2%. However, despite

Table 7.24 identifying a low proportion of vacancies at the time of our site visit a large number of

7.155 Services are focused around the Market Street part of Stalybridge with a number of nightclubs and

7.156 T survey identifies that most businesses (87%) consider there are too many non-retail

u st notably pubs, bars and clubs.


national average (12.6%).

The comparison sector by contrast performs well with regard to both floorspace and number of

outlets. The total comparison floorspace (41.0%) is above the national average of (36.8%),

similarly the number of u

However, the floorspace occupied by service sector retailers (43.7%) is comparable with the

national average (43.4%), implying a small number of large units. Finally vacancy rates are seen

be below the national average with respect to both floorspace occupied and number of outlets.

Vacant units account for 6.2% of all outlets compared to the national average of 8.8%, a

vacancies were noticed in all parts of the centre from our visit.

bars together with a bingo hall (Cosmo).

he business

ses, mo

treet,

decrease in quality along Grosvenor Street, whilst the number of vacancies

7.157 Convenience and comparison retailing is concentrated on Melbourne Street and Grosvenor S

however there is a proliferation of shops selling low value goods in this area, for example Savers,

Ethel Austin, Bottom Dollar Discount, and Quality Save, additional a number of charity shops.

Generally shops

101

increases. A large Tesco supermarket with dedicated car parking is located to the east of the

reflected by the household survey).

7.158 dge offers Astley Cheetham Art Gallery, a library a Grade

d by the Borough Council, and a particularly

Castle Street Urban Splash are on site

res.

centre off Acres Lane, and this is very well used (as

In addition to the retailers present Stalybri

II listed Town Hall, which is currently being refurbishe

attractive church on Trinity Street. Furthermore, on

constructing mixed use urban village spanning 4.2 ac


The majority of businesses surveyed (57%) indicated that they had no plans to alter their existing

business in any way over the next five years. However, just under a quarter (21%) are planning to

cease trading in the next five years (the highest of the centres surveyed).

The retailer survey indicated that most retailers in Stalybridge are trading poorly (53%). In

comparison a f

7.159

7.160

ifth (20%) of businesses highlight that they are trading well or very well. Similarly,

57% of businesses state that their turnover had experienced a decrease in turnover over the last

7.161 ding performance were lack of

footfall, inadequate customer parking and lack of visitors in general to Stalybridge. Competition

to be constraining business performance.

five years. Just over a fifth of businesses (21%) have experienced an improvement in turnover

over the last five years.

The main issues cited as having a constraining influence on tra

from traders elsewhere in Stalybridge, poor security and inadequacy of current premises were

ranked lowest on the list of issues perceived


7.162 Table 7.25 sets out retailer requirements within Stalybridge District Centre as derived from the

Table 7.25: Summary of Retail Requirements within Stalybridge District Centre, 2005

Focus Database (August 2005).

Number of Requirements Minimum Floorspace Maximum Floorspace (sq m) (sq m)

Convenience 1 465 743 Comparison 0 0 0 Service 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 465 743


7.163

Stalybridge ace. This level of

Octob

As identified above there is just one retailer, Farmfoods, currently seeking representation in

District Centre, and is seeking between 465 and 743 sq m of floorsp

requirement is half the average of the last ten years (two) and well below the peak of six obtained in

er 2001.

102

Accessibility

Stalybridge enjoys good pedestrian movement with

the majority of Melbourne Street (Figure 7.14) and

all of Grosvenor Street being completely

pedestrianised. Elsewhere along Mark

7.164

et Street and

Back Grosvenor Street the paving is such to place

lly a one-way

system operates in much of the centre for vehicular traffic. However, footfall around the centre was

generally low, particularly along Grosvenor Street. There is a number of pay and display car parks

park

to Somerfield on Grosvenor Street. However, car parks were not well used on the day of

survey. Although on-street parking is limited, parking is available along Melbourne Street and

7.165 T connected to the bus network with a number of covered bus stops around the

c us lanes. A bus tion is located on Water Street, h incorporates

covered bus stops and benches. Stalybridge train station is located to the north west of the centre

o close proximity to the district centre.

7.166 I bility, the 2005 NEMS Household Survey identified th ollowing in rela to

t sited Stalybr

emphasis on pedestrian movement as the dominant

form, and pavements are wide and are raised

slightly from the road. Additiona Figure 7.14: Melbourne Street

located throughout Stalybridge District Centre, including a particularly large surface level car

adjacent

Trinity Street.

he centre is well

entre in addition to b sta whic

n Rassbottom Street in

n respect of accessi e f tion

hose respondents who vi idge:

• 61% did not find the ability to park and access Stalybridge difficult;

• 80% did not find Stalybridge congested and difficult to move around; and

• 44% found the price for parking in Stalybridge to be sufficient.

Customer Views and Behaviour

7.167 The household survey completed in 2005 identified that of those respondents who visited

• O

f od shopping (9%) and because of its proximity to home;

3 ce a

f

• T ) did not find the range and choice of shopping present in the centre to be

sufficient.

Stalybridge:

ver a third (34%) did so due to the choice and range of shops, followed by choice of leisure

acilities (22%), to do fo

• 2% visited Stalybridge at least once a week, 5% less than once a week, 11% less than on

ortnight, 20% less than once a month, and 30% less often; and

he majority (65%

103

7.168 When asked whether there were any measures that could be taken to encourage them to visit

Stalybridge more often, the vast majority of respondents (76%) said there was nothing further that

could be done. However, other respondents want to see an increase in the choice and range of

shops (8%), improved quality of shops (5%), and a department store, cheaper parking and

increased public transport (all at 2%).

and 3% because they felt that it was not

7.169 Of those surveyed that did not visit Stalybridge, 32% did so because it was too far away from home

or work, 17% due to the choice and range of shops,

accessible by public transport.

Retailer Views

The main findings of the business survey in respect

follows:

Table 7.26: Retailers’ Views of Stalybridge District Centre

7.170 of the district centre are summarised as

Perception Good (%) Average (%) Poor (%) Don’t Know (%) Range of Shops and Services 6 6 88 0 Location and quality of Car Parks 0 25 75 0 Foodstore Provision 41 29 24 6 Pricing of car parks 0 6 88 6 Shopping Environment 0 44 56 0 Pedestrian Environment 31 38 31 0 Security 19 56 19 6 Personal Safety 19 56 13 13 Access by Public Transport 50 13 13 25 Signage 6 8 44 0 Cleanliness 19 44 38 0 Entertainment/Leisure 50 38 0 13 Cultural Facilities 6 31 44 19 Events (e.g. farmer’s market) 0 31 63 6 Public Toilets 13 25 50 25

7.171 The survey suggests that the centre’s main strengths are perceived to be access by public

transport, entertainment and leisure facilities and foodstore provision. The range of shops and

services, pricing and location of car parks were considered the poorest aspects of the centre.

• Increased choice and range of shops, more independent retailers, more parking and greater

promotion of the centre, were identified as the measures most widely accepted as being

capable of delivering improvements to the centre, with each gaining the support of 80% or

more of businesses;

• The majority of businesses (more than half) consider that more national multiples, more

quality restaurants, more organised events and the provision of public toilets will also improve

the town; and

7.172 In respect of measures to improve the centre, the survey indicated the following:

104

• Less than a quarter of businesses, consider that a foodstore and more entertainment and

st positiv Indeed, 47%

ion foodstore in the town centre would harm

E

leisure facilities will have the lea

of respondents consider that the provis

e impact on improving the town centre.

of a new

Stalybridge.

nvironmental Quality

k Grosvenor Street

Figure 7.14: Back Grosvenor Street

7.173 B c (Figure 7.14) has recentl he Huddersfield Canal

i nd this provides an attractive

inco ligh .

a t

tree oor state of

rep well

maintained, with adequate street furniture and the

c wer boxes adding to the

scene. Stalybridge benefits from

the presence of two water channels which run through

it, the Huddersfield Canal and the River Tame. The Huddersfield Canal as discussed above has

been capitalised upon with repaving of the surrounding area, creating an attractive feature of the

centre. The River Tame by contrast would benefit from some maintenance/improvement as it

currently contains some litter visible from the bridge on Melbourne Street, which is detrimental to

the centre’s environmental quality.

7.174 There are some attractive buildings in Stalybridge, most notably Trinity Street, which contains a

Grade II listed Town Hall that is currently being renovated along with the Church and the Art Gallery

and library, all of which provide an impressive urban landscape. However, some of the units along

Melbourne Street and Grosvenor Street are in a poor state of repair.

SWOT Synthesis

a y been repaved as part of t

mprovements a area,

rporating benches, flowers, and street ts This

rea is well used by the public. Grosvenor S

-lined although some units are in a p

air. Overall, the centre is clean and streets

reet is

existen e of trees and flo

amenity of the street


7.27:

105

Table 7.27: SWOT Analysis of Stalybridge District Centre Strengths Weaknesses

Strong compprovision or

arison sector, with the units and floorspace above the

national average; Below average proportion of vacancies;

The majority of traders are performing poorly;

Too many non-retail uses within the primary shopping streets;

Good accessibility by a variety of modes of transport; and

Good provision of leisure and entertainment uses.

Declining trading performance of local businesses over the past five years; and

Low demand from retailers seeking representation in the centre.


Develop the centre’s ‘evening economy’; Improve car parking pr Create mixed use d

Over a fifth of retailers seeking to cease ovision; and

evelopments, including residential and leisure uses within the centre utilising the attractiveness of the

trading in the centre; Low levels of footfall.

Huddersfield Canal and River Tame.

106

8 RETAIL CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

Methodology

Retail capacity assessment are an importan

8.01 t pre-requisite to any proposed retail development

strategy as they provide invaluable information on the levels of demand for additional retail facilities

d evelopment will have on established stores within the catchment of the

ssments are also now an accepted method

elopment Frameworks or

Development Briefs.

8.02 the

le

sequently can be interpreted in a number of different ways.

8.03

to as

that:

n assessing quantitative need for additional development when preparing its development plan

Existing and forecast population levels;

• of goods to be sold, within the broad categories of

an the likely impact any d

centre or centres under consideration. Capacity asse

for guiding future allocations for retail developments within Local Dev

However, it must be stressed that although capacity assessments are based on factual data,

conclusions must only be treated as a guide/indicator rather than providing unchallengeab

evidence. This caveat reflects the complexity of the modelling exercise and dependence upon a

number of assumptions, which con

To provide an insight, the modelling for the capacity assessment has been undertaken for two

different categories of expenditure. Typically these categories reflect the differences in patterns for

food shopping (often referred to as ‘convenience’ shopping) and non-food shopping (referred

‘comparison’ shopping). This approach is advocated in PPS6, which states at paragraph 2.34

‘Idocuments, a local planning authority should assess the likely future demand for additional retail and leisure floorspace, having regard to a realistic assessment of:

•

Forecast expenditure for specific classes comparison and convenience goods and for the main leisure sectors; and

• Forecast improvements in productivity in the use of floorspace.’ (Our emphasis).

8.04 s primarily examined the need for

new convenience and comparison goods floorspace.

8.05 conceptual approach is identical, although the data

sources and assumptions may differ. The key relationship is: Expenditure (£m) less Turnover (£m)

Therefore, for the purposes of this capacity exercise this study ha

Capacity Formula

For all types of capacity assessment, the

equals Surplus/Deficit (£m).

107

Expenditure (£m) – the expenditure element of the above equation is calculated by taking

population within the defined catchment and then multiplying this figure by average annual

expenditure levels for various forms of retail spending per annum. The formula is subject to a

number of factors, which need to be considered to help provide the most accurate figure for that

particular local catchment. These include:

• Growth in population;

• Growth in expenditure per head per annum; and

• Special forms of trading (e.g. catalogue shopping, internet, etc.)

Turnover (£m) – the turnover figure relates to the annual turnover generated by existing retail

facilities within the catchment that has been adopted to calculate the population figure. The

turnover of existing facilities is calculated using analysis prepared by Mintel and Verdict;

independent analyses that list turnovers per square foot/metre for all major retail multiples (both

convenience and comparison).

Surplus/Deficit (£m) – this represents the difference between the expenditure and turnover figures

8.06

ng the turnover per square metre figures used to calculate the turnover

part of the equation. (Full tabulations are provided at Appendix IV)

8.07 t

8.08

good distribution of convenience facilities within the Borough. Indeed, within the identified core

8.09 essed

h but within the defined study area given their close

proximity to Tameside.

outlined above. Clearly, a surplus figure will represent an ‘under provision’ of retail facilities within

the catchment (which, other things being equal, would suggest that additional floorspace is

required), whereas a deficit would represent an over provision of retail facilities (and in these

circumstances it would prove difficult to justify additional floorspace).

Although a surplus figure is generated in £m, it is possible to convert this figure into an indication of

aggregate floorspace, usi

Capacity for Future Convenience Goods

In order to ascertain the likely need for additional convenience goods floorspace within Tameside, i

is important to understand the true nature of the existing supply.

As highlighted in the retail health check presented within this report, it is evident that there is a

catchment of Tameside (zones 7 to 10) existing facilities retain 91% of convenience goods

expenditure generated in the study area.

As well as assessing individual foodstores within Tameside Borough, this study has also ass

the impact of stores outside the Boroug

108

8 In terms of the individual foodstores within the Borough, it would appear .10 from the survey results that

the Asda in Ashton-under-Lyne is the most popular store, att 6 nien

expenditure generated within the study area. The next most popular store in the Borough is th

A .29m), followed by the Morrison store at Dukinfield (£53.2 m) and the Te co

s 52.33m). Other popular st in the Borou include son’s

S nd £37.23m respectively), the Morri

( bury’s store in Ashton-unde e (£21.9

8.11 I e Borough but within the defined s rea, the ehold sur

identifies that the Tesco store in Oldham is trading ery well (£7 5m), resu in the stor g

the most popular in the study area. Other stores located outside he Borough that are trading ell

i nd Asda stores in Chad (£53.57 £57.10 ctively), Asda

a ), Tesco store in Glosso .51m) a Tesco in Stockport

(£32.7

C 8.12 Although rob -date is available for floorsp within Tame

it is more difficult to qualify the extent of local co nce pro as ther consiste

d o rely upon. Therefore, for the purposes of this assessment this study has assum at

5 the study are facilities (£58m) distribu n

a ing to the market share centre d s .

I son, the survey evidence identifies the rnover of oth r stores w e Boroug e

a

8.13 W r foodstores, as the study adopts a ‘goods based’ ap h, it is imp t

t rtain major foodstore operator ell an element of non-fo s such

b pact discs, clothing and household go s. To account for this the study has taken the

approximate net floorspace figures for the identified foodstores (Asda, Co-op, Iceland, Kwik Save,

Morrison’s, Sainsbury’s, Somerfield and Tesco) and then applied the ratio for

convenience/comparison goods sales area from Verdict Grocery Retailers (January 2005) to

estimate the likely sales area devoted to the sale of convenience items.

8.14 When benchmark company turnover to floorspace ratios are applied to the net floorspace figures

for the existing retail facilities within Tameside, this provides a benchmark estimate of the current

convenience goods turnover generated for each store. The study has calculated the expected

turnover of these facilities by applying figures relating to company benchmark floorspace to

turnover ratios as shown at Table 8.1.

racting £6 .00m of conve ce

e

sda at Hyde (£63 ’s 7 s

tore in Stalybridge (£ ores gh the Morri and

ainsbury’s stores in Denton (£38.74m a son’s at Hyde

£34.81m) and Sains r-Lyn 7m).

n terms of stores outside th tu y ad hous vey

v 0.8 lting e bein

t w

nclude the Morrison’s a derton m and m respe

t Sports City (£50.94m p (£42 nd the Extra

6m).

urrent Provision

ust up-to a ec side in terms of large foodstores,

nvenie vision e is no nt

atabase t ed th

% of the expenditure generated in a is spent at these ted o

pro rata basis accord for ache id ntified by the househole urvey

n compari tu e ithin th h to b

pproximately £24.72m.

ith regard to the majo proac ortan

o recognise that ce s s od good as

ooks, com od

109

Table 8.1: Trading Performance of Current Major Foodstores in Tameside Store Net

Convenience Turnover per sq m

Benchmark Turnover (£m)

Survey Estimate

Floorspace (sq m)1

(£m)

Ashton-under-Lyne Aldi, Picton Street 517 4,1673 2.15 1.60 Asda, Cavendish Street 3,150 13,646 42.98 66.00 Co-op Food Market, Queens Road, Hurst Cross 929* 6,310 5.86 5.42 Iceland, Bow Street 619 4,768 2.95 4.14 Kwik Save, Bow Street 588 4,166 2.45 7.41 Lidl, Stamford Street 936 4,0723 3.81 1.84 Marks & Spencer, Warrington Street 6842 8,594 5.88 7.01 Sainsbury’s, Lord Sheldon Way 2,064 9,870 20.37 21.97 Market - - 0.46 0.46 Local Shops - - 8.17 3.37 Sub-Total 95.08 119.22 Hyde Aldi, Manchester Road 669 4,167 2.79 4.44 Asda, Water Street 2,111 13,646 28.81 63.29 Kwik Save, Market Street 930 4,166 3.87 2.80 Morrison’s, Mottram Road 2,525 11,794 29.78 34.81 Local Shops - - 10.00 4.12 Sub-Total 75.25 109.46 Stalybridge Somerfield, Leech Street 1,033 6,855 7.08 7.09 Tesco, Trinity Street 2,979 13,184 39.28 52.33 Local Shops - - 11.52 4.75 Sub-Total 57.88 64.17 Denton Morrison’s, Saxon Street 3,466 11,794 40.64 38.74 Sainsbury’s, Oldham Street 3,248 9,870 32.06 37.23 Local Shops - 4,000 2.94 1.21 Sub-Total 75.64 77.18 Droylsden Kwik Save, Green Side Lane Retail Park 689 4,166 2.87 6.66 Tesco, Manchester Road 1,344* 13,184 17.72 36.49 Local Shops - - 8.34 3.44 Sub-Total 28.93 46.59 Other Morrison’s, Foundry Street, Dukinfield 3,017 11,794 35.58 53.27 Local Shops, Hattersley - - 1.31 0.54 Local Shops, Mossley - - 10.07 4.15 Local Shops, Dukinfield - - 3.69 1.52 Local Shops, Audenshaw - - 1.19 0.49 Local Shops, Mottram - - 0.43 0.18 Local Shops, Other - - 0.34 0.14 Sub-Total - - 52.61 60.29 TOTAL - - 385.39 476.89

Source: 1 – Derived from Tameside MBC Retail Database and assumes food/non food ratio identified by Verdict Grocery Retailers (January 2005) where available

2 – White Young Green estimate

8.15 ve

nkings (2005), taking into

account VAT and petrol sales (at a 2001 price base).

3 – Derived from Mintel Retail Rankings (2005) 4 – Derived from Tameside MBC and assumes a gross to net ratio of 85% * - Derived from IGD Database (2003) utilising the findings of Verdict Grocery Retailers (January 2005)

Accurate figures as to the sales density of leading national multiple convenience retailers ha

been derived from Verdict Grocery Retailers (2005) or Mintel Retail Ra

110

Future Convenience Floorspace Requirements 8.16 Our analysis of Tamesid ugh’s market share of convenience goods expenditure within the

pproximately £476.89m will be

available to convenience goods stores within the defined study area (at current market share).

8.17

ar to be an undersupply of convenience retail

facilities of approximately £91.5m when compared to ‘benchmark’ anticipated turnovers (Table 8.1).

8.18

rnover

This

nstrate that the store is overtrading by 54%. Similarly, the household survey

suggests that the Sainsbury’s store at Lord Sheldon Way is also identified to be marginally

8.19

nd the

store in Denton is identified to be overtrading by

16%, the Morrison’s store is identified as the only major foodstore within the Borough to be

undertrading (by 5%). However, this is likely to be due to the store having only recently opened at

the time of the household survey being undertaken.

8.20 However, it must be noted that the results of shopper surveys should only be used with caution to

estimate the turnovers of individual stores (rather than comparative market shares). Nevertheless,

the results appear to confirm our impressions that the major foodstores in the Borough are

generally performing very well, particular the Asda and Tesco stores.

e Boro

defined catchment (identified in Section 4) indicates that in 2005 a

By comparing this estimate with the total turnover generated by existing retail facilities based on

company averages (£385.39m), there would appe

This additional expenditure will either be passing through existing shops which in aggregate could

be trading above company averages.

Our analysis of the performance of the leading supermarkets indicates that certain stores within the

Borough are significant overtrading. Indeed, from the evidence it is clear from the household

survey that within Ashton-under-Lyne the Asda store on Cavendish Street is generating a tu

of £66.00m per annum. This compares to the company benchmark figure of only £42.98m.

would appear to demo

overtrading by 8% (at £21.97m compared to £20.37m) above company average.

With regard to other centres, the two main foodstores in Hyde (Asda and Morrison’s) are also

identified to be overtrading by 120% and 17% respectively. Similarly, within Stalybridge and

Droylsden the Tesco stores are identified to be overtrading by 33% and 106% respectively a

Morrison’s store in Dukinfield is overtrading by 50%. On this basis, the significant overtrading of

the Tesco store at Droylsden reflects the limited convenience goods offer in this part of the

Borough. In comparison, whilst the Sainsbury’s

8.21 Having regard to this surplus expenditure, it is now important to estimate the likely quantitative

need for additional convenience facilities within the Borough through to 2016. It is assumed that

the surplus expenditure would be made available for new convenience floorspace.

111

Table 8.2: Estimated Need for Convenience Facilities Turnover - £m Expenditure Available - £m Surplus Expenditure - £m 2005 385.39 476.89 91.50 2010 395.12 495.49 100.37 2016 407.12 524.88 117.76

.22 It must be noted that the above surplus expenditure is a cumulative total applicable to the whole of

me that the ‘excess’ expenditure identified can be

drawn a single retail location within the Borough.

8.23 h will

ion

September 2005. Therefore, White Young Green consider

that this store could have a potential convenience goods turnover of approximately £3.8m (at 2001

prices). This is based on the sales density identified by Mintel Retail Rankings (2005) and

assumes a sales area of 80% of the gross and that 90% of the sales area is for the sale of

convenience goods.

f Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre. For the

purposes of this assessment it is assumed that the existing Aldi store will be developed for

at

d

8.25 r, whilst the existing markets in the main town centres have been highlighted in the

household survey, it is considered the likely convenience goods turnover to be an underestimate.

a

ified will

8.26 mitments and proposals will have a convenience

goods turnover of £5.0m. On this basis, at current market shares, there will remain significant

surplus capacity of approximately £95.27m by 2010 increasing to £112.61m by 2016 (allowing for

increased productivity of 0.5% per annum). Whilst this floorspace is likely to comprise a variety of

Source: WYG 2005 at 2001 prices Allows for Increased turnover of efficiency of 0.5% per annum

8

the Borough and does not necessarily presu

In addition, it is also important to account for existing commitments within the Borough, whic

absorb a certain proportion of this surplus capacity available. In this respect, planning permiss

exists for an Aldi foodstore (1,255 sq m gross) at Great Norbury Street, Hyde (LPA Ref:

05/00871/FUL), which was approved in

8.24 Furthermore, a relocated Aldi store is proposed to the west of Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre at

the former Nissan Garage, which is allocated in the UDP for retail and leisure uses (Policy E2 (12)).

In this respect, Aldi are seeking to relocate from their existing store at Picton Street (960 sq m

gross) to a new store (1,372 sq m gross) at the edge o

residential purposes rather than reused for retail purposes, although this it is important to note th

this is not guaranteed. Therefore, it is considered that this development will result in an increase

‘benchmark’ turnover of approximately £1.2m.

Moreove

Indeed, the Ashton Market Study identifies the market to be trading very well. Moreover, the

market hall is currently being redeveloped following the fire and should the new market comprise

significant proportion of stalls selling food products, it is likely that the surplus capacity ident

be less. Therefore, White Young Green consider that the capacity identified by 2016 (£118m)

should be treated with a ‘note of caution.’

Notwithstanding this, it is evident that existing com

112

formats (i.e. extensions to existing stores, discount retailers and new stores of varying scale), by

adopting an average sales density of £10,000 per sq m to the surplus expenditure, which is based

on a broad range of convenience goods retailers as identified by Verdict and Mintel, this surplus

capacity equates to approximately 10,660 sq m (net) of additional convenience goods floorspace

8.27 ability to spend more money on non-food goods

(such as clothing and footwear) will also increase. The current ‘ultra long term’ growth rate

8.28

nly from major out-of-centre

retail facilities but also from new forms of retailing.

8.29

to 2016

.30 With such a diverse range of retailers trading throughout the Borough (retail warehousing, high

ark’

sting

retail facilities is to analyse the market share for facilities in Tameside identified by the household

8.31 Given this, from our ana the market share of fa in Tameside, the study identifies that

h non-food fa m the defined study area (which

cludes is represents 29.5% of the total

comparison goods expenditure generated within the defined study area. In addition, the retail

model has not allowed for any inflow of expenditure from outside the defined study area. Indeed,

given the extent of the study area adopted and the strength of competing centres White Young

Green consider this a realistic approach to adopt.

by 2016.

Capacity for Future Comparison Goods

As our general standard of living increases, our

provided by Brief 05/2 suggests that this growth is likely to be +3.8% per annum (after 2004).

Clearly, over any Local Development Framework period this represents a significant cumulative

increase in total non-food expenditure.

However, although non-food shopping is often seen as a leisure/social activity, there are increasing

pressures being placed upon the traditional high street function, not o

Although the study has taken into account Special Forms of Trading (e.g. internet sales, mail order,

etc.) within our expenditure analysis, it is considered that as capacity is being assessed up

it is important that the rapidly expanding opportunities of ‘e-commerce’ are ignored. As this is still

emerging the likely impact is still open to speculation.

8

street multiples, independent retailers, etc.), it is more difficult to estimate the likely ‘benchm

turnover of each facility. Therefore, the most accurate way to estimate the turnover of the exi

survey.

lysis of cilities

the current level of trade passing throug cilities fro

in both non-bulky and bulky goods) is £591.66m. Th

113

8.32 On this basis, the study has ‘rolled forward’ Tameside’s current market share to examine the lik

comparison goods floorspace required to maintain its current position within the hierarchy, n

ely

amely

at a level of approximately 30% of all comparison goods expenditure in the defined study area.

8.33 Drawing upon the lling outline ction, the study has fore

t and additional £196.03m will be available for comparison oods

s ing within Tamesi ugh. In this respect, PPS6 advocates that this should be focused

within established town centres as a first preference, subject to suitable sites being available to

accommodate the level of potential floorspace.

8.34 C , if no additional c rison goods floorspace veloped within the perio to 2016,

then, regardless of impro roductivity’ by existing facilities, the majority of this su ld be

lost to competing centre here. In addition, Tame market share of all comparison goods

expenditure could then fall from its current level of 30% to 23% by 2016 - such a de uld

s change the future shopping and trading patterns within the defined study area at the

e se of the future vitality and viability of the establi centres.

.35 The assessment of the current vitality and viability of existing centres within the Borough it is

at the

st continue to improve in order to provide a good

distribution of facilities.

8.36

results of the mode d in the previous se cast

hat between 2005 2016, an g

hopp de Boro

learly ompa was de d up

ved ‘p rplus wou

elsew side’s

crease co

ignificantly

xpen shed

8

evident that Ashton-under-Lyne is the dominant retail destination. Therefore, it is important th

centre benefits from additional investment to meet the requirements of modern retailers.

Furthermore, other centres such as Hyde and Denton also provide an important role in meeting the

retail requirements of the local population and mu

By allowing for increased productivity (1.5% per annum) the study has estimated the likely

expenditure that will be available for new comparison goods floorspace by 2016 (Table 8.3).

Table 8.3: Estimated Available Comparison Expenditure Turnover + Increased

Productivity - £m Expenditure Available

- £m Surplus Expenditure

- £m 2005 591.66 591.66 - 2010 637.39 710.42 73.03 2016 696.95 892.98 196.03

Source: WYG 2005 at 2001 prices

8.37

Allows for Increased turnover of efficiency of 1.5% per annum

The results show that by 2010 there will be £73.03m of comparison goods expenditure available for

new retail development, based on current market shares. This level of expenditure will increase to

£196.03m by 2016. This amount of expenditure will be available for all comparison goods

floorspace.

114

8 In terms of capacity for the major centres within the Borough (assuming n.38 o changes in market

share), Table a pari

T .4: Estim vailable Comparison Expenditure by Centre (includes out-of-centre facilities)

8.4 provides an ssessment of the com son goods expenditure available.

able 8 ated A Turnover + Increased

Productivity - £m Expenditure Available

- £m Surplus Ex re penditu

- £m Ashton-under-Lyne 2005 429.26 429.26 - 2010 462.43 516.85 54.42 2016 505.65 649.66 144.02 Hyde 2005 85.02 85.02 - 2010 91.59 101.43 9.84 2016 100.15 127.50 27.35 Stalybridge 2005 19.48 19.48 - 2010 20.99 24.15 3.16 2016 22.95 30.36 7.41 Denton 2005 46.73 46.73 - 2010 50.34 55.55 5.21 2016 55.05 69.82 14.77 Droylsden 2005 8.32 8.32 - 2010 8.96 9.66 0.70 2016 9.80 12.14 2.34

8.37

in

nd

.38 On this basis, in accordance with national planning guidance (PPS6) this expenditure will be

t notably Ashton-under-Lyne and

Hyde. Given this, the analysis of the household identifies th g facilities in Ashton-

u sity of ap tely £7,348 per sq m whereas H d

S nsity of sq m and £2,488 per sq m re

On this basis, for the purposes of this study an a sales density of approximately £

sq m has been applied to the estimated surplus expenditure.

Source: WYG 2005 at 2001 prices Allows for Increased turnover of efficiency of 1.5% per annum

Understandably, the analysis identifies that Ashton-under-Lyne will be the main focus for the

identified capacity. Indeed, the study identifies surplus expenditure of some £144.02m by 2016

Ashton-under-Lyne, compared to £27.35m in Hyde, £14.77m in Denton, £7.41m in Stalybridge a

£2.34m in Droylsden (at current market shares).

8

directed towards the established centres in the Borough mos

survey at existin

nder-Lyne have an average sales den proxima yde an

talybridge achieve an average sales de £4,211 per spectively.

verage 4,500 per

8.39 Therefore, by applying the derived sales density of £4,500 per sq m to the surplus expenditure, it is

estimated that by the year 2010 there will be a requirement for approximately 15,064 sq m net

(approximately 21,520 sq m gross) of town centre floorspace in the Borough to retain its current

market share. Furthermore, this requirement is estimated to increase to 36,980 sq m net by 2016

(or 52,829 sq m gross)

115

Table 8.5: Estimated Comparison (Town Centre) Floorspace Requirements Surplus Expenditure -

£m Average Sales Density + Increased Productivity -

£ per sq m

Net Floorspace Requirement – sq m

Gross Floorspace Requirement – sq m

2005 - 4,500 - - 2010 73.03 4,848 15,064 21,520 2016 196.03 5,301 36,980 52,829

8.40

3,000 per sq m

to the surplus capacity, the requirement for additional retail floorspace would increase to 55,470 sq

Future Proposals for Comparison Floorspace

8.41

tail

planning permission, the redevelopment of the former Oldham Batteries site in Denton (which is

Notes: Gross to Net at 70% Allows for Increased turnover of efficiency of 1.5% per annum

However, if further comparison goods development was to occur within an extension to a

supermarket or the development of a retail warehouse then the sales density applied would differ.

Indeed, by applying a typical sales density for retail warehousing of approximately £

m (net) by 2016. In reality it is likely that this surplus capacity will comprise a variety of retail

development types.

In terms of future commitments, there are currently a number of outstanding planning permissions

and retail allocations within Tameside. These are identified to be: the permitted development for

mezzanine floors at Crown Point North, Denton, which benefits from unrestricted non-food re

allocated in the adopted Tameside Unitary Development Plan) and could be developed for non-

food retailing, such as retail warehousing, the existing United Utilities site at the edge of Ashton

Town Centre, which is to be occupied by IKEA and the Gas Street/Katherine Street site in Ashton

Town Centre that is being developed by TJ Hughes (although this has not yet started).

Table 8.6: Outstanding Commitments/Proposals in Tameside Development/Location Net Floorspace

(sq m) Sales Density

(£/sq m) Turnover

(£m) Crown Point North, Denton (Mezzanine floors) 12,598 3,500 44.09 Oldham Batteries, Denton 11,148 3,000 33.44 United Utilities, Ashton-under-Lyne 10,400 4,680^ 48.67 Gas Street/Katherine Street, Ashton-under-Lyne 1,980 2,0271 4.01 TOTAL 36,126 - 130.21

nsity of TJ Hughes as identified by Mintel Retail Rankings (2005)

8.42 Table 8.6 indicates that outstanding commitments/allocations could have a potential turnover of

approximately £130m. However, this will vary dependant on the end-operators and therefore, the

actual turnover of commitments/allocations could increase. Notwithstanding this, it is evident that

current commitments and proposals could absorb all the identified capacity through to 2010 (£73m)

Notes: ^ - Based on sales density of IKEA as identified by Mintel Retail Rankings (2005) 1 - Based on sales de

and a significant proportion (66%) of expenditure available by 2016 at current market shares

(£199m).

116

8.43 Furthermore, a number of additional retail commitments are also outstanding in the Borough.

There are two mixed used schemes at Stalybridge, allocated in the UDP (Policy E2 (8) and

However, it is difficult to quantify the amount of retail floorspace within the two schemes as no

applications have been submitted for either site as yet. In addition, as previously highlighted,

Policy E2 (12) allocates an area to the west of Ashton Town Centre for retail and leisure uses.

Whilst the northern end of the site is subject to an applica

E2 (9).

tion by Aldi there has been no application

on the remainder of the site. Therefore, there is no way of estimating the contribution this area

8.44

8.45 t

ort

.

.46 ity at current market share for additional

non-food floorspa m net by 2016)

a ed by facilities in ide has increased sinc it is evident that more than half (c.

e study area are undertaken at competing facilities. Indeed, whilst

nt is relatively high (72%), it is evident

that almost a half (46%) of non-bulky comparison goods shopping trips are made to facilities

blished

ugh.

8.47 Therefore, it is considered reasonable through improved provision in quantity and particularly

quality

could make and an estimate is made more difficult because the site is in multiple ownerships and

therefore there is no certainty of when the site could be available for development.

Similarly, a mixed use scheme is also proposed in Droylsden; however, this is likely to comprise

only a couple of hundred square metres. Therefore, this proposal will have limited affect on the

surplus capacity identified due to its limited size.

Therefore, it is likely that the potential turnover of outstanding commitments will be greater than tha

identified in Table 8.6. However, it remains evident that there will be significant capacity to supp

additional non-food floorspace over and above outstanding commitments/proposals by 2016 (circa

£57m) at current market shares and allowing for increased productivity at 1.5% per annum

8 Whilst it is acknowledged that there is significant capac

ce (almost 37,000 sq , it is notable that whilst the market share

chiev Tames e 2001,

59%) of shopping trips within th

retention in ‘bulky’ goods shopping within the core catchme

outside Tameside. Given this it is considered reasonable for the market share of facilities in

Tameside to increase as facilities such as Crown Point North in Denton become more esta

and existing commitments are developed to continue the trend since 2001. Furthermore, the

strength of IKEA as a retail brand is also likely to contribute to increasing the market share of

facilities in the Boro

(such as a department store), the market share achieved by facilities in Tameside could

increase, particularly within the core catchment.

8.48 On this basis, the market share for comparison goods within the core catchment could increase

from approximately 62% to 72% through improved provision within the Borough together with an

increase in market share within the outer catchment of three percentage points (linked primarily to

the permitted IKEA store) within the outer catchment, from 15.3% to 18.3%.

117

8.4 Given this, the overall market achieved within the overall catchment a9 rea will increase from 29.5%

to 34% by 2010, an increase of more than 16%. However, a 72% retention within the core

inal increase in market share within the outer catchment should not be

considered by the Council as a ‘ceiling figure’, and further appropriate development should be

8.49 of the adjoining authorities are also seeking to improve

their retail ‘offer’, which is likely to have an impact on the market share achieved by facilities in

meside (notably at Ashton) will reduce the need to travel to Manchester. Given

this, based on the market share increasing to approximately 34% within the Study Area by 2010,

£348.7

le of Ashton Town Centre, further non-food retail development should be concentrated in this

pears

to h

Table 8.7: Estimated Available Comparison Expenditure

catchment and a marg

considered by the Council that will provide more sustainable development in accordance with

national planning advice and meet an identifiable need.

However, it is important to note that, many

Tameside, particularly from the outer catchment. Indeed, it is inevitable that Manchester as the

Regional Centre will continue to draw trade from Tameside area. Nevertheless, improved retail

provision within Ta

Table 8.7 indicates that the surplus expenditure will increase to £195.89m by 2010 and to

8m by 2016. Of this expenditure, White Young Green consider that given the sub-regional

ro

location, in order to improve its market share, which as identified by the household survey ap

ave declined since 2001 following the development of Crown Point North at Denton.

Turnover + Increased Productivity - £m

Expenditure Available - £m

Surplus Expenditure - £m

2005 591.66 591.66 - 2010 637.39 833.28 195.89 2016 696.95 1,045.73 348.78

ng

commitments. This equates to approximately 13,548 sq m (net) of additional retail floorspace by

,936 sq m net) by 2016 assuming all outstanding commitments

are implemented.

Source: WYG 2005 at 2001 prices Allows for Increased turnover of efficiency of 1.5% per annum Based on increased market share by 2010 of 31.8%

8.50 Accordingly, by increasing market share to a realistic and achievable level, the assessment

identifies a residual capacity of approximately £66m by 2010 over and above outstandi

2010, increasing to £206m (or 38

118

9 QUALITATIVE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL FLOORSPACE

Introduction .01 Although the recent published Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS6) ‘Planning for Town Centres’

an

the e

• Provision is made for a range of sites for shopping, leisure and local services, which allow ing in

9.02 r

9.03

repancy in with regards to the retail offer.

9.04

0 sq m of

with the medium sized Tesco store in Droylsden

(although slightly below the 2,500 sq m threshold identified in PPS6), cater for main and ‘top-up’

food shopping needs in the study area.

9

states that local planning authorities should place greater weight on quantitative need for additional

floorspace, local planning authorities should also take account of qualitative considerations. In this

respect, paragraph 2.35 of PPS6 states:

‘In assessing the qualitative need for additional development when preparing its development pl

documents, a key consideration for a local planning authority will be to provide for consumer choice, by ensuring that:

• An appropriate distribution of locations is achieved, subject to the key objective of promoting vitality and viability of town centres and the application of the sequential approach, to improvaccessibility for the whole community; and

genuine choice to meet the needs of the whole community, particularly the needs of those livdeprived areas.’

Furthermore, PPS6 states that local planning authorities should also take into consideration othe

issues, such as the degree to which shops may be overtrading. Although additional benefits in

respect of regeneration and employment are not considered to constitute qualitative need, weight

should be given to such benefits depending on local issues.

On this basis, set out below is a qualitative assessment of existing provision in order to identify

which type of retailing there is a current disc

Convenience Goods Retailing

As identified in this study it is evident that most households undertake two kinds of food shopping

trips (i.e. main food shopping and ‘top-up’ shopping). In this respect, residents in Tameside

Borough have the choice of eight food superstores (defined as comprising more than 2,50

trading floorspace in Annex A of PPS6), including Asda and Sainsbury’s in Ashton-under-Lyne,

Morrison’s and Asda in Hyde, Tesco in Stalybridge, Morrison’s and Sainsbury’s in Denton and

Morrison’s in Dukinfield. These stores, along

119

9 These superstores are supported.05 by nine smaller supermarkets; these include the Somerfield and

Iceland stores on Bow Street, Ashton-under-Lyne and Somerfield in Stalybridge, together with a

wide variety of Co-op, Kwik Save, Aldi and Lidl stores. These stores generally serve a ‘top-up’

9.06 h

g a

9.07

er

onvenience goods provision within the Borough, including the Morrison’s in Denton,

Sainsbury’s in Ashton-under-Lyne and Asda at Hyde. Although there has also been improved

provision in the adjoining authorities, the household survey indicates that there has been an

increased market share achieved by facilities in the study area.

9.08 However, it is significant to note that the household survey identifies that almost all the major

superstores in the Borough are trading above ‘benchmark’ turnover. Indeed, as highlighted in

Section 8 of this study, the Asda stores in Ashton-under-Lyne and Hyde are overtrading by 54%

and 120% and the Morrison’s in Dukinfield is overtrading by 50%. On this basis, this significant

overtrading will have an impact on the shopping experience for local residents. It is likely that

existing main food shopping destinations in the Borough will be congested at certain periods of the

day. In addition, there is likely to be the necessity for frequent re-stocking of shelves from stock

9.09 ate

new foodstore provision is provided in areas of the Borough that currently have poor provision, rely

on stores with high levels of overtrading and are located in accessible locations. In this respect,

there appears to be a need for a new major foodstore in the eastern part of the Borough

(Hattersley/Hyde). Indeed, it is evident that within Zone 10 of the study area the market share has

reduced since 2001, with significant shopping trips being made to facilities in Glossop coupled with

the significant overtrading at stores in Hyde.

shopping role not offering the range of goods commonly found in large superstores.

Furthermore, located within defined centres in the Borough are a number of varying retailers suc

as small national/regional multiples and independent retailers, including markets, again meetin

‘top-up’ shopping role, but also serving the general needs of the less mobile in certain locations.

On this basis, it is notable that convenience goods provision within the Borough is good with

representation from all the four leading supermarkets (as identified by Verdict Grocery Retailers).

Indeed, there has been significant recent development since the 2001 Study that has furth

improved the c

cages during the day, which may cause aisles to be congested. Due to the significant popularity of

certain foodstores in the Borough, it is likely that the car parks serving the store together with

surrounding roads will become congested.

Therefore, it is considered that there is a qualitative need for additional major foodstore to allevi

overtrading in the Borough and improve the shopping environment. However, it is important that

120

Comparison Goods Retailing

Defined Centres

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre is the dominant destination for retailing in the Borough providing

good range of shops reflecting its sub-regional status. However, investment levels have not k

up in recent years with most develop

9.10 a

ept

ment taking place at edge-of-centre locations, such as the

Triangle Retail Park. However, whilst facilities in Ashton are the most popular within the core

is

r

er.

e

nt North

catchment, achieving a market share of 33% of all non-bulky comparison goods shopping trips, it

evident that the majority of shopping trips for these types of goods are to facilities outside the

Ashton-under-Lyne area. Whilst it is acknowledged that some of these shopping trips are to othe

facilities in the Borough (circa. 19%), it is evident that almost half of shopping trips in the core

catchment are to facilities outside the Borough, most notably to facilities in Stockport and

Manchest

9.11 Furthermore, whilst the market share of facilities in Tameside as a whole have increased sinc

2001 within the core catchment (from 52% to 54%), which is due primarily to the Crown Poi

development in Denton, it is evident that facilities Ashton’s market share from the core catchment

has reduced from 43% in 2001 to 33% in 2005. Therefore, it is considered that there is a

qualitative need to improve the non-bulky comparison goods offer in Ashton-under-Lyne, with fo

on improving the town centre retail offer enhancing the provision of higher order retailers (e.g.

department store). Indeed, it is considered that the impact of the continuing development of Crow

Point North on existing centres within Tameside and on the Borough hierarchy should be carefu

cus

n

lly

monitored by the Council.

9.12 With regard to the four district centres in the Borough (Denton, Stalybridge, Droylsden and Hyde),

these have a much more limited retail offer with limited national comparison retailers, with the

exception of the Crown Point North development in Denton. Generally, these centres serve to

meet the needs of the local population and primarily serve a food shopping role, with each centre

anchored by at least one major foodstore operator. Indeed, these centres achieve low market

shares within the core catchment of: Hyde 10%, Denton 9%, Stalybridge 2% and Droylsden 0%.

9.13 On this basis, it is evident that Denton’s market share has increased significantly since 2001, from

1% to 9% due to the significant development at Crown Point North. On this basis, it is considered

that there is limited qualitative need for additional non-bulky comparison goods retailing in Denton.

Similarly, Hyde’s market share has also increased since 2001 (from 7%) so has Stalybridge (from

1%). In this respect, it is considered that there is no pressing qualitative need for additional retail

floorspace in these centres. However, should an appropriate opportunity arrive in the district

centre, further improvement to these centres should be encouraged by the Council of an

appropriate scale to the centre.

121

Retail Warehousing

9.14 The retention of shopping trips in Tameside for ‘bulky goods’ (i.e. electrical, furniture, DIY, etc) is

n that achieved for non-bulky goods within the core catchment (72%

compared to 54%). Similarly, within the wider study area, facilities in Tameside attract almost a

third of shopping trips (31%) undertaken, which is higher than the market share achieved by

facilities in the adjoining authorities.

9.15 Whilst the market share has reduced since 2001 within the core catchment, from 73% to 72%, it

remains evident the market share achieved is relatively high and it is considered that there is no

clear qualitative need for significant additional ‘bulky’ goods provision in the Borough. However,

with regard to specific types of ‘bulky goods’ retailers, facilities in Tameside attract 69% of shopping

trips in the core catchment for electrical goods, 88% for DIY goods and 58% for furniture and

carpets.

9.16

re

il offer, which has seen the greatest fall in market share since 2001 and 42% of

shopping trips undertaken in the core catchment being made to facilities outside the Borough.

significantly higher tha

It is evident that the market shares have reduced since 2001 for all ‘bulky’ goods categories,

electrical by 7%, DIY by 2% and furniture and carpets by 9%. Therefore, unlike non-bulky

comparison goods shopping trips, it is evident that there is limited ‘leakage’ to facilities outside the

Borough from within the core catchment. Indeed, for DIY goods, only 12% of shopping trips in the

core catchment are made to facilities outside the Borough, reflecting the strength of provision.

However, of all the ‘bulky’ goods identified, there does appear some scope to improve the furnitu

and carpets reta

122

10 POTENTIAL FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND THE EMERGING STRATEGY

Introduction

This section of the report seeks to build upon the evidence gathered as part of the modelling and

capacity exercise set out in Section 8 of this report. As can be seen from the analysis undertaken

within this study, there is anticipated to be significant demand for retail goods (particularly non foo

or comparison goods) through to the year 2016. Whilst there has been recent evidence of a slow

down in overall high street activity, forecasts that have been utilised as part of this stud

10.01

d

y allow for

cycles of economic growth and recession. Therefore, the conclusions reached with regard to future

10.02 tively

f

6.

10.03

and pro-active approach must have regard to the overall Regional Spatial Strategy, it is evident that

n-

10.04

st attracter within the Borough. However, although Ashton-

under-Lyne Town Centre clearly performs a role and function which has a sub-regional influence, it

need for development, are not simply based on the significant growth that has occurred over the

past five years.

With this in mind, it is appropriate for Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (MBC) to pro-ac

and positively plan to accommodate the need identified and ensure that the vitality and viability of

the key centres identified throughout this study can be maintained if not enhanced. This section o

the report provides advice on how the Council should seek to adopt a pro-active approach in the

future and ensure that the emerging LDF process will address the needs identified through to 201

This section of the report also focuses on potential redevelopment opportunities within the key

centres identified and highlights priorities for action which may not necessarily involve physical

development.

The Role of Plans at the Local Level

PPS6 is clear in stating that local planning authorities should adopt a positive and pro-active

approach to planning for the future of all centres within their designated area. Whilst this positive

Tameside MBC should clearly set out how the role of their existing centres within the Borough will

contribute to the overall spatial strategy at the local level. Given the importance placed on Ashto

under-Lyne Town Centre as part of the regional network it is fundamental that the growth and the

development of the hierarchy of centres within the Borough must be driven by Ashton-under-Lyne’s

developing sub-regional status.

The survey evidence gathered as part of this study demonstrates that for comparison goods,

Ashton-under-Lyne is by far the bigge

is evident that there is significant scope for the centre to develop within the overall regional

network.

123

10.05

ategic

ome

10.06 share

oted that there have been four new

major foodstore developments that have opened since the 2001 study was completed. They

e

e

gh. In fact, it is evident from the retail model outlined in Section 8 of this study

that a number of the main food shopping destinations within the Borough are still performing well

s

.

10.07

h as the

10.08 foodstore development elsewhere, it is evident that all of the main food

shopping destinations within the key centres of Denton, Droylsden, Hyde and Stalybridge are

performing extremely well. In certain cases, there is likely to be scope for the further extension of

By comparing the results of this study with the previous study undertaken in 2001, it is possible to

explore how Ashton-under-Lyne and other key centres within the Borough have developed over the

past four years and whether or not there are any clear messages which will influence the str

direction adopted in the emerging LDF process. Put simply, for both food and non food shopping

(convenience and comparison) the market shares achieved by facilities within the Borough have

remained relatively constant. Although on the one hand this could be seen as a positive outc

whereby facilities within the Borough have managed to capture the growth associated within the

market share achieved in 2001, there is little evidence of any step change that has occurred in the

past four years whereby Tameside’s role and performance has managed to improve.

With regard to convenience goods retailing, it is interesting to note that the main food market

within the defined study area has only increased from 48% in 2001 to 52% in 2005. Whilst this

shows that improvement of four percentage points, it must be n

include the Asda in Hyde, the Morrison’s in Denton, the Sainsbury’s in Ashton-under-Lyne and th

Tesco in Stalybridge. Whilst in the same period two small foodstores have closed (the Tesco at

Hyde and the Shopping Giant in Denton) it is evident that the introduction of four new main food

shopping destinations have ultimately rebalanced existing expenditure within the Borough rather

than drawing in increased expenditure from elsewhere (often referred to as claw back). When th

performance of existing foodstores are analysed in more detail, it is evident that this rebalancing of

expenditure has in no way undermined the performance of main food shopping destinations

throughout the Borou

above the company benchmark estimates. Given the anticipated growth in convenience good

expenditure through to 2016, it is evident that the Council will need to carefully consider the

provision of further main food shopping destinations within the Borough as part of the LDF process

With regard to new foodstore development, the evidence outlined within this study would appear to

support the development of a new main food shopping destination as part of the proposed new

district centre in Hattersley. The provision of an additional main food shopping destination in this

location is not only justified by the proposed regeneration programme for this area, but also due to

the significant high levels of over trading experienced at main food shopping destinations in nearby

Hyde and to some extent elsewhere within the immediate drivetime of Hattersley. In addition, there

is also evidence of leakage from Hattersley to existing stores outside of the Borough suc

successful Tesco store in Glossop.

With regard to new

124

these facilities (where possible) either through the introduction of mezzanine floors, extensions or

potentially redevelopments. This is something that would need to be carefully explored as part of

t

rated by the significant overtrading at these two

stores and the forecast growth in convenience goods expenditure, it will be important that

the provision of additional main food shopping facilities

focused on Ashton-under-Lyne as part of any future development or redevelopment opportunities

10.09 n

rt

fer

0.10 In terms of comparison goods, as highlighted previously the market share for both non bulky

ally

for

n the

n of future

development within and on the edge of Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre. At the same time it is

the emerging strategies for each of these four key centres. Given the recent provision of a

Morrison’s at Denton, an Asda in Hyde and the Tesco in Stalybridge, White Young Green would no

envisage at this stage additional supermarket development on a major scale within these four key

centres. However, with regard to Ashton-under-Lyne it is evident that whilst the Sainsbury’s

foodstore is performing at about company benchmark levels, it is evident that both the Asda in

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre and the Morrison’s at Dukinfield are trading well above company

benchmark expectations. Given the capacity gene

Tameside MBC will have to consider

identified within this study or as part of the emerging strategy.

However, in considering the future need for an additional main food shopping destination withi

Ashton-under-Lyne, it will be important to recognise the role played by the new Market Hall (when

delivered) as there will clearly be a strong element of convenience goods provision provided as pa

of this significant refurbishment. At this stage it is extremely difficult to factor in the likely impact

that could be created by a rejuvenated indoor market at the heart of the town centre. However,

given that the most successful markets are now clearly driven by a strong convenience goods of

linked to local produce this issue will need to be carefully considered as part of the wider strategy

for the town centre.

1

comparison goods and bulky comparison goods within the Borough have only increased margin

when compared to the results of the 2001 Study (although 10% down on non-bulky goods market

share in Ashton Town Centre). Whilst it is positive that the comparison goods market share within

the whole of the Borough has not declined, this does not mean that significant improvements can

be secured in the comparison goods retail offer in the future. As highlighted previously, the main

focus for future growth in comparison goods retailing should be targeted towards Ashton-under-

Lyne as the key centre within the Borough. However, this does not mean that opportunities

future enhancement and expansion at the other four key centres should be ignored. A key part of

the emerging strategy therefore will be to identify an appropriate balance of opportunities withi

short, medium and long term to ensure that there is not an over concentratio

important that Ashton-under-Lyne is given every opportunity to enhance its sub-regional role within

the wider network.

125

0.11 The hierarchy of centres within the Borough is set out within the Adopted Plan (November 2004) in

ne,

e

s

are identified as blue dots on the Proposals Map.

10.12 ne

e. However, the health check exercise demonstrates that there are mixed

messages in terms of recent performance. This reinforces the need for a coherent strategy for its

rall dominance within the

catchment as a comparison goods shopping destination. Linked to this demand, is evidence of

vident

10.13

ugh

pproximately 53,000 sq m (gross). Whilst 60% of this floorspace has already been

committed in the schemes mentioned in Section 8, the way to exploit this growth is to identify

10.14 t

achieved by facilities within the Borough remaining constant. Therefore, whilst it is not anticipated

that the market share achieved by facilities in Tameside will dramatically increase their market

Tameside’s Retail Hierarchy and Potential Redevelopment Opportunities

1

defining the hierarchy of centres, it is evident that Policy S1 seeks to support and develop the role

of Ashton-under-Lyne as the Borough’s sub-regional shopping centre. Below Ashton-under-Ly

Hyde District Centre is identified as a large district centre with Denton, Droylsden and Stalybridg

identified as district centres. The centres of Mossley and Hattersley are then identified as small

district centres within the overall hierarchy. Beyond this a series of local centres/shopping parade

Ashton under Lyne Town Centre

The evidence gathered so far has demonstrated that whilst the market share of Ashton-under-Ly

has remained relatively stable, there are positive signs for the future growth and enhancement of

the centre’s rol

future development identifying key weaknesses which need action. On the positive side there is

evidence of growing demand from retailers seeking representation in Ashton-under-Lyne with

operators wishing to exploit the wider draw of the town centre and its ove

rental growth and overall improvement in ranking in the regional hierarchy. Conversely, it is e

that without further redevelopment to accommodate this demand there is a danger that Ashton-

under-Lyne’s future role and function could stagnate and even decline in the future.

As highlighted at the regional level, no established sub-regional centre can afford to stand still

particularly given the significant levels of capacity that have been identified for comparison goods

expenditure within the Borough. To put this into context, it is evident from the modelling set out in

Section 8 of this study that the surplus capacity for additional comparison goods within the Boro

in the next five years will amount to approximately £75m. When this is rolled forward to 2016, this

capacity will increase to approximately £200m. In floorspace terms, this means that by 2016

additional comparison goods floorspace will have to be accommodated within the Borough

amounting to a

proposals in Ashton Town Centre or risk the sub-regional centre declining.

In reflecting upon the anticipated capacity/need by 2016, it is important to note that the requiremen

for additional floorspace set out in Section 8 of this study is based on the market share currently

126

share in the future it is important to note that any small increase in market share will generate

greater need than the 53,000 sq m (gross) identified by 2016.

a

0.15 To accommodate future growth within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre, a development strategy

.

0.16 There will always be some demand for these units from independent retailers, but it is evident that

10.17 er-Lyne’s sub-regional role will be to

provide a more focused and concentrated retail offer which builds upon the success of the Arcades

10.18

the

oo far in retail terms and therefore other uses should be

encouraged to occupy space that was previously operated by the retail industry. A good example

t is the current redevelopment opportunity underway at St Petersfield centred on

the Magistrates Court. Here a successful office quarter is being developed in an area where retail

has declined dramatically leaving vacant and derelict premises which not only detract from the

Conservation Area but Ashton as a whole. Redevelopment of these areas for alternative uses such

as housing, employment, offices in the core of the town centre supports the consolidation of the

retail offer focused around the identified primary shopping area and increasing the economic value

of the town.

10.19 An opportunity in Ashton however is the refurbishment of the market hall and market. Plans are

now in place to provide a comprehensive refurbishment of the Market Hall and Market Place (which

includes the outdoor market) even though uncertainty has been expressed by both shoppers and

retailers within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre as to when this refurbishment will take place.

1

needs to address some major weaknesses. Clearly, the Town Centre Boundary at present is

extensive and stretches from Richmond Street in the west through to Fraser Street in the east.

Within this wider town centre area, there is a significant number of small retail premises which do

not meet the requirements of modern retailers who are now seeking large flexible footprint units

1

the supply far exceeds demand. This is still the case even though the past five years have been

some of the most successful in terms of retailing and consumer expenditure. This over-supply of

inflexible properties means that the vacancy rate within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre is well

above average despite there being strong signs of demand from retailers not represented within the

town centre.

The starting point for any development strategy for Ashton-und

development and the planned refurbishment of the historic market hall.

Whilst any future major redevelopment within Ashton Town Centre could be restricted by the

Conservation Area, it is evident that the diversification of former retail uses in areas towards

fringe of the Town Centre Boundary should be encouraged. It is evident that the town centre in

Ashton-under-Lyne at present extends t

of this at presen

127

10.20 Both shoppers and retailers have identified the Market Hall as being a key attractor unique to

Ashton playing a fundamental role in supporting vitality and viability. The establishment of a

temporary indoor market has provided essential continuity.

10.21 A successfully implemented refurbishment scheme for both the Market Hall and Market Place will

have a dramatic effect on rejuvenating the central core of Ashton-under-Lyne’s retail offer. The

separate report produced by Donaldson’s on the future of the Market Hall in Ashton Town Centre

confirms that its role is fundamental to the continued vitality and viability of Ashton-under-Lyne

Town Centre and its contribution should not be under estimated.

10.22 Whilst the refurbishment of the Market Hall is viewed as an essential part of Ashton-under-Lyne

Town Centre’s future strategy it is evident that the Council will also have to take a pro-active and

positive approach to identifying future redevelopment opportunities to accommodate the demand

for further retail floorspace particularly from national multiples. Whilst the health check undertaken

as part of this study demonstrates that there is a reasonable representation of national retailers

within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre it is evident that there are a number of quality operators

10.23

Site Analysis

10.24

usually associated with sub regional centres that are absent.

In seeking to identify potential redevelopment opportunities within and on the edge of Ashton-

under-Lyne Town Centre, Tameside MBC are currently embarking on a comprehensive

masterplanning exercise which has identified a number of development opportunity areas and

landmark opportunity sites. Feeding into this study, White Young Green have reviewed the

opportunities within and on the edge of Ashton to understand whether they could realise future

comparison goods development.

Cavendish Street/Old Street/Henry Square (Policy E2(1)) is currently known as the St Petersfield

Urban Business Quarter and is currently undergoing comprehensive redevelopment driven by Ask

Developments. The policy in the adopted UDP allows for a mix of uses including residential,

leisure, arts and culture, office, light industrial and supporting retail uses it is envisages that any

retail development within this area will support new office development rather than provide

additional town centre floorspace. This presents the opportunity to remove derelict and vacant

retail flo

orspace from this part of Ashton Town Centre and provide alternative uses like employment

and residential uses which will serve to underpin spending in the town.

10.25

Portland Basin Surrounds/Cavendish Street (Policy E2(2)), situated to the south west of the town

centre, this area is identified for future mixed use development including residential, leisure

, arts

and culture, office, light industrial and supporting retail uses. Whilst the area benefits from close

128

proximity to the existing Asda foodstore, it is not envisaged that these sites would prove

commercially attractive to retail and leisure uses in this location. Also, given the overall

recommended thrust of the strategy is to consolidate future retail and leisure development close to

sites

0.26 The final area of opportunity identified within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre is located to the

n Road and bounded by Oldham Road, Cotton Street East and Cavendish Street

the primary shopping area, White Young Green would not recommend any significant retail and

leisure development taking place within this area. Although the future redevelopment of the

will depend on land assembly, it is considered that demand in the medium to long term will be for

residential as office/live work units. There is considerable merit in capitalising the waterside

environment potential on both the Ashton Canal and the River Tame.

1

south of Wellingto

(Policy E2(12)). This area is identified for potential retail and leisure uses. In terms of the overall

10.27

0.28 From visiting the development opportunity identified, it is evident that the site is dominated by a mix

In

reen

n of

10.29

commercial attractiveness of the development opportunity area identified, the strongest frontage

now exists along Charlestown Way which means that the northern portion of this development

opportunity area would prove extremely attractive to future retail and leisure development.

Given this, it is not surprising to discover that Aldi have recently submitted a planning application for

a new foodstore on the frontage to Charlestown Way and Oldham Road. The development in this

location will prove extremely attractive given the significant prominence and the ability to attract

linked shopping trips. Whilst the application is encouraging and will help redevelop the existing

vacant Nissan Garage, it is evident that any future comprehensive redevelopment of this area

would then be limited given that the prime frontage will be occupied by Aldi. If the proposed Aldi

scheme is not implemented then the opportunity to create comprehensive redevelopment would be

greatly enhance. However, White Young Green have significant concerns with regard to land

assembly and the diverse range of ownerships that appear to dominate the site identified.

1

of small uses including Indian restaurants, tanning salons, specialist retail shops, car sales etc.

addition, there are also limited vacancies within this development opportunity area and given the

likely multiple ownerships involved, White Young Green believe that any future comprehensive

redevelopment of this area is unlikely within the short to medium term. In fact White Young G

believe that this area could secure future investment in the longer term if successful expansio

the primary shopping area could be achieved which is adjacent to this development opportunity

area.

Therefore, in summary White Young Green believe that the whilst the development opportunity

areas identified within the adopted UDP could help support future investment in alternative uses

within the town centre it is not envisaged that any of these areas would be able to deliver

129

comprehensive retail and leisure developments that would enhance the sub-regional role of

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre.

0.30 In addition to the development opportunity areas identified within the adopted UDP, the emerging

10.31 the

E2 this opportunity site now includes land which

benefits from prominent frontage along Park Parade. Whilst the frontage along Park Parade would

g

emely

t of this area will only occur in the

medium to long term given the potential land assembly issues. If the site could be assembled in

e further

10.32 of

ithin the existing Conservation Area and is

dominated by secondary retail focused along Stamford Street Central. From the site visits, it is

rough improvements

through the public realm and wider environmental treatments. This key part of the Conservation

e Park

1

masterplanning exercise being undertaken by Tameside MBC has also identified landmark

opportunity sites within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre. A total of four landmark opportunity sites

have been identified to date which have been reviewed as part of this study to understand whether

or not there is an opportunity for further retail and leisure development to be accommodated within

theses areas.

Landmark Sites

One such landmark opportunity site has been identified to the south of Park Parade bounded to

east by Cavendish Street and to the west by Margaret Street. Whilst this includes part of the

Development Opportunity Area identified in Policy

generate significant commercial interest it is evident that the existing uses within this area includin

Park Parade Industrial Estate and existing car showrooms and garages, it is anticipated that any

future land assembly exercise seeking to deliver this landmark opportunity site will prove extr

complex. Whist the masterplanning exercise was right to identify the importance of the frontage

along Park Parade, any future comprehensive redevelopmen

the future, there would clearly be opportunities for a mix of office (building upon the success of St

Petersfield on the opposite side of the road) and retail development linked to retail warehousing

type uses. As highlighted previously, White Young Green would not encourage at this stag

non-food retail development in this location given the need to expand the primary shopping area.

The next landmark opportunity site identified is located to the north of Park Parade and east

Cavendish Street. This opportunity site is located w

evident that there is a successful secondary retail economy established within this area and

provides important services uses including estate agents, solicitors, opticians and specialist

independent retailing. Overall, White Young Green believe that this area cannot be considered for

future retail and leisure development but should be seen as a key part of the wider economy of

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre. In fact, its future role could be developed as an independent

specialist retail and service quarter which could be significantly enhanced th

Area has the ability to provide an extremely attractive gateway to the town centre from th

Parade/Cavendish Street junction.

130

10.33

10.34

g

the

ve properties and land uses. White Young

Green therefore feel that future redevelopment for retail or leisure uses is unlikely to be viable

t

ive

10.35

enefits from

planning permission for non food retail development. The sites proximity to the Sainsbury’s

ly a

10.36

t

pedestrian connections need to be strengthened.

10.37

t

ccommodated within the primary shopping

area. Although there is some uncertainty as to the future availability of this site in the short term, it

e

10.38

Whilst White Young Green recognise that there are opportunities for small scale incremental

redevelopment of existing vacant and derelict properties, the ability to provide further retail and

leisure development within this area is particularly limited.

The next landmark opportunity site identified incorporates the development opportunity area

previously referred to, to the south of Wellington Road and to the north of Cotton Street East. The

landmark opportunity extends further including the existing swimming pool and theatre frontin

Oldham Road to the east and properties along the western side of Cavendish Street. Similar to

conclusions reached for the development opportunity area identified in the adopted UDP, it is

evident that this landmark opportunity site includes acti

particularly in the short to medium term. In the longer term, individual plots and incremental

development opportunities may occur but White Young Green recommend that this area is no

targeted action. Future redevelopment in this area should however be encouraged for alternat

uses such as residential or office development.

The final landmark opportunity area is focused to the north of Wellington Road and to the east of

new Sainsbury’s supermarket. This area is the United Utilities depot which currently b

supermarket and its prominence fronting Wellington Road would suggest that this is commercial

viable opportunity for future retail and leisure development.

Whilst outline planning permission has been secured for non-food retail development on this site,

the Council as part of any future strategy for Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre should recognise tha

this opportunity could provide a mix of uses to support retail and leisure growth along the

Wellington Road corridor. The redevelopment of this landmark opportunity site would also have the

added advantage of providing a stronger linkage between the existing Sainsbury’s supermarket

and the Triangle Retail Park with Ashton Retail Park and the primary shopping area, but its

However, the location of the United Utilities site does not form a natural extension to the primary

shopping area and therefore could be view as a potential opportunity to accommodate large forma

retailers (including retail warehousing) which cannot be a

is evident that this area will form a key component of any future strategy seeking to accommodat

additional non food (and potentially food) retail development in the future.

Although the emerging masterplanning exercise undertaken to date has identified other

redevelopment opportunities outside of the town centre, White Young Green are somewhat

131

surprised that the masterplan has not identified the existing bus station and surrounding area as a

potential landmark opportunity site. Given that the most successful retail location within Ashton-

under-Lyne Town Centre is currently focused at the Arcades, White Young Green believe that the

natural extension to the primary shopping area would be to consider

comprehensive redevelopment of the bus station area and land bounded by Wellington Road and

t

10.39

and

f

10.40 rt,

n

Centre is to achieve a high quality refurbishment of the Market Hall and Market Place whilst at the

of

10.41

lity

10.42

ping area whilst actively seeking to consolidate retailing in fringe areas. By

pursuing this strategic approach, Tameside MBC will deal with the key weaknesses identified within

best opportunity to create a

Oldham Road. Clearly, any future redevelopment of this potential area would have to incorporate a

new bus station facility. However, it appears to be the must logical and viable opportunity to

provide another phase to the Arcade Shopping Centre as well as benefiting from the prominen

frontage along Wellington Road. This frontage is particularly important when seeking to attract key

anchor retailers including department store operators.

The need for larger modern flexible retail units in the medium to long term is self evident within

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre and White Young Green believe that an area of opportunity

focused around the bus station and Assheton House is likely to provide the best opportunity.

However, the potential redevelopment of this area would need to be tested in the market place

any future redevelopments secured through a partnership with a preferred developer. As part o

this exercise, there will be a need for market testing of the opportunity which if proves unsuccessful

will reinforce the importance of the United Utilities site as the next best opportunity.

Therefore, in terms of the emerging strategy based on the evidence gathered within this repo

White Young Green would recommend that the short term objective for Ashton-under-Lyne Tow

same time pursuing the potential redevelopment of the bus station area with a view to delivering

additional comparison goods retail floorspace in the medium to long term. It is anticipated that the

refurbishment of the Market Hall and Market Place will have a dramatic impact upon the fortunes

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre in the short to medium term which could then be further supported

by additional comparison goods retail development including the potential attraction of another

department store which would further reinforce Ashton-under-Lyne’s future sub-regional role.

If such developments are not pursued pro-actively and positively, then there is a danger that

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre’s market share could decline over the next 11 years and its vita

and viability could be threatened by additional out-of-centre retail development which is difficult to

resist due to a lack of sequentially superior alternatives.

Emphasis is placed at the regional level on the future development of Ashton-under-Lyne Town

Centre as a key centre within the wider regional network. It is vital that Tameside MBC plan

positively to ensure that opportunities are offered to the market to ensure expansion and growth of

the primary shop

132

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre at the same time as building upon strengths and the unique

attraction of the historic Market Hall.

Hyde

At present, it is evident that behind Ashton-under-Lyne, Hyde is the next strongest retail location in

the Borough. Whilst it is anticipated that Denton’s market share will grow rapidly as Crown Point

North establishes its trading patterns, it is evident that Hyde District Centre is underpinned by

strong convenience goods sector and a successful market. Although the market share achieved by

Hyde would suggest that there is potential capacity for future food and non-food retail developme

it must be acknowledged that the development of a much stronger district centre at Hattersley will

help alleviate some of the overtrading at the major foodstores in Hyde and will have an influence on

the future needs for Hyde District Centre. For example, it is evident that both the Asda and

Morrison’s stores in Hyde are trading above company averages (this is particularly significant for

the Asda store). Whilst this would normally suggest t

10.43

nt,

hat there is potential for future foodstore

provision within this part of the Borough to address the existing overtrading and accommodate

nce goods expenditure it is evident that any future development of a large

foodstore as part of the proposed district centre at Hattersley will reduce the capacity currently

10.44

ct

ds facilities

, the centre benefits

from a strong retail core which is anchored to the east and west by both Morrison’s and Asda.

future growth in convenie

available to Hyde District Centre. As demonstrated by the household survey, it is evident that the

majority of the residents within the Hattersley area are currently travelling to the Asda and

Morrison’s at Hyde due to the lack of provision within the existing district centre at Hattersley.

With the introduction of a new foodstore at Hattersley it is evident that this will dramatically reduce

the flow of expenditure from the east thereby reducing the levels of overtrading currently recorded

at both foodstores but predominantly Asda. The same could also be said for future comparison

goods retail development whereby it is anticipated that new facilities provided as part of the distri

centre in Hattersley will reduce the overall capacity and need for further comparison goo

within Hyde District Centre. In fact, it is evident that the future vitality and viability of Hyde District

Centre could be further enhanced through the consolidation of the retail core which would enable

units particularly along the southern edge of Market Street to be converted into alternative uses.

The health check contained within this study identifies that there are significant levels of vacant

units throughout the centre and therefore any future strategy seeking to address this issue in the

future must consider the redefinition of Hyde District Centre to provide greater flexibility to enable

vacant units to be occupied for alternative uses including residential. Clearly

Although opportunities for redevelopment within this area are limited, the Council should where

possible explore opportunities for additional retail floorspace particularly linked to the comparison

goods sector.

133

10.45

in

w

e any major retail redevelopment on this site within the

short to medium term. If retail development is to occur on this site in the future, similar to the

0.46 Since the hierarchy was established within the adopted development plan significant changes have

t is

s

rn has also been expressed

by established traders within Denton District Centre who are uncertain about their own future

10.47 h

r retail

At present, the adopted development plan identifies two development opportunity areas to the north

and south of Manchester Road on the western edge of the district centre. Whilst the site are

close proximity to the main retail core, as highlighted above it is anticipated that Hyde District

Centre would benefit from a period of consolidation in the short to medium term to help target ne

investment towards the central retail core and overcome the high level of voids throughout the

centre. Whilst the Manchester Road opportunity is identified for a mix of uses including specialist

retail, White Young Green would not envisag

strategic approach recommended at Denton, the end uses would have to complement the facilities

that already exist within the central core rather than compete with them. This may involve some

form of retail warehouse development which focuses on ‘bulky goods’ retailing and builds upon the

presence of the existing B&Q access from Manchester Road. However, given the complexities of

assembling the site identified within the adopted UDP, White Young Green would anticipate that

any future retail development on this site as part of a comprehensive mixed use scheme would

ultimately be delivered in the medium to long term.

Denton District Centre

1

occurred or are planned within certain centres that may impact upon the overall structure of the

retail hierarchy in the future. The most significant change to date relates to the development and

opening of Crown Point North within the centre boundary of Denton. Although this major

comparison goods retail development had only recently opened prior to the commissioning of the

survey evidence for this study, it is evident that over time this development will have a significant

impact upon the overall market share of Denton District Centre as well as its role and performance.

As the trading position of Crown Point North was not fully established at the time the household

survey was undertaken, it is not possible to provide an exact figure as to the impact the

development has had on shopping patterns in the Denton and wider Tameside area. However, i

evident in the short period that the scheme has been trading the impact on established centre

within Tameside, particularly Denton, could be significant. This conce

performance. Within this in mind, it is evident that the Council will have to carefully consider future

retail development proposals in the Denton area (including the Oldham Batteries site) to ensure

that the problems highlighted to-date are not compounded in the future.

Furthermore, the introduction of both the Morrison’s foodstore at Denton and Crown Point Nort

has had a dramatic impact upon the structure of the centre and its potential sphere of influence.

One concern that has been identified from evidence gathered as part of this study is how the

original core of Denton District Centre can respond positively to the introduction of two majo

134

schemes towards the edge. Clearly, concern has been expressed by existing traders with

that the overall impact of both the Morrison’s foodstore and Crown Point North could prove

damaging to the vi

in Denton

tality and viability of the core of Denton District Centre in the short term.

Therefore, as part of any emerging strategy for Denton District Centre careful consideration will

on’s

10.48 d,

ent Opportunity Area’ within the boundary

of Denton District Centre known as the Edward Street/Howard Lane/Amelia Street/Hyde Road site

of Denton. The site is situated on the North Eastern side of Denton District Centre and South of the

M67 motorway. This area was principally occupied by the extensive and long established industrial

to note

g non-

10.49 e

and on the edge of Denton over

the past four years, it is fundamental that the traditional core of the district centre is given sufficient

tional

10.50

d whereby the future health of Denton District Centre is not undermined and that any

additional retail facilities that are provided a part of the mixed use development will complement

need to be given to enhancing future linkages between both Crown Point North and the Morris

foodstore to ensure that the spin off benefits of both of these developments can be maximised and

the core of the centre can be rejuvenated.

In examining future opportunities for redevelopment and expansion over the emerging plan perio

it is evident that the adopted plan identifies a ‘Developm

premises of Oldham Batteries. As highlighted in the adopted plan, the Council are keen to ensure

that the site does not become derelict over a number of years although remediation will be

required. In assessing future opportunities for the redevelopment of this site, it is important

that the site has been subject to a planning application for mixed use development comprisin

food retail, leisure, employment and residential uses.

Given the sites location within the centre boundary of Denton, it is evident that there may be th

potential for future retail and leisure development as part of a comprehensive mixed use scheme.

However, given the significant investment that has occurred within

opportunity to respond to this investment in a positive way whereby potential ‘spin off’ benefits are

maximised in the future. Clearly, to introduce further retail development within the short term on the

immediate edge of the central core could draw future valuable expenditure away from the tradi

core of the centre at a time when a period of consolidation is required. This will enable the

significant investment at Crown Point North and the Morrison’s supermarket to establish settled

trading patterns and to ensure that any impact created by these developments can be offset

through future growth in comparison and convenience expenditure.

However, given the need to remediate the development opportunity identified it would appear that

any future mixed use opportunity on this scheme would be delivered in the medium to long term

and appropriate phasing of development should be considered. When considering future

redevelopment of this site, it will be important to ensure that an appropriate mix of uses can be

achieve

rather than compete with the established centre. Given the site’s proximity to existing residential

area, White Young Green would anticipate that a significant proportion of the development

135

opportunity will be considered for residential development which would not only assist in

regenerating this part of Denton District Centre but will also provide additional expenditure close to

the central core.

Whilst the role an

10.51 d function of Denton is anticipated to change significantly in the future when

Crown Point North establishes strong trading patterns, it is evident that whilst further expansion will

g term any additional short term growth could prove damaging to the

traditional retail areas of the district centre. Over time, it is envisaged that Denton will establish a

10.52 de,

an important role in meeting the needs of the

surrounding Droylsden community which is separated from Ashton-under-Lyne by the M60

ive

10.53 no major pressing need in the short term for future expansion it would appear to be

sensible for the Local Planning Authority to explore potential opportunities to accommodate further

elp

thern side of Manchester

Road.

10.54

wth that

be required in the lon

comparison goods market share that exceeds the role of Hyde District Centre which is currently

identified as a large district centre within the hierarchy.

Droylsden

Although Droylsden is identified within the adopted UDP as a district centre operating below Hy

it is evident that the centre shows strong signs of vitality and viability. Clearly, despite the centres

close proximity to Ashton-under-Lyne it plays

motorway. The centre at present is underpinned by both a strong convenience goods sector

(including Tesco and Kwik Save) as well as having strong representation from national comparison

goods retailers primarily focused at the Droylsden Centre. However, given this strong trading

position it is important that any future growth or expansion of Droylsden is achieved in a sensit

manner whereby the centres current performance is not diluted.

Whilst there is

growth in the medium to long term. Furthermore, although an area of opportunity is identified

fronting Manchester Road in the adopted UDP, it is evident that there is also the potential

opportunity for redeveloping the existing football ground in the future which is located to the north of

Greenside Lane. The benefit of the football ground site is that it could form a natural extension of

the Droylsden Centre so long as strong pedestrian links across Greenside Lane could be achieved.

However, careful consideration should also be given to the opportunity identified within the adopted

UDP whereby improvements to the frontage along Manchester Road could be achieved and would

benefit from the location opposite the successful Tesco foodstore. The regeneration of this area

could also improve the setting of the existing library and community centre/swimming pool and h

reinforce linkages with the core of the centre which is located on the nor

However, as highlighted above not only will any future expansion of Droylsden have to be sensitive

to its current success but any future expansion will also be tempered by the potential gro

136

can be accommodated within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre. If significant redevelopment

opportunities can be brought forward in Ashton-under-Lyne to reinforce its comparison goods offer,

then the future strategy for Droylsden will have to be flexible enough to respond to this potential

growth and recognise that any expansion of this successful district centre may only be necessary in

the longer term.

10.55 nton

e has

ding

nomy

10.56

Stalybridge. This does not mean that evening economy uses and additional A3 and A4 uses

10.57

sion

nce

r

gh.

the

Stalybridge

Although Stalybridge is identified as a district centre equivalent to the role and function of De

and Droylsden it is evident that in terms of a network of centres Stalybridge performs a much

different function to both Denton and Droylsden. Whilst the vitality and viability of the centr

been significantly boosted by the development of the Tesco store which would appear to be tra

well, the wider economy of the centre appears to be under pinned by leisure and evening eco

uses. This is in stark contrast to the role of the other district centres within the Borough which

although they have an A3, A4 and A5 function they are clearly not seen as a major destination for

such uses when compared to Stalybridge.

The leisure and evening economy role of Stalybridge is important to the wider network of centres

within the Borough. At present, Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre has a particularly limited evening

economy sector which to some extent is offset by the strong performance of this sector within

should not be encouraged within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre. However, any growth of this

sector within Ashton-under-Lyne must be sensitive to the role in the network performed by

Stalybridge.

Conversely, there may be opportunities in the future to further improve the retail offer within

Stalybridge in order to provide a more balanced offer as a whole. However, similar to any future

expansion of Droylsden it must be noted that the distance between Stalybridge District Centre and

Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre is just less than two kilometres. Therefore, any major expan

of the comparison goods offer within Ashton-under-Lyne Town Centre will clearly have an influe

over the likely level of future retail development that could be secured within Stalybridge. Clearly,

concerns have been raised (particularly within the business survey) about the problems associated

with the evening economy uses. Therefore, any future strategy for Stalybridge will have to conside

wider management issues to ensure that the strong evening economy role provides a safe and

attractive environment for residents in the western part of the Borou

10.58 Any major future redevelopments within Stalybridge will be limited within the central core due to

existing Conservation Area. However, it must be noted that the centre’s Conservation Area status

does provide an attractive environment which further benefits from the River Tame and

137

Huddersfield Narrow Canal which provide attractive waterfront locations at key points within the

core of the centre. In seeking to develop the role of Stalybridge in the future, it is evident that th

waterfront locations must be exploited as part of any new mixed use development particularly given

the values now associated with waterfront residential development.

Due to the Conservation Area status at the core of the centre the adopted UDP identifies two

development opportunity areas known as Castle Street/Longlands Mill and Harrop Street/Shepley

Street which are both located to the western edge of the centre with frontages onto the Rive

and the Huddersfield Narrow Canal. Although these areas are currently dom

ese

10.59

r Tame

inated by light

industrial uses, it is evident that there is scope for significant redevelopment opportunity in the

ce of Stalybridge it is not anticipated that there will be

significant demand for major retail expansion in the short term. However, it is evident that the

l

10.60 ed

es location beyond the

eastern boundary of the defined centre, White Young Green would agree with the policy direction

the adopted UDP that this site should be considered for residential and office uses. The

policy also refers to leisure development although the sites current lack of prominence on to

Road and Portland Place would limit its commercial attractiveness for such development

at present. In addition, it would be more beneficial to focus any future leisure development at the

two opportunity areas to the west of the district centre, which could create a more prominent

opportunity with stronger linkages into the central core. Similar to the opportunity areas on the

western edge of the centre, White Young Green anticipate that the Knowl Street/North Road area

would prove attractive to future residential development benefiting from the frontage onto the River

Tame and the Huddersfield Narrow Canal. However, the proximity of the existing factory and mill

on the northern side of the River Tame accessed off North End Road currently detract from the

overall attractiveness of this area particularly for residential uses.

10.61 Overall, White Young Green would anticipate any future strategy for Stalybridge District Centre

would seek to pro-actively bring forward the opportunity areas on the western edge of the centre

thereby providing a mix of uses focused on residential, potentially some employment and retail

future. Given the current performan

centre would benefit significantly from major mixed use development which at this stage it is

assumed would be driven by residential development. Not only would high density residentia

development maximise the waterside frontage opportunities but such development would further

support the strong evening economy role of Stalybridge as a whole. Although the policies within

the adopted plan refer to the possibility of retail uses within the two western opportunity areas, it is

envisaged that any future retail development should be located as close as possible to the existing

primary shopping core and the facilities provided as part of a wider mixed use scheme would again

seek to complement rather than compete with the limited retail offer which exists at present.

The adopted UDP also identifies a development area opportunity to the east of the establish

centre. This is referred to as Knowl Street/North Road. Given the sit

set out in

Mottram

138

139

development. As outlined above, any future retail development within this location would be best

delivered as close as possible to the central core to provide a natural western extension to the

district centre from Melbourne Street. Not only would further redevelopment in this area help

support the regeneration of the opportunities identified but it would also widen the appeal of

Stalybridge District Centre and help diversify its overall economic base. However, the future

strategy must not lose site of the important evening economy role played by Stalybridge and how

this role complements the retail focus at Ashton-under-Lyne. On this basis, any future expansion of

the evening economy within Ashton-under-Lyne must be sensitive to the close proximity to

Stalybridge and its important role in the wider part of the western borough.

Hattersley District Centre 10.62 Another centre which is anticipated to undergo significant change with regards to its future role in

the established hierarchy is the small district centre at Hattersley. White Young Green have

completed a separate study which looks at the role of the existing district centre at Hattersley and

what future retail development could potentially be accommodated as part of the establishment of a

new district centre at the heart of the proposed regeneration and clearance programme. Given that

the current district centre has an extremely limited convenience and comparison goods offer, it is

anticipated that the role of this district centre will be transformed through the introduction of a main

food shopping destination and associated non-food retail development. In achieving a more

sustainable district centre facility which better meets the needs of the local community, it is

suggested that Hattersley will establish a strong role as a district centre within the Borough

operating between larger centres at Hyde, Stalybridge and Glossop.

HITE YOUNG GREEN PLANNING - Tameside

Documents

Transcript of HITE YOUNG GREEN PLANNING - Tameside