LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD A STUDY OF TOWN CENTRES. CL10414/PW/SPe/HC. Final Report. March 2007

Transcription

1 LONDON BOROUGH OF ENFIELD A STUDY OF TOWN CENTRES CL10414/PW/SPe/HC Final Report March 2007 Offices also in: Cardiff Manchester Newcastle-upon-Tyne Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners Ltd 14 Regent s Wharf All Saints Street London N1 9RL T F E london@nlpplanning.com

2 ii

3 CONTENTS GLOSSARY OF TERMS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION... 1 The Study... 1 Content of the Report PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT... 3 National Policy... 3 The London Plan... 8 Sub-Regional Planning Framework Local Planning Context THE SHOPPING HIERARCHY AND CATCHMENT AREA Major Shopping Centres in Enfield and the Surrounding Area Development Plan Definitions Socio-Economic Characteristics within Enfield HOUSEHOLD SURVEY Survey Structure Food and Grocery Shopping Non-Food Shopping Internet Purchases Frequency of Visit Improvements to Town Centres Leisure Activities Key Messages from the Household Survey Results TOWN CENTRE VISITORS SURVEY Survey Structure Main Purpose for Visit to Each Centre Intended Visitor Purchases Mode of Travel Car Parking Frequency of Shopping Trips Duration of Visit Other Centres Visited What Visitors Like about Shopping in Each Centre What Improvements would Respondents like to see made to the Centre Leisure Activities Key Messages from the On-Street Survey Results OCCUPIER PERCEPTIONS AND PROPERTY MARKET POTENTIAL Introduction Length of Trading in Current Location Property Tenure and Ownership Future Property Requirements Trading Performance Factors Constraining Businesses i

4 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Town Centre Perceived Planning Issues for the Future of Town Centres Key Messages from the Occupier Survey ENFIELD TOWN CENTRE Mix of Uses and Occupier Representation The Supply of Commercial Premises and Property Indicators Catchment Area and Visitor Profile Accessibility and Movement Environmental Quality Summary of Enfield Town Centre s Strengths and Weaknesses EDMONTON GREEN DISTRICT CENTRE Mix of Uses and Occupier Representation The Supply of Commercial Premises and Property Indicators Catchment Area and Visitor Profile Accessibility and Movement Environmental Quality Summary of Edmonton Green District Centre s Strengths and Weaknesses ANGEL EDMONTON DISTRICT CENTRE Mix of Uses and Occupier Representation The Supply of Commercial Premises and Property Indicators Catchment Area and Visitor Profile Accessibility and Movement Environmental Quality Summary of Angel Edmonton District Centre s Strengths and Weaknesses SOUTHGATE DISTRICT CENTRE Mix of Uses and Occupier Representation The Supply of Commercial Premises and Property Indicators Catchment Area and Visitor Profile Accessibility and Movement Environmental Quality Summary of Southgate District Centre s Strengths and Weaknesses PALMERS GREEN DISTRICT CENTRE Mix of Uses and Occupier Representation The Supply of Commercial Premises and Property Indicators Catchment Area and Visitor Profile Accessibility and Movement Environmental Quality Summary of Palmers Green District Centre s Strengths and Weaknesses RETAIL PARKS Enfield Retail Park De Mandeville Gate Retail Park Ravenside Retail Park Angel Road Retail Park LARGE LOCAL CENTRES Cockfosters Local Centre Green Lanes Local Centre Enfield Highway Local Centre ii

5 Ponders End Local Centre Enfield Wash Local Centre Winchmore Hill (Broadway) Local Centre OTHER LOCAL CENTRES Medium Local Centres Small Local Centres THE NEED FOR NEW RETAIL DEVELOPMENT Introduction Methodology and Data Population and Spending Existing Retail Floorspace Existing Spending Patterns Quantitative Capacity for Additional Convenience Floorspace Quantitative Capacity for Additional Comparison Floorspace The Qualitative Need for Retail Development Occupier Demand Conclusions THE NEED FOR COMMERCIAL LEISURE AND ENTERTAINMENT FACILITIES171 Introduction Commercial Leisure Trends The Potential for Leisure and Entertainment Uses The Cinema Market Conclusions TOWN CENTRE OFFICE ASSESSMENT Introduction Overview Existing Office Provision in LB of Enfield Conclusions SCOPE FOR ACCOMMODATING GROWTH Floorspace Projections Accommodating Future Growth Potential Development Opportunities Evaluation of Potential Development Sites DEFINING THE BOROUGH S NETWORK OF CENTRES The Designation of Shopping Centres Defining Centre Boundaries and Retail Frontages RECOMMENDATIONS Meeting Shopping Needs in Enfield Commercial Leisure Development The Role of Shopping Centres Criteria for Meeting Assessing Development Proposals Enfield Town Centre Strategic Objectives District Centres Strategic Objectives Local Centres Strategic Objectives Retail Parks Strategic Objectives Future Strategy Implementation and Monitoring iii

6 APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I Appendix J Appendix K Study Area, Centre Location Plan and Existing Retail Facilities Convenience Retail Assessment Comparison Retail Assessment Operators Requirements Major Leisure Provision Cinema Assessment Audit of Medium and Small Local Centres Household Survey Results On-Street Survey Results Business Survey Results Evaluation of Potential Development Sites iv

7 GLOSSARY OF TERMS BISL Class A1 Class A1 Services Class A2 Class A3/A4/A5 Convenience Goods Comparison Goods Experian Focus Retail Goad Plans Gross floorspace Higher order comparison goods Lower order comparison goods Market share Penetration rate Multiple traders Net floorspace Zone A Rent Business in Sport and Leisure is a major leisure industry association with over 100 members including leisure operators and consultants. Commercial units classed as retail or shop uses within the Use Classes Order. Non-retail uses classed as A1 within the Use Classes Order, such as hairdressers, travel agents and dry cleaners. Commercial units classed as financial or professional services, for example banks and building societies, within the Use Classes Order. Commercial units classed as food or drink outlets, for example pubs, restaurants and takeaways, within the Use Classes Order. Consumer goods purchased on a regular basis, including food and groceries and cleaning materials. Durable goods such as clothing, household goods, furniture, DIY and electrical goods. A data consultancy who are widely used for retail planning information. A published source of information providing known retail and leisure operators space requirements in towns across the country. Town centre plans prepared by Experian, which a based on occupier surveys of over 1,200 town centres across the country. Total external floorspace including exterior walls. Durable goods which tend to be high value, bought on an occasional basis and/or where customers are most likely to shop around and compare products in different shops e.g. adult fashion items, high value electrical goods, jewellery, furniture etc. Customers are usually prepared to tend to travel further to purchase these items. Durable goods which tend to be lower value, bought on a regular basis and/or where customers are less likely to shop around e.g. small household goods, books, pharmaceutical and toiletries. Customers are less likely to travel long distances to purchase these items. The proportion of total consumer expenditure within a given area taken by a particular town centre or shopping facility. National or regional chain store retailers. Retail floorspace devoted to the sale of goods, excluding storage space. The annual rental charge per square foot for the first 20 foot depth of a shop unit, which is the most suitable measure for standardising and comparing rental levels. v

8 vi

9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose of the Study 1. Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (NLP) were commissioned by London Borough of Enfield to prepare a borough wide town centre and retail study, including an assessment of the main town and district centres, namely Enfield Town, Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate. Enfield town centre is the main shopping centre in the Borough and Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate are district centres at the next level in the hierarchy. The study also examines a number of local centres distributed throughout the Borough and out-of-centre retail parks. The study assesses the future need for additional retail, commercial leisure facilities and other town centre uses. The study includes: a survey of 1,001 households within the Borough and parts of neighbouring boroughs; a survey of 1,000 visitors within the five main centres (Enfield Town, Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate); a postal survey of commercial occupiers within Enfield Town, Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate (93 responses); a postal canvas of over 300 national/regional multiple retailers and leisure operators, in order to ascertain their potential space requirements in the Borough; a land use and GIS floorspace survey of all identified shopping centres within the Borough. The Potential for Retail Development Convenience Retailing (Food and Grocery) 2. An assessment of available expenditure and existing shopping patterns suggest that convenience goods sales floorspace within the Borough is collectively trading about 4% above the expected levels, million above average. 3. In qualitative terms, the Borough has a good selection of large food stores, supported by a range of smaller supermarkets and convenience stores. In relation to the five main centres in the Borough (Enfield, Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate) food store provision is weakest in Edmonton Green and Angel Edmonton. However, the proposed Asda store in Edmonton Green will improve provision in the south east area of the Borough. This commitment is expected to absorb the majority of the existing 2005 expenditure surplus and expenditure growth up to The quantitative capacity analysis indicates there is limited potential for convenience goods sales floorspace within the Borough up to There is no need to identify a site for new food store development for the foreseeable future. Surplus expenditure available in the Borough at 2017 is projected to exceed the benchmark turnover of vii

10 existing floorspace by about 10 million, which could support about 1,300 sq m net of new food store floorspace. Comparison Retailing (Non-Food Durable Goods) 5. An assessment of available expenditure and existing shopping patterns suggest that a significant amount of comparison goods expenditure in the study area is spent at shopping centres outside the Borough, and residents have a significant choice of shopping destinations e.g. Brent Cross, Waltham Cross, the West End, Walthamstow and Wood Green. Enfield town centre is the main comparison shopping destination in the Borough. 6. Overall comparison retail sales floorspace within the Borough appears to be trading healthily, which is consistent with relatively low shop vacancy rate within most of the main centres. 7. Major retail development in the Borough could change existing shopping patterns and could reduce comparison expenditure leakage. Conversely improvements in competing centres may increase expenditure leakage from the study area. On balance recent developments in Enfield and Edmonton Green will have helped to increase expenditure retention. Expenditure projections available to shops in the Borough and new retail floorspace projections are shown in the Table below. Additional Comparison Goods Floorspace Projections Period 2005 to to to 2017 Surplus Expenditure M Sales Floorspace Sq M Net 4,624 4,908 5,208 Gross Floorspace Sq M n/a (1) 11,947 31,612 (1) no floorspace projection given due to expenditure deficit 8. These capacity projections suggest there is scope for additional comparison goods retail development within the Borough up to The long term projections beyond 2013 should be treated with caution. 9. In qualitative terms, Enfield town centre has a reasonable range of comparison shops including many national multiples and independent specialists, but is ranked below Brent Cross and Wood Green in terms of multiple retailer representation. Enfield town centre is supported by a reasonable selection of comparison shops within the Borough s district centres. The new PalaceXchange development has improved comparison shopping in Enfield. Residents within the Borough have a good choice of high street comparison shopping destinations. Many of the Borough s residents have good access to Brent Cross, particularly those to the west and along the North Circular Road, whilst residents across the Borough have good public transport access to the West End. 10. The existing provision of retail warehouse stores appears to be excellent in the Borough, and these facilities also serve neighbouring Boroughs. viii

11 Commercial Leisure and Entertainment Facilities 11. The provision of leisure, entertainment and cultural facilities within the Borough is reasonably good, and residents also have good access to facilities in neighbouring boroughs and Central London. 12. The main sectors that could offer potential for new leisure facilities, based on our assessment which included a canvas of operators and published space requirements, are health & fitness clubs, ten-pin bowling, bingo and bars/restaurants. The general requirement for Class A2, A3 to A5 floorspace up to 2017 is between 3,300 to 5,000 sq m gross. Cinemas 13. Cinema provision in the Borough is reasonable. The capacity analysis indicates that the current provision (UGC Cineworld on Southbury Leisure Park and the Odeon cinema at Lee Valley) is sufficient to meet the demand for cinema provision within the Borough up to 2017 and beyond. Therefore, the potential for further cinema development in the Borough appears to be limited. Private Health and Fitness Clubs 14. Existing private and public health and fitness facilities in the Borough could accommodate a membership of 13,500, which is lower than the catchment potential (at least 16,600 members). An increase in membership rates along with population growth could increase demand. A canvas of operators suggests there is demand from Virgin Active for a facility in Enfield Town, Cockfosters or Ponders End. There may be emerging scope for further health and fitness club provision in the Borough. Tenpin Bowling 15. The London Borough of Enfield has no tenpin bowling facilities. The nearest tenpin bowling facilities are in Finchley and Finsbury Park. The study area population (526,000) is in theory capable of supporting 53 lanes. There appears to be potential for a new ten pin bowling facility within the Borough. Other Leisure Facilities 16. Other Leisure facilities assessed include the following. Existing bingo provision in Enfield does not seem to be sufficient to meet the needs of Borough s population. However, a bingo hall is proposed as part of the Edmonton Green Shopping Centre redevelopment. The provision of nightclubs in Central London will limit the potential for major new nightclubs in the Borough, but small or medium nightclub facilities may be viable. There are currently no commercial casinos in the Borough, but provision in Central London will limit potential. Enfield Town centre may have a catchment population large enough to support a small casino. A canvas of leisure operators included several major casino operators and this identified a requirement by London Clubs International for a casino of 50,000 sq ft in Enfield Town, Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green, Southgate, local centres or an out of centre location. ix

12 The growth in bars and restaurants (Class A3 to A5 uses) should continue in the future. Future town centre development should provide additional space for these uses as well as Class A1 retail and A2 services. An allowance of 10% to 15% of new floorspace for Class A2, A3 to A5 uses may be appropriate. The requirement for Class A2 to A5 floorspace could be between 3,300 to 5,000 sq m gross up to Town Centre Offices 17. Within the Borough no single town centre or out-of-centre location is strategically significant in terms of office uses. The North London Sub-Regional Development Framework (SRDF) identifies three Local office locations in LB Enfield (Enfield Town, Southgate and Edmonton). The recommended approach in Enfield Town and Southgate is the promotion of some office provision as part of wider residential or mixed us schemes. In Edmonton the SRDF suggest there is no purpose in promoting offices. 18. The SRDF indicated that the need for new office floorspace from 2001 to 2016 was about 77,000 sq m in Enfield Borough, based on employment projections, or 55,000 sq m allowing for commitments at More recently the London Office Policy Review suggests a lower projection up to 2016 (44,600 sq m). However, the London Office Policy Review suggests that this projected gain in stock is unlikely to be viable, which implies that a lower amount of office development is likely to be achieved in the Borough. 19. The SRDF s recommended approach for Enfield Town and Southgate is to promote office provision as part of wider mixed use schemes (residential/leisure), the renewal of existing office where commercially viable and managed change of use. This approach is expected to lead to a net loss of the office stock due to changes of use. 20. Based on existing land use data, one might expect commercial town centre developments to include approximately 20% Class A2/B1 ground floorspace and 35% of all floorspace could be devoted to B1 office use (at least 11,000 sq m by 2017). If achieved this would represent about 25% of the Borough wide projection (44,600 sq m) set out in the London Office Policy Review up to 2016, which is broadly consistent with the existing office stock in town centres. The findings of this study are broadly supportive of the GLA s suggested approach i.e. that Enfield Town and Southgate can be promoted locations for office provision, as part of wider mixed use schemes, and that other centres in the Borough should not be actively promoted for office development. Office development in other centres is likely to be small scale. The Overall Need for New Floorspace 21. The total Class A1/A2/A3/A4/A5 floorspace projection is up to about 14,000 sq m gross for the Borough as a whole by 2013 (over and above commitments). A further 24,000 sq m gross could be provided by 2017, about 38,000 sq m gross in total. Vacant floorspace could accommodate about 29% of the floorspace projection up to 2013 (4,000 sq m gross compared with the 14,000 sq m gross projection), leaving about 10,000 sq m gross to be accommodated within new developments in town centres across the Borough. In the longer term, opportunity sites within Enfield town centre, particularly around the Railway Station area, could accommodate about a x

13 third of the total floorspace demand up to 2017 (13,000 sq m gross compared with the 38,000 sq m gross projection). The Hierarchy and Role of Enfield Borough s Centres 22. As stated above, Enfield Town is the main shopping centre within the Borough and designated as a Major Centre in the London Plan, it is at a higher level in the hierarchy than the four other town centres; Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate which are designated as District Centres in the London Plan. Below the five main centres are a number of local centres and retail parks. Enfield Town, Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate as the main centres in the Borough compete with major shopping centre destinations outside Enfield, including Wood Green and Walthamstow. Enfield Town Centre 23. Enfield town centre should be maintained and enhanced as a Major Town Centre. It should serve the Borough as a whole, and should embrace a wide range of activities. The town centre should function as the main comparison shopping destination in the Borough, and also the main destination for leisure, entertainment and cultural activities that serve the Borough s residents. Enfield town centre should be the main focus for large-scale retail and leisure development, where the development has a wide catchment area and seeks to serve a large part of the Borough. 24. The study has identified a significant need for new retail development and Class A uses in general, over and above the PalaceXchange development. It will also be necessary to retain existing retail uses within the centre. Therefore, there is a continuing need to designate separate primary and secondary shopping frontages within the town centre s Primary Shopping Area, and to adopt policies to protect Class A uses. 25. There are a number of potential development opportunities within Enfield town centre. However, only one site is capable of accommodating a significant amount of additional floorspace, i.e. the Railway Station area, which should be the long term priority for development. 26. In Enfield town centre it would be beneficial to introduce a new policy criterion that seeks to prevent the creation of concentrations of non-retail use within the primary shopping frontages. A new criterion could specify that changes of use should not create two or more adjoining non-retail uses and not more than two non-retail units within any six consecutive units within the primary shopping frontage. 27. Within Enfield s secondary frontages there is already a reasonable concentration of non-retail uses, and the existing 65% threshold now has limited relevance. A new criterion could specify that changes of use should not create three or more adjoining non-retail uses and not more than two non-retail units within any four consecutive units. xi

14 Enfield Town Centre s Strengths A reasonably large range and choice of national and independent shops compared with other centre in the Borough. The new PalaceXchange Shopping Centre has improved the centre s retail offer. Large food stores suitable for both main and top up food shopping. A good range of service facilities including banks and building societies. A very low shop vacancy rate (3.6%), and strong demand for premises. The strongest trading performance in the borough, but with scope to improve. Reasonable condition shop units with well kept façades. Wide, well maintained and clean pavements and a pleasant shopping environment. Good street furniture and landscaping. Good public transport access. Enfield Town Centre s Weaknesses The centre does not offer the same quality and range of facilities available in Brent Cross or London s West-End, especially clothing and footwear retailers. The proportion of convenience retailers is lower than the national average. There is a poor range of leisure and entertainment facilities, apart from restaurant/bars and pubs. There is a limited supply of premises available to accommodate new operators. The survey results suggest that many customers and businesses would like more car parking. The linear form of the centre does not encourage shoppers to visit all parts of the town centre during their visit, and pedestrian flows within peripheral areas are low. There are limited pedestrianised areas and high volumes of traffic can make it difficult for pedestrians to cross the road in places. Heavy traffic also generates noise and fumes and impacts on the shopping environment. xii

15 District Centres 28. District centres should complement Enfield town centre by providing for main and bulk convenience food shopping and a reasonable range of comparison shopping facilities and other services. 29. Edmonton Green, Palmers Green, Southgate and Angel Edmonton should be designated as District Centres, and be second level centres in the hierarchy, below Enfield town centre. These centres currently provide a critical mass of commercial floorspace, capable of serving their respective sectors of the Borough. Their role as important shopping/service centres should be maintained to ensure they provide an appropriate range of facilities and services. 30. The boundary of these district centres should be more tightly drawn and the designation of primary and secondary frontages is not appropriate or necessary. The centre boundaries as previously defined in the UDP (SPG) remain appropriate and could be used to define Primary Shopping Areas for each centre, subject to a number of amendments that should be considered by the Council. 31. Development plan policies should continue to include a presumption against the change of use of Class A1 uses. However, the policy approach could be simplified by defining a primary shopping area rather than separate core and secondary frontages as previously defined in the UDP. A new policy criterion could be introduced for district centres, which seeks to prevent the creation of concentrations of non-retail use within the primary shopping area. A new criterion could specify that changes of use should not create three or more adjoining non-retail uses and not more than two non-retail units within any five consecutive units. Edmonton Green s Strengths A reasonable number of retail units serving the needs of residents within the south east of the borough. A number of community services including a leisure centre, library, careers/education centres and a job centre. A good provision of food and grocery outlets and a permanent market. This provision is suitable for both main and top up food shopping. The Market Square provides a pleasant and positive feature within the centre. Businesses suggest Edmonton Green is perceived to be the second highest current trading performer in the borough behind Enfield Town. The centre has good public transport access. xiii

16 Edmonton Green s Weaknesses A low number of national multiple retailers at present within the centre, in particular comparison retailers. However this should to improve following the opening of the Edmonton Green Shopping Centre extension. A limited range of leisure and entertainment facilities, apart from restaurants and pubs. The vacancy rate is reasonably high, which suggests demand for premises is low. The majority of occupiers felt that high overhead/rents were the factor most constraining trading performance. The poor quality physical fabric with many buildings in a poor state of repair. Angel Edmonton s Strengths A reasonable provision of services, community facilities and entertainment uses serving the local community. The provision of convenience retailers is suitable for main and top up food shopping. The centre has a good selection of chemists and electrical shops. Most businesses considered their current trading performance to be satisfactory. The general environmental quality of the centre is reasonably good, but could be further be improved by addressing the traffic congestion and litter. Angel Edmonton s Weaknesses The centre has a low number of multiple retailers and the majority of goods categories are under provided. The diversity of entertainment and leisure facilities within the centre is limited. The majority of occupiers suggested that high overheads/rents and the availability and location of car parking were the most constraining factor to their trading performance. xiv

17 Southgate s Strengths A reasonable provision of services, community facilities and entertainment uses serving the local community. The Asda and Marks & Spencer stores and other convenience retailers are suitable for main and top up food shopping. The centre has a good selection of restaurants. The vacancy rate is reasonably low, which suggests demand for premises is reasonably high. The environmental quality of the centre is good and there are a number of listed buildings. Public transport links are reasonably good. Southgate s Weaknesses The centre has a low proportion of both comparison and convenience retail uses. The diversity of entertainment and leisure facilities within the centre is limited Southgate had the highest proportion of businesses who considered their current trading performance to be poor, but the general consensus was that current trading performance was satisfactory. The majority of occupiers suggested that the availability and location of car parking was the most constraining factor to successful trading performance. Palmers Green s Strengths The provision of A1 services, A2 services and A3/A5 uses is good. The centre has a good selection of restaurants. The Morrison s store and convenience shops are suitable for main and top up food shopping. The environmental quality of the centre is reasonably high and there are a number of listed buildings. The public transport links within Palmers Green are reasonably good. xv

18 Palmers Green s Weaknesses Community and entertainment facilities within the centre are limited. The vacancy rate is relatively high, which suggests demand for premises is reasonably low. Palmers Green had one of the highest proportion of businesses who considered their current trading performance to be poor, but the general consensus amongst businesses was that current trading performance was satisfactory. Many occupiers suggested Palmers Green is too-down market when compared with other centres. Making the centre safer (CCTV, policing, better lighting etc) was an important issue for businesses. Local Centres 32. In the Borough 17 large local centres should be designated. These centres differ significantly in terms of size, structure and the mix of uses, but are generally much smaller than district centres and in particular have a more limited range and choice of comparison shopping. 33. The future priority for large local centres should be to consolidate and maintain their roles as important local centres. Opportunities for small scale development to provide additional shop premises should be encouraged, as should the reoccupation of vacant premises. The priority in some centres should focus on environmental improvements. 34. Small local centres and local parades in the Borough are the third and fourth level of centres in the hierarchy. These centres should be maintained to ensure they provide basic food and grocery shopping facilities, supported by a limited choice and range comparison shops selling lower order comparison goods (bought on a regular basis) and a range of non-retail services and community uses. Small-scale infill development may be appropriate within these local centres. 35. Small local centres and parades should continue to serve small catchment areas (extending no more than walking distance from the centre), focused on their respective local communities. However, some centres may also serve passing trade, but should not encourage additional car-borne trade. 36. All local centres and parades should continue to be maintained and protected, in order to ensure all residents in the Borough have access to a basic range of small shops and services of a local nature. Core facilities should include convenience stores, post office, newsagents and pharmacy. Development within these centres should be commensurate with this role and limited catchment area. xvi

19 Retail Parks 37. The North London SRDF suggests that the long term plan for out of centre retail parks should seek to ensure these locations evolve into more sustainable uses of land. In the short to medium term it is unlikely that retailers/retail park owners will be prepared to convert high value retail uses to other potentially lower value uses that generate less trips. The retail capacity projections suggest there is a need to retain existing retail floorspace. 38. The retail parks provide important shopping facilities for residents in the Borough and North London more generally, selling goods traditionally termed as bulky goods (DIY, furniture, carpets and electrical goods). It is important that these retail parks remain accessible both by car and by other forms of transport. Improvements should be encouraged within the existing retail parks to improve the quality of the environment (landscaping and car parking areas), signage and levels of accessibility. The reoccupation of vacant units should also be encouraged before other proposals for out-of-centre units are considered. 39. The intensification of retail or leisure uses within these out-of-centre retail parks should only be permitted if the proposed development cannot be accommodated within established centres or on the edge of established centres. Where there is a clear need for new large units, which cannot be disaggregated and cannot be accommodated within established centres, then the existing retail parks may be an appropriate location for new development, subject to other planning considerations. Future Strategy Implementation and Monitoring 40. There are a number of broad areas of possible action the Council could pursue in order to maintain and enhance the role of shopping centres within the Borough, as follows: application of guidance within PPS6, particularly relating to need and the sequential approach in determining out-of-centre retail and other development proposals that generate significant numbers of trips; measures to improve accessibility and public transport to the town, district and local centres in order to encourage more residents to shop within their nearest centre; the implementation of shop frontage policies within the development plan to protect retail and other desirable town centre uses; the implementation of public realm improvements to improve the attractiveness of shopping environments within all centres; the continued support for town centre management activities; and measures to bring forward development opportunities. 41. The recommendations and projections within this study are expected to assist the Council in preparing development plan policies over the coming years and to assist development control decisions during this period. xvii

20 xviii

21 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Study 1.1 Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (NLP) were commissioned by London Borough of Enfield to prepare a town centre study, including an assessment of the main town and district centres within the authority area, namely Enfield Town, Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate. The objectives of the study are to provide: a qualitative assessment of existing retail, leisure and entertainment facilities in the Borough; an assessment of the future needs for additional retail and commercial leisure facilities; an assessment of the capacity of Enfield s town and district centres to meet demand through identification of sites; and a policy review and proposed issues and options for the Local Development Framework (LDF). 1.2 The study includes centre health checks for the main town and district centres and an audit of local centres and retail parks. The analysis of centres is based on land use information collected in December 2005, and the base data may have changed since the fieldwork was completed. The centre health checks pull together information from the land use survey, NLP s site visits and the results from surveys of customers, residents and businesses conducted in November Content of the Report 1.3 Section 2.0 provides an overview of the national, regional and local planning policy context. Section 3.0 provides a description of the shopping hierarchy in Enfield and the surrounding area and the role performed by Enfield Town and Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Palmers Green and Southgate district centres. 1.4 Sections 4.0, 5.0 and 6.0 summarise the results of a household survey, an on-street survey in the town/district centre and a survey of occupiers. Sections 7.0 to 11.0 provide town centre health checks for Enfield Town, Edmonton Green, Angel Edmonton, Southgate and Palmers Green. Sections 12.0 to 14.0 provide health checks for the retail parks, the large local centres and the other centres within Enfield. LON2006\R (Final) - 1 -

22 All the health checks are based upon surveys undertaken in December Sections 15.0, 16.0 and 17.0 set out an analysis of shopping, commercial leisure and office needs within the London Borough of Enfield and assess the ability of existing facilities to meet the needs of the community. 1.6 Section 18.0 assesses the opportunities to accommodate the future need for new retail and leisure development, including an initial appraisal of potential development sites. Section 19.0 examines the Boroughs network of centres, defining centre boundaries and retail frontages and Section 20.0 assesses the town/district centres and strategic objectives and sets out recommendations and conclusions. LON2006\R (Final) - 2 -

23 2.0 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT National Policy 2.1 PPS6: Planning for Town Centres (March 2005) sets out the Government s policies on retail. 2.2 The Government s key objective for town centres (this covers city, town, district and local centres) is to promote their vitality and viability by planning for growth and development of existing centres and promoting and enhancing existing centres, by focusing development in such centres and encouraging a wide range of services in a good environment, accessible to all. 2.3 Other Government objectives that need to be taken account of in the context of the key objective are set out in paragraph 1.4: Enhancing consumer 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 and particularly socially excluded groups; Supporting efficient, competitive and innovative retail, leisure, tourism and other sectors, with improving productivity; and Improving accessibility, ensuring that existing or new development is, or will be, accessible and well served by a choice of means of transport. 2.4 Regional planning bodies (RPB s) and local planning authorities (LPAs) are advised in paragraph 1.6 to implement the Government s objectives for town centres, by planning positively for their growth and development. They should therefore: Develop a hierarchy and network of centres; Assess the need for further main town centre uses and ensure there is capacity to accommodate them; Focus development in, and plan for the expansion of, existing centres as appropriate, and at the local level identify appropriate sites in development plan documents; Promote town centre management, creating partnerships to develop, improve and maintain the town centre and manage the evening and night-time economy; and Regularly monitor and review the impact and effectiveness of their policies for promoting vital and viable town centres. LON2006\R (Final) - 3 -

24 2.5 Paragraph 2.1 states that in order to deliver the Government s key objective, RPB s and LPA s should actively promote growth and manage change in town centres, define a network and a hierarchy of centres each performing their appropriate role to meet the needs of their catchment, and adopt a pro-active, plan led approach to planning for town centres, through regional and local planning. 2.6 The main town centre uses to which PPS6 applies are outlined in paragraph 1.8: Retail (including warehouse clubs and factory outlet centres); Leisure, entertainment facilities and the more intensive sport and recreation uses (including cinemas, restaurants, drive-through restaurants, bars and pubs, night-clubs, casinos, health and fitness centres, indoor bowling centres and bingo halls); Offices, both commercial and those of public bodies; and Arts, culture and tourism (theatres, museums, galleries and concert halls, hotels and conference facilities). 2.7 Paragraph 1.9 of PPS6 also acknowledges that housing will be an important element in most mixed-use, multi-storey developments. 2.8 PPS6, paragraph 2.15 to 2.17 offers specific guidance to LPA s on the role of plans at local level, including the need to work in conjunction with stakeholders and the community to: Assess the need for new floorspace for retail, leisure and other main town centre uses, taking account of both quantitative and qualitative considerations; Identify deficiencies in provision, assess the capacity of existing centres to accommodate new development, including, where appropriate, the scope for extending the primary shopping area and/or town centre, and identify centres in decline where changes need to be made; Identify centres within their area where development will be focused, as well as the need for any new centres of local importance, and development strategies for developing and strengthening centres within their area; Define the extent of the primary shopping area and the town centre, for the centres in their area on their proposal map; Review all existing allocations and reallocate sites which do not comply with this policy statement; Identify and allocate sites in accordance with the considerations on sight selection and land assembly e.g. assessment of need, appropriate scale of development, sequential approach, impact and accessibility; LON2006\R (Final) - 4 -

25 Develop spatial policies and proposals to promote and secure investment in deprived areas by strengthening and/or identifying opportunities for growth of existing centres, and to seek to improve access to local facilities; and Set out criteria based policies, in accordance with this policy statement, for assessing and locating new development proposals, including development on sites not allocated in development plan documents. 2.9 PPS6 also indicates that in addition to defining the extent of the primary shopping area for their local centres, LPAs may distinguish between primary and secondary frontages. Primary frontages should contain a high proportion of retail uses, while secondary frontages provide opportunities for flexibility and diversity of uses. Policy should make clear which uses will be permitted in such locations. Demonstrating Need for development 2.10 PPS6 requires Councils to undertake assessments of need for other non-retail town centre uses, i.e. commercial leisure and office development. This study assesses the retail and commercial leisure needs of the London Borough of Enfield PPS6 states in paragraph 2.33 that: in assessing the need and capacity for additional retail and leisure development, 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 in identifying sites for appropriate development to serve the communities in there areas, additional weight should be given to meeting these qualitative needs In assessing quantitative need for additional development, local planning authorities should assess the likely future demand for additional retail and leisure floorspace, having regard to a realistic assessment of the existing forecast population levels, forecast expenditure for specific classes of goods to be sold, within the broad categories of comparison and convenience goods and for main leisure sectors and forecast improvements in productivity in the use of floorspace With regards to assessing the qualitative need for additional development, paragraph 2.35 states that a key consideration will be to provide for consumer choice, ensuring that: LON2006\R (Final) - 5 -

26 An appropriate distribution of locations is achieved, subject to the key objective of promoting the vitality and viability of town centres and the application of the sequential approach, to improve accessibility for the whole community; and Provision is made for a range of sites for shopping, leisure and local services, which allow genuine choice to meet the needs of the whole community, particularly the needs of those living in deprived areas Other local issues, although not necessarily elements of need, can be important material considerations. Appropriate Scale of Development 2.15 PPS6 also requires that local planning authorities ensure that the scale of opportunities identified is directly related to the role and function of the centre and its catchment. Paragraph 2.41 states: The aim should be to locate the appropriate type and scale of development in the right type of centre, to ensure that is fits into that centre and that it complements its role and function For city and town centres, PPS6, paragraph 2.43 states that where a need has been identified, LPAs should seek to identify sites in the centre, or failing that on the edge of the centre, capable of accommodating larger format developments. Paragraph 2.42 indicates that in most cases it is likely to be inappropriate to include local centres within the search area to be applied under the sequential approach for large scale developments The guidance places greater emphasis on the regeneration of town centres, particularly smaller centres and the need to define a network of centres, and where appropriate to plan for the decline of some centres. Local authorities are expected to set indicative upper limits on the scale of new floorspace appropriate in different types of centres. The Sequential Approach 2.18 PPS6 sets out the sequential approach to site selection for new retail development (paragraph 2.44), namely that first preference should be existing centres where suitable sites or buildings for conversion are, or are likely to become available, taking account of an appropriate scale of development in relation to the role and function of the centre, followed by edge-of-centre locations, with preference given to sites that are or will be well-connected to the centre and only then out-of-centre sites, with LON2006\R (Final) - 6 -

27 preference given to sites which are or will be well served by a choice of means of transport and which are close to the centre and have a high likelihood of forming links with the centre Further to this LPAs should, in consultation with stakeholders (including the development industry) and the community, identify an appropriate range of sites to allow for accommodation of the identified need. Paragraph 2.45 emphasises the need for flexibility and realism from both LPAs and developers and operators in discussing the identification of sites, LPAs should be sensitive to the needs of the community and stakeholders, including developers and operators and identify sites that are, or are likely to become available for development during the development plan period and which allow for the accommodation of the identified need, including sites capable of accommodating a range of business models The factors that should be taken into account in considering business models are scale, format, car park provision and the scope for disaggregation In selecting sites for allocation, the LPA should also consider the degree to which other considerations, including specific local circumstances, may be material to the choice of appropriate locations for development, these include physical regeneration, employment, economic growth and social inclusion The guidance clearly states that local planning authorities should plan positively for growth by making provision for a range and choice of shopping and services. If a need for new development is established, it will be necessary to identify opportunities to meet that need. PPS6 indicates that local authorities should allocate sufficient sites to meet anticipated demand for the next five years. PPS6 also suggests that an apparent lack of sites of the right size and in the right location should not be construed as an obstacle to site allocation and development to meet this need. LPAs should consider the scope for effective site assembly using their compulsory purchase (CPO) powers, to ensure that suitable sites within or on the edge of centres are brought forward for development This suggests the onus is placed on the Council to identify sites to accommodate the 5-year demand for development. This study provides floorspace projections up to 2016 (a 12-year period). Therefore, it may be more appropriate for the Council to seek to identify opportunities to accommodate projections up to 2016 at this stage. LON2006\R (Final) - 7 -

28 2.24 PPS6 also suggests that where growth cannot be accommodated in identified existing centres, local planning authorities should plan for the extension of the primary shopping area if there is a need for additional retail provision or, where appropriate, plan for the extension of the town centre to accommodate other main town centre 2.25 uses. Extension of the primary shopping area or town centre may also be appropriate where a need for large developments has been identified and this cannot be accommodated within the centre. Larger stores may deliver benefits for consumers and local planning authorities should seek to make provision for them in this context. In such cases, local planning authorities should seek to identify, designate and assemble larger sites adjoining the primary shopping area (i.e. in edge-of-centre locations). Planning Policy Guidance Note 13: Transport (PPG 13, March 2001) 2.26 The key objectives, set out at paragraph 4 of PPG13 are to integrate planning and transport, in order to: promote more sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight; promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport; and reduce the need to travel, especially by car The Guidance advises that planning policies should seek to promote the vitality and viability of existing town centres, which should be the preferred locations for new retail and leisure developments. When this development cannot be accommodated in or on the edge of existing centres, it may be appropriate to combine the proposal with existing out-of-centre developments. The London Plan 2.28 The London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy has replaced strategic planning guidance for London (formerly RPG3). The London Plan was published in February One of the strategic priorities for North London (Policy 5E.1) is to: promote and intensify retailing, services, employment, leisure and housing in town centres and opportunities for mixed-use development. LON2006\R (Final) - 8 -