final report for printing - home - derbyshire dales ... · midlands. the key town centre policies...

IMPORTANT NOTE Derbyshire Dales District Council commissioned this document specifically in connection with the production of a Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan (AAP). Although the AAP was withdrawn on 3rd July 2008 the District Council has nevertheless decided to make this document available because it contains useful baseline information which could assist landowners, developers and others to draw up appropriate development proposals in line with the guidance provided in the Matlock Town Centre Supplementary Planning Document.

Matlock & Wirksworth Retail Capacity Study

Final Report

JOB NUMBER: 5035263 DOCUMENT REF: RC Final Report

1 Final RC MB JB JB Aug 06

0 Draft Final RC/MB RH RC JB July 06

Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date

Revision Purpose Description


i

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION 1-1

Background 1-1 Structure of Report 1-2

2. POLICY CONTEXT 2-1

Introduction 2-1 PPS6 – Planning for Town Centres 2-1 Regional Policy 2-4

3. RETAIL HIERACHY AND QUANTITATIVE AUDIT OF CENTRES 3-1

Introduction 3-1 Retail Hierarchy and Sub Regional Context 3-1 Diversity of Retail Uses in Matlock and Wirksworth 3-2

4. QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF RETAIL OFFER 4-1

Introduction 4-1 Matlock 4-1 Wirksworth 4-6 Household Survey 4-9

5. RETAILER NEED 5-1

Introduction 5-1 Investment Factors 5-1 Retailer Inquiries 5-2 Property Market Indicators 5-3 Conclusion 5-4

6. QUANTITATIVE NEED IN MATLOCK & WIRSWORTH 6-1

Introduction 6-1 Approach and Methodology 6-1 Population Projections 6-5 Market Share 6-6 Turnover 6-11 Capacity for Additional Retail Floorspace 6-12 Implications 6-14


ii

7. CONCLUSIONS 7-17

Introduction 7-17 Overall Findings 7-17 Matlock 7-17 Wirksworth 7-17 Assessment of Proposals for Retail Development 7-17

List of Tables Table 3.1 – Matlock Summary Groupings 3-4 Table 3.2 – Matlock Analysis by Retail Type 3-5 Table 3.3 – Use Class Profile of Matlock 3-7 Table 3.4 – Wirksworth Summary Groupings 3-8 Table 3.5 – Wirksworth Premises by Retail Type 3-10 Table 3.6 – Wirksworth Premises by Use Class 3-11 Table 4.1 – Number of Interviews by Retail Category 4-6 Table 4.2 - Frequency of Visits to Matlock / Wirksworth for Food Shopping 4-10 Table 4.3 - Frequency of visits to Matlock / Wirksworth for Non Food Shop 4-10 Table 5.1 – Retailer Inquiries 5-2 Table 5.2 – Indicative Initial Investment Yields (Retail) 5-4 Table 6.1 – Key Forecasting Model Assumptions 6-4 Table 6.2 – Catchment Area Population Growth (Scenarios 2 & 4) 6-5 Table 6.3 – Gross Retail Expenditure Projections from Catchment Area Residents 2004-

2021 6-6 Table 6.4 – Market Share 2006 – Convenience Goods (Food) 6-7 Table 6.5 - Food Expenditure Self Containment and Leakage by Zone (2006) 6-8 Table 6.6 - Market Share: Clothing, Footware, Fashion 2006 6-9 Table 6.7 - Self Containment & Leakage – Clothing, Footware, Fashion 2006 6-9 Table 6.8 - Market Share – DIY & Other Bulky Goods 2006 6-10 Table 6.9 - Self Containment & Leakage – DIY & Other Bulky Goods 2006 6-10 Table 6.10 - Retail Expenditure in Catchment Area 2006 6-11 Table 6.11 - Projections of Future Convenience Goods Expenditure (£’000) 6-11 Table 6.12 - Projections of Future Comparison Goods Expenditure (£’000) 6-11 Table 6.13 - Estimates of Existing Retail Turnover in Matlock & Wirksworth (£’000). 6-12 Table 6.14 - Projections of Future Retail Turnover (£’000) 6-12 Table 6.15 - Future Retail Needs (Scenario 1) 6-13 Table 6.16 - Future Retail Needs (Scenario 2) 6-13 Table 6.17 - Future Retail Needs (Scenario 3) 6-14 Table 6.18 - Future Retail Needs (Scenario 4) 6-14 Table 6.19 - Net Floorspace Capacity 2006-21 (‘000 sq.m. net) 6-16 Table 6.20 - Tourism Impact on Matlock Retail Demand 6-17 Table 6.21 – Matlock Workforce Retail Demand 6-17


Final Report for printing.doc 1-1

1. INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

1.1 Atkins was commissioned by Derbyshire Dales District Council (DDDC) in Spring 2006 to prepare a retail capacity assessment for the District as part of the evidence base for the formulation of town centre policies in so far as they relate to Matlock and Wirksworth. More specifically, the study provides a direct input to the Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan.

1.2 This study has been carried out in accordance with guidance issued in PPS 6 (Planning for Town Centres) regarding the assessment of future need for retail development in the District during the period up to 2021.

1.3 This report sets out the findings of the assessment of both the qualitative and quantitative need for new retail floorspace with respect to both convenience and comparison facilities in Matlock and Wirksworth.

1.4 Other centres in Derbyshire Dales District, including neighbourhood centres and shopping parades, are not addressed by the study. The conclusions and recommendations of this report are based on the assumption that no significant change will take place in terms of floorspace provision within other centres or clusters of shops in the District.

1.5 In assessing the quantitative need for retail development in the town centres, the study has also given consideration to the potential impact of key initiatives planned for the area and specific circumstances which may influence future expenditure patterns. These include:

• the proposed development of a Sainsbury’s supermarket at Cawdor Quarry in Matlock;

• town centre change options and development opportunities being considered as part of the emerging Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan;



• policy aspirations and opportunities for increasing visitor spend in Matlock and Wirksworth and diversifying the local tourism market;

• the nature and extent of controversial planning applications for change of use of retail premises in Wirksworth;

• the current and future employment role of Matlock, particularly in relation to retail expenditure arising from the large public sector workforce in the town.

1.6 Building on a significant body of work carried out by Matlock Town Council and the District Council on qualitative issues, the study has been conducted using a wide range of empirical and secondary data sources including:

• Bespoke population and retail expenditure data for a defined population catchment area provided by Experian;

• Town centre profile data for Matlock and Wirksworth provided by Derbyshire Dales District Council and Experian Goad;

• Physical appraisal of the two centres;

• A statistically significant household survey of current shopping patterns derived by telephone interviews with 530 households within the catchment area;

• A face-to-face survey of existing retailers (Wirksworth only); and

• An e-mail survey of Matlock-based public sector employees (conducted by Derbyshire County Council).

STRUCTURE OF REPORT

1.7 This report is structured as follows:

• Section 2 provides a review of the Government, regional and local policy context relevant to the study;

• Section 3 describes the existing sub-regional retail hierarchy and profiles the existing retail offer of Matlock and Wirksworth town centres;

• Section 4 provides a qualitative review of the two centres based on an empirical assessment of local perceptions regarding their respective strengths and weaknesses.



• Section 5 provides a review of retailer demand and key property market indicators;

• Section 6 summarises the quantitative assessment of future retail need in Matlock and Wirksworth and establishes the potential capacity for developing additional convenience and comparison floorspace in the two centres; and

• Section 7 sets out conclusions and recommendations.



2. POLICY CONTEXT

INTRODUCTION

2.1 This section provides a brief review of PPS6 (Planning for Town Centres, ODPM 2005) which establishes the retail planning policy context for this study. The PPS sets out the strategic requirements for assessing retail need in local authority areas and for conducting retail health checks as part of LDF preparation.

2.2 In accordance with the requirements of PPS6 this section also provides a brief review of regional town centre policies set out in the Regional Spatial Strategy for the East Midlands. The key town centre policies which form part of the Adopted Local Plan are also reviewed.

PPS6 – PLANNING FOR TOWN CENTRES

2.3 PPS6 establishes the need for Local Development Documents to implement the Government’s objectives for town centres by planning positively for their growth and development. This includes providing an emphasis on:

• Developing a hierarchy and network of centres;

• Taking a plan-led approach at both the regional and local levels;

• Assessing for further main town centre uses and ensuring there is the capacity to accommodate them;

• Focusing development in, and planning for the expansion of, existing centres as appropriate, and at the local level identifying sites in Development Plan Documents;

• The need to tackle social exclusion by ensuring access for all to a wide range of everyday goods and services; and

• The need to promote more sustainable patterns of development with less reliance on the car.



Assessing the Need for Development

2.4 Paragraph 2.15 of PPS6 states that local authorities should work in conjunction with key stakeholders to:

• Assess the need for new floorspace for retail, leisure and other key town centre uses, taking account of both quantitative and qualitative factors; and

• Identify deficiencies or gaps in provision;

• Identify the centres where development will be focused;

• Set out criteria-based policies for assessing and locating other new development proposals for sites not allocated in the plan.

2.5 In selecting sites for development, paragraph 2.28 states that local planning authorities should:

• Assess the need for development;

• Identify the appropriate scale of development;

• Apply the sequential approach to site selection;

• Assess the impact of development on existing centres; and

• Ensure that locations are accessible.

2.6 In assessing the need for development, paragraphs 2.32 to 2.40 advise that this should be carried as part of the plan preparation and review process, and should be updated regularly. Whilst PPS6 emphasises the importance of evidence provided by objective quantitative considerations, it also stresses that local planning authorities should take full account of both quantitative and qualitative considerations.

Quantitative Need

2.7 In assessing quantitative need for additional development when preparing its Development Plan Documents, Paragraph 2.34 states that the local planning authority should assess the likely future demand for additional retail and leisure floorspace, having regard to a realistic assessment of:

• Existing and forecast population levels;



• Forecast expenditure for specific classes of goods to be sold within the broad categories of comparison and convenience goods; and

• Forecast improvements in productivity in the use of floorspace.

2.8 It is highlighted that quantitative assessments should provide sufficient information on which to base strategic choices about where growth should be accommodated and how it can be used effectively to strengthen or regenerate existing centres and to address deficiencies in the existing network of centres.

Qualitative Need

2.9 In relation to assessing qualitative aspects of need, PPS6 emphasises that local authorities should aim to provide for consumer choice by ensuring that:

• 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 should be made for a range of sites for shopping, leisure and local services, which allows genuine choice to meet the needs of the whole community.

2.10 In paragraph 2.36 PPS6 advises that other considerations may also be taken into account in assessing qualitative need, such as the degree to which shops may be overtrading.

Vitality and Viability

2.11 In assessing the vitality and viability of town centres and undertaking town centre health checks, PPS 6 advises local authorities to collect information on a range of key indicators including:

• Diversity of town centre uses by number, type and amount of floorspace;

• The potential capacity for growth or change of centres in the network;

• Retailer representation;

• Shopping rents and commercial yields;

• Vacancies;



• Pedestrian flows;

• Accessibility;

• Customer and residents’ views and behaviour;

• Perception of safety and the occurrence of crime;

• State of the town centre environmental quality.

REGIONAL POLICY

2.12 Regional Spatial Strategy for the East Midlands (RSS8, 2005) now forms part of the statutory development plan, replacing RPG8. All statutory planning documents must now be in general conformity with its policies.

2.13 RSS8 sets out Regional Priorities for Town Centres and Retail Development in the sub area. RSS8 divides the region down into 5 smaller sub-areas for the purposes of policy development. The Derbyshire Dales District falls within the Peak sub-area, comprising the Peak District National Park and adjacent areas including Matlock and Wirksworth which are both outside the Park boundary.

2.14 The Strategy encourages local authorities, the East Midlands Development Agency, and Sub Regional Strategic Partnerships to work together on a sub area basis to promote the vitality and viability of existing town centres, and market towns (Policy 23). It encourages intervention in cases where centres are under performing, including the development and implementation of town centre strategies.

2.15 RSS8 was informed by a Regional Town Centres Study for the East Midlands (February 2003)1 which undertook a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative analysis of retail floorspace and leisure facilities. The study concluded that:

• A sub-area approach should be used to develop localised strategies;

• There is no identified need for additional regional scale out of town retail floorspace within the region;

• Some existing centres require public sector support to encourage the required private sector investment. It emphasises the importance of design led initiatives and town centre strategies in helping to achieve this; and

1 DTZ Pieda Consulting for East Midlands Regional Local Government Association



• Quantitative forecasts for retail in each centre should be supplemented by a wider assessment of each centre’s role.

2.16 For the Peak sub-area, RSS8 states that development should be focussed on encouraging high quality schemes that are in scale with existing historic town centres, and in particular, development of centres that are outside the National Park boundary.

2.17 RSS8 gives advice regarding the development of areas within the Peak sub areas which lie outside the National Park. It encourages policies which aim to meet the needs of the area whilst reducing past levels of in-migration, discouraging additional commuting to, and supporting the regeneration of the nearby conurbations. In relation to retail Policy 10 emphasises the need to retain and generate local employment whilst respecting the high quality environment of the area.

2.18 With respect to the management of tourism and visitors in the Peak sub-area, Policy 12 states that development plans and economic development strategies covering areas adjacent to the National Park should consider whether there is potential for further tourism development that could ease pressures on the Park itself. Policy 25 states with regards to tourism that provision for additional tourist facilities close to popular destinations that have adequate environmental and infrastructure capacity should be encouraged.

Regional Town Centre Study

2.19 The Regional Town Centre Study estimates that between the period 2002 to 2012, growth in the population of the Peak sub area is forecasted to be the lowest in the East Midlands, at only 1%. It also concludes that average annual per capita expenditure on comparison goods within the Peak sub area is the lowest, at only £2,522, and that the growth in this sector is also expected to be amongst the lowest in the East Midlands sub area. The relatively small amount of comparison spending in the Peak sub area is a reflection of the amount of floorspace in the sub-area, the lowest in the East Midlands, and the lower sales density in this sub area.

2.20 In terms of the future role of town centres, the report concludes that Matlock and Wirksworth have close functional relationships with Chesterfield, South Yorkshire and Derby. Due to the relationships and the effects of the restraint policies in the National Park, the study states that these towns will be subject to strong development pressure in the future.



Derby and Derbyshire Joint Structure Plan (adopted January 2001)

2.21 The Joint Structure Plan has been prepared with Derby City Council. It covers the whole of Derbyshire outside the Peak District National Park. As RSS8 has been published since the approval of the Structure Plan, in some instances it contains more up to date policy advice.

2.22 The Joint Structure Plan contains general policies and proposals of strategic importance for the development and use of land in the area. It provides the framework within which the Local Plan has to be prepared.

2.23 Matlock and Wirksworth are identified as ‘Town Centres’ in the Structure Plan’s retail hierarchy along with Alfreton, Ashbourne, Belper, Bakewell, Matlock Bath and Ripley under Town Centre Policy 1 – Sustaining and Enhancing Existing Centres. The Structure Plan supports the sequential approach to retail planning in Town Centre and Shopping Policies 2, 3 and 4, which broadly favours new retail provision being provided in existing centres over development of edge of town locations. Appropriate leisure and tourism development is also supported in the Derwent Valley (Leisure and Tourism Policy 3).

Derbyshire Dales Local Plan

2.24 The Derbyshire Dales Local Plan, adopted in November 2005, provides the present local planning policy context for Matlock and Wirksworth. It sets the strategic framework for sustainable development in the District.

2.25 Chapter 6 of the Local Plan contains policies relating to Town Centres and Retailing. Key objectives relating to retail provision in town centres are:

• To protect and enhance the vitality and viability of town centres;

• To encourage new retail development that contributes to the achievement of sustainable development;

• To protect and enhance the character and appearance of town centres; and

• To protect important local and village shops and services.

2.26 Local policies concerning Town Centres and Retailing complement the national and regional planning context. Policies S1-S3 support the sequential approach for the development of retail provision which favours development of town centres over edge of centre and out of town locations.



• Policy S1 guides retail development in The Town Centre (as defined on the Proposals Map). It requires proposals for retail development in town centres to be in scale and character with the town centre, to be well related or capable of being well related to the public transport network;

• Policy S2 guides development in edge of centre locations. It states that planning permission for retail development that is appropriate for a town centre location will only be granted on sites on the edge of town centres if:

− There is a proven need for the development and;

− It cannot be accommodated within that centre or in any other nearby centre and;

− Does not have an adverse impact upon the vitality and viability of the town centre or any existing nearby centre and;

− Is well related or capable of being well related to the public transport network and;

− Is within easy walking distance of the adjacent town centre and;

− Does not have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

• Policy S3 states out of centre retail proposals will only be granted permission if there is a proven need for development, if it cannot be accommodated in a town centre or edge of centre location and does not have an adverse impact on the vitality and viability of any town centre.

2.27 Policy S4 provides guidance on the inclusion of non retail uses in Primary Shopping Frontages. Within Defined Shopping Frontages, planning permission will only be granted if it does not have an adverse effect on the vitality or viability of the town centre.

2.28 Policy S8 provides advice on development that can be used to realise the potential of the River Derwent on the west of Bakewell Road and east of Dale Road. It states that planning permission for developments on the west of Bakewell Road and east of Dale Road will be granted if it is part of, or would not prejudice, a comprehensive scheme covering the entire river frontage from the proposed junction of Bakewell Road and the A6 Link Road in the north to the railway bridge in the south. Such developments also need to demonstrate that they protect and enhance the character and appearance of the surrounding area.



2.29 The Local Plan also provides guidance regarding the development of a supermarket, in Matlock in Policy S9. It states that within the site identified on the Proposals Map for a supermarket proposals that would prejudice the development of the supermarket will not be permitted.

2.30 Remaining policies contained in the Town Centres and Retailing chapter are of less importance to the context of this report. Retail policies S5, S6 and S7 inclusive provide guidance on amusement centres, the design and appearance of shops and commercial premises and shop front security. Policies S10, S11 and S12 provide guidance relating to development in Local Shopping Centres, Individual and village shops and important local services.

Other Policies Relating to Conservation, Economic Development & Transport

2.31 Policy NBE22 provides guidance on replacement shop fronts in Conservation Areas. It aims to ensure that retail and other units located in Conservation Areas do not adversely affect the character of the designated areas.

2.32 Policies EDT4 and EDT6 are also of some relevance in terms of restricting the development of employment land for other uses including retail and the potential loss of existing retail space to other uses.

2.33 Policy EDT4 states that the redevelopment for non-employment uses of existing business or industrial land will only be granted if the continuation of the land or premises in industrial or business use is no longer required or if the current use is incompatible with the surrounding properties and land uses. EDT6 guides the conversion and re-use of buildings for industrial and business development in settlement frameworks. In these areas, permission for the conversion of buildings to industrial and business development from other uses is dependent on the proposals meeting strict criteria with regards to design, character and appearance in the context of its surroundings.

2.34 Policy EDT11 takes a precautionary approach to providing retail in employment areas. It assumes retail shall not be permitted in employment areas unless it involves a specialist retail use unsuited to a town or edge of centre location or it would specifically serve the needs of those employed in the existing employment areas and that it does not create unacceptable problems in terms of its relationship to neighbouring uses within or beyond the employment area.

2.35 Chapter 7 details the Council’s policies relating to transportation. Policies relating to access and the impact of new development (TR1), public transport (TR3), pedestrian and cycle provision (TR6 and TR7), parking (TR8) and the safeguarding of the



proposed A6 Link Road (TR11) also help to set the planning policy context of the study.

Other Relevant Documents

2.36 The Matlock Town Centre Healthcheck (2004) and subsequent Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan (AAP) are key documents relating to the future development options of the town. The AAP is currently being prepared and its likely adoption date as a Development Plan Document (DPD) is mid 2008. They are considered as part of the qualitative assessment of retail offer in Section 4.

2.37 An Options Appraisal for a new Leisure Centre and Tourism Destination (2004) is also of relevance and is reviewed in Chapter 4.



3. RETAIL HIERACHY AND QUANTITATIVE AUDIT OF CENTRES

INTRODUCTION

3.1 This section provides a review of how Matlock and Wirksworth fit into the sub regional retail hierarchy. The purpose of this analysis is to assess the role of each centre within the hierarchy and to evaluate the strength of the centres in terms of retailer representation, diversity of provision, and use class profile.

3.2 It also provides a quantitative review of the diversity of centre uses including the balance of convenience, comparison and service provision, and levels of vacancy. The analysis was undertaken to gain an understanding of the current retail market offer in the two centres and to provide a rationale for future change options in the centres. This analysis does not include qualitative analysis of issues affecting the centres, which is dealt with separately in Chapter 4.

RETAIL HIERARCHY AND SUB REGIONAL CONTEXT

3.3 It is important to consider the role of Matlock and Wirksworth in the sub regional context when considering their existing and future roles. Situated on the edge of the Peak District, both Matlock and Wirksworth form part of a wider sub regional retail hierarchy. The towns have functional relationships with larger urban centres including Chesterfield / South Yorkshire, Derby and Nottingham.

3.4 Smaller centres in good proximity to Matlock and Wirksworth compete with the two towns. These include Alfreton, Ripley, Bakewell, Darley Dale, Belper, Clay Cross and Ashbourne.

3.5 Matlock is one of the key market towns in the Dales and serves as an important centre for the local and surrounding population. As it is a larger and more diverse market town than Wirksworth, Matlock residents are more able to meet their retail needs locally and consequently have a lower propensity to shop in other nearby centres.

3.6 Although the wider retail sub-region provides an important context to the planning of retail provision in Matlock and Wirksworth, it is important to consider the demand and



scope for expanding and diversifying the role of the two centres. National planning guidance on retail provision (PPS6) states the importance of maintaining, improving and renewing medium term and lower order centres. This priority reflects the drive to regenerate town centres (in the wake of major growth in out of town centres), encourage urban renaissance and to facilitate more sustainable shopping patterns.

3.7 Given the sub regional hierarchy is influenced by the relationships and effects of the restraint policy of the National Park, Matlock and Wirksworth could be subject to strong development pressure in the future.

DIVERSITY OF RETAIL USES IN MATLOCK AND WIRKSWORTH

3.8 The diversity of retail uses within Matlock and Wirksworth has been considered as it impacts on the relative attractiveness of a centre, and can be used to understand the role, viability and performance of centres. The scale and diversity of uses within a centre usually correlates with the amount of time people spend in a given centre, levels of spending and the time of day people use the centre.

3.9 To verify and update the Council’s baseline information and to consider changes that have occurred to retail provision in the two centres, site reconnaissance work was undertaken by Atkins during June 2006. The summary tables for both Matlock and Wirksworth reported in this chapter have been updated to reflect this process.

Matlock

3.10 Much of the retailer representation in Matlock is from local companies although national retailers include Somerfield, Co-op, Boots, Woolworths and Wilkinson. These operators are typical of a relatively prosperous town of Matlock’s size and similar companies have recorded interest in locating in the town (see Section 5).

3.11 Analysis of the retailer mix, number and type of floorspace is based on data collected by the Council during 2005. Data from this report was supplemented by site visits to the town to gain an appreciation of the issues and context of provision in Matlock. To analyse the retail mix in Matlock, each unit was coded according to a retailer type based on the categorisation used by Goad Experian. In addition, units were coded by use class. The typology disaggregates convenience retailing, comparison retailing and service sector activities into 34 smaller categories of retail provision. It includes categories for non-retail provision to gain an appreciation of the range and extent of other land uses in the town.

3.12 Table 3.1 shows the breakdown of activities represented in Matlock in terms of the number of units and the net floorspace. A more detailed summary table which sorts units by retailer code is provided in Table 3.2.



3.13 Table 3.1 identifies some 161 units within Matlock town centre boundary (as defined in the Local Plan). Retail provision is spread across some 14,935 sq.m of net floorspace.

3.14 Seven vacant units were identified in Matlock, which equates to a unit vacancy rate of 4%. In terms of floorspace, only 2% of the total is vacant which indicates that it is the smaller units which are generally less viable. This level of vacancy is low compared to the national average of 8.5% for the floorspace measurement2. This low vacancy rates represents a frictional level of turnover in the market which is necessary for the market to function efficiently. It also demonstrates relatively high demand and provides an indication of potential for further development within the town’s retail sector.

3.15 Matlock has a range of convenience, comparison and service retail provision. The comparison (45%) and service (40%) sectors are best represented in Matlock in terms of the number of units. Whilst the proportions in terms of floorspace are similar for comparison shops (46%), service activities account for a disproportionately lower amount of floorspace (29%). This reflects the demand for relatively small units by the service sector.

3.16 The convenience sector comprises less than 8% of retail units, but in terms of floorspace, the sector is much better represented with 19%. This is broadly comparable to the national average at 9% and 17% respectively. However, given the role of Matlock as an important market town, it would not be uncommon for towns with a similar role to display a proportion of convenience provision which was higher than the national average.

3.17 Compared to the national average of 52% (in terms of floorspace), comparison provision is under-represented in Matlock (46%). Conversely, the town’s share of service floorspace (29%) is greater than the national average (21%) which reflects the importance of Matlock’s role as a local service centre / market town.

2 Experian Goad, 2005.



Table 3.1 – Matlock Summary Groupings

Category No. Units % Units Net Floorspace (sq.m) % Net Floorspace

Convenience 12 7.5 2862.5 19.17 Comparison 72 44.7 6908.7 46.26 Service 65 40.4 4399.5 29.46 Miscellaneous 5 3.1 447.2 2.99 Vacant and derelict 7 4.3 317.7 2.13 TOTAL 161 100.0 14,935.6 100

Source: DDDC, 2005 / Atkins, 2006

3.18 Goad Experian define 26 key national convenience and comparison retailers which provides an important benchmark for assessing the relative strength and attractiveness of centres to the market. Moreover, the strong reputation and branding of these retailers acts as a catalyst for further retail investment by other regional and national operators. In the case of Matlock, only 3 such key retailers are evident (Boots, Wilkinson’s and Woolworths). Consequently, attracting further key retailers to the town will be important in raising the profile of Matlock to potential investors and shoppers. However, this aspiration should also be tempered by the need to support the viability of existing, independent and smaller traders in the town.

Convenience

3.19 The 12 convenience sector units in Matlock comprise some 2863 sq.m of footprint floorspace. Groceries and frozen food stores have 3 units comprising 14% of the total retail floorspace in Matlock. The centre also contains 3 CTN/Convenience stores, a baker, 2 butchers and a delicatessen. The presence of traditional convenience retailers is an important strength of the town as it contributes towards the vitality and distinctiveness of the centre.

Comparison

3.20 The comparison sector is the largest both in terms of the number of units (72) and gross floorspace (6,909 sq.m). The proportion of units (44.7%) and floorspace (46.3%) in this sector is almost identical.

3.21 In terms of the number of units, the most common type of retailers in the town are charity shops. There are also seven furniture stores in this sector, which are generally clustered along Dale Road. Clothes shops also have a number of outlets in Matlock, with 7 retailers located in the town. Despite the number of shops in this retailer category, the 586 sq.m of floorspace in this sector suggests that most of these shops are fairly small.



3.22 In terms of floorspace, the DIY/ hardware and household goods category is well represented, with 1,867.2 sq.m of net floorspace. The cars, motorcycles and accessories sector also contains a large amount of floorspace, with 1,210 sq.m.

Services

3.23 There are 65 service based units in Matlock covering around 4,399.5 sq.m of net floorspace. The size of units in this sector is typically smaller than average, with the proportion of floorspace (29.5%) being considerably smaller than the overall number of units (40.4%).

3.24 Restaurants, cafes and fast food are well represented type of store in this sector, with a total of 12 such businesses across 1,230.7 sq.m of net floorspace. Other types of unit that are well represented in this category are hairdressers, beauty and health sector (16 units), banks (14 units) and estate agents (4 units).

Table 3.2 – Matlock Analysis by Retail Type

Retailer Category Retail Code

Retail Type

% Units

Net Floorspace

% Net Floorspace

Convenience CTN & Convenience Store 1 3 1.9 519.0 3.5 Groceries and Frozen Food 2 3 1.9 2210.3 14.8 Baker 3 1 0.6 14.9 0.1 Butcher 4 2 1.2 20.5 0.1 Off Licence 7 1 0.6 42.8 0.3 Delicatessen 7b 2 1.2 55.0 0.4 TOTAL CONVENIENCE 12 7.5 2862.5 19.2 Comparison 0.0 Footwear and repairs 8 2 1.2 179.8 1.2 Clothing 9 7 4.3 585.6 3.9 Furniture, 10 7 4.3 498.6 3.3 Books, arts/crafts, stationers/ copy and photo 11 6 3.7 257.5 1.7 Electricals, home ents / phones / videos 12 5 3.1 358.0 2.4 DIY / hardware and household goods 13 6 3.7 1867.2 12.5 Gifts, china, glass and leather goods 14 3 1.9 256.3 1.7 Cars, motorcycles and Accessories 15 4 2.5 1210.0 8.1 Chemists, toileteries and opticians 16 6 3.7 385.1 2.6



Retailer Category Retail Code

Retail Type

% Units

Net Floorspace

% Net Floorspace

Florists and garden 18 2 1.2 58.6 0.4 Sports, toys, cycles and hobbies 19 5 3.1 213.2 1.4 Jewellers, clocks and repairs 20 4 2.5 125.5 0.8 Charity shops 21 8 5.0 423.2 2.8 Other compasrison 22 7 4.3 490.3 3.3 TOTAL COMPARISON 72 44.7 6908.7 46.3 Service 0.0 Restaurants & Cafes (A3 Use) Sandwiches 25 12 7.5 1230.7 8.2 Drinking Establishments (A4) 26 4 2.5 882.2 5.9 Hot Food Takeaway (A5) 27 4 2.5 179.2 1.2 Hairdressing, beauty and health 29 16 9.9 500.1 3.3 Bookmakers (A2) 30 2 1.2 118.6 0.8 Laundrette (S/G) Dry Cleaners (A1) 31 2 1.2 30.7 0.2 Travel Agents (A1) 32 3 1.9 71.9 0.5 Banks and Financial Services (A2) 33 14 8.7 886.4 5.9 Estate Agents (A2) 35 4 2.5 61.6 0.4 Employment Agencies (A2) 36 3 1.9 371.6 2.5 Vets 36b 1 0.6 66.6 0.4 TOTAL SERVICE 65 40.4 4399.5 29.5 Misc. - Non retail 0.0 Voluntary Sector Office / Venue (B1) 39 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other 40 5 3.1 447.2 3.0 TOTAL MISC 5 3.1 447.2 3.0 Vacant and Derelict 0.0 Vacant 41 7 4.3 317.7 2.1 TOTAL VACANT AND DERELICT 7 4.3 317.7 2.1 TOTAL 161 100.0 14935.6 100

Analysis by Use Class

3.25 The balance of premises according to the Use Class Order (as amended 2005) is important as the Council favours certain use classes within the defined town centre boundary. Paragraph 6.12 of the adopted Local Plan (November 2005) states a



preference for Use Class A1 shops, A2 Financial and Professional Services, A3 Restaurants and Cafes, A4 Drinking Establishments and A5 Hot Food Takeaway.

3.26 Table 3.3 provides a breakdown of premises by use class in Matlock. The largest summary grouping, both in terms of the percentage of units (61.5%) and the floorspace (61.2%) is the A1 use class. Financial and Professional Services (A2) is the second largest grouping, both in terms of the percentage of units (19.3%) and floorspace (12.6%). Restaurants and cafes (A3) also have a reasonable representation in the town, with 10 such units.

Table 3.3 – Use Class Profile of Matlock

Use Class* Number Units % Units Floorspace (Sq.m)

% Net Floorspace

A1 99 61.5 9147.2 61.2 A2 31 19.3 1884.2 12.6 A3 10 6.2 1157.4 7.7 A4 4 2.5 882.2 5.9 A5 4 2.5 179.2 1.2 B1 3 1.9 273.1 1.8 Sui Generis 3 1.9 1094.6 7.3 Vacant 7 4.3 317.7 2.1 Total 161 100 14935.6 100

*Units classified by the amended Use Class Order 2005

Wirksworth

3.27 The analytical approach used for Wirksworth follows the same approach as that for Matlock. Use Classes and a similar retailer typology are used to disaggregate and analyse the balance of retail units in the town. Baseline information comprising unit and retailer information used to inform this section of the report originates from work undertaken by the Council during April 2005.

3.28 Table 3.4 shows the breakdown of activities represented in Wirksworth in terms of the number of units and the total floorspace. A more detailed summary table which sorts units by retailer code is provided in Table 3.5. The largest summary grouping, both in terms of the number of units (38%) and gross floorspace (51.9%) is the service sector. This reflects the dominant role of the centre in providing easily accessible day-to-day service activities for the local population. Moreover, it also provides an indication of the extent to which the town’s convenience and comparison functions are largely secondary compared to the national average.



3.29 Comparison shopping is the second highest represented in terms of the number of units (33.9%) and in terms of gross floorspace (31.6%). This compares to the national average of 47% and 52% respectively.

3.30 Convenience shopping accounts for only 7% of total floorspace in Wirksworth, compared to 17% at the national level. This demonstrates the limited role of the town centre for food shopping which reflects the fact that it mainly serves a small catchment area comprising residents of the town and its immediate hinterland.

3.31 Only 2 vacant units were identified in Wirksworth which demonstrates, in broad terms, the viability of small scale retail activity in the town. Some vacancy is considered necessary to allow a frictional market to function.

Table 3.4 – Wirksworth Summary Groupings

No. of units % Gross Floorspace %

Convenience 8 12.9 210.2 6.8 Comparison 21 33.9 968.7 31.6 Service 24 38.7 1,592.4 51.9 Non Retail 7 11.3 181.4 5.9 Vacant 2 3.2 117.0 3.8 Total 62 100 3,069.6 100

Source: DDDC 2005 / Atkins 2006

Convenience

3.32 In total, convenience stores comprise almost 13% of units and 6.8% of floorspace in Wirksworth. In general terms, this demonstrates that these types of stores are smaller than the town’s average. Wirksworth has largely retained a traditional mix of small shops including bakers, butchers and a greengrocer. The largest category of provision in terms of floorspace in this category are groceries and frozen food (102.5 sq.m).

Comparison

3.33 Table 3.5 provides a detailed summary of retail type in Wirksworth. Across the town the comparison sector is the largest retail category and contains a similar proportion of units (33.9%) and floorspace (31.6). The most heavily represented stores in this category are gifts, china, glass and leather goods (5 units).



Service

3.34 This sector comprises 39.7% of units in the town and 51.9% of gross floorspace meaning on average, service based units are larger than the Wirksworth average. Restaurants and cafes are the best represented type of store in this category, (7 units), with a further 5 drinking establishments identified. There are also 4 banks / financial service based businesses in the town and 4 estate agents. One strength of the centre is that there are only 3 take-aways, a use which would not be desirable in terms of its ability to help attract higher value firms to locate in the town.



Table 3.5 – Wirksworth Premises by Retail Type

Category Retail Code No. of units % Gross Floorspace % Convenience CTN & Convenience Store 1 2 3.2 31.7 1.0 Groceries and Frozen Food 2 2 3.2 102.5 3.3 Baker 3 2 3.2 63.6 2.1 Butcher 4 2 3.2 12.3 0.4 Greengrocers 5 1 0.0 23.2 0.0 Fishmongers 6 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Off Licence 7 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delicatessen 7b 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

TOTAL CONVENIENCE 8 12.9 210.2 6.8 Comparison Footwear and repairs 8 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Clothing 9 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Furniture, 10 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Books, arts/crafts, stationers/ copy and photo 11 3 4.8 36 1.9 Electrical, home ents / phones / videos 12 3 4.8 112.9 3.7 DIY / hardware and household goods 13 2 3.2 208.6 6.8 Gifts, china, glass and leather goods 14 5 8.1 316.9 10.3 Cars, motorcycles and Accessories 15 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chemists, toiletries and opticians 16 2 3.2 82.6 2.7 Variety, department and catalogue 17 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Florists and garden 18 1 1.6 8.4 0.3 Sports, toys, cycles and hobbies 19 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Jewellers, clocks and repairs 20 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Charity shops 21 1 1.6 28.7 0.9 Other comparison 22 4 6.5 151.3 4.9

TOTAL COMPARISON 21 33.9 968.7 31.6 Service Restaurants & Cafes (A3 Use) Sandwiches 25 7 11.3 207.0 6.7 Drinking Establishments (A4) 26 5 8.1 649.6 21.2 Hot Food Takeaway (A5) 27 3 4.8 63.6 2.1 Internet Café (A1) 28 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Hairdressing, beauty and health 29 0 0.0 136.6 4.5 Bookmakers (A2) 30 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Laundrette (S/G) Dry Cleaners (A1) 31 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Travel Agents (A1) 32 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Banks and Financial Services (A2) 33 4 6.5 352.0 11.5 Money Transfer 34 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Estate Agents (A2) 35 4 6.5 166.6 5.4 Employment Agencies (A2) 36 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Vets 36b 1 1.6 17.0 0.6 TOTAL SERVICE 24 38.7 1,592.4 51.9 Misc. - Non retail Post Office (A1) 37 1 1.6 15.4 0.5 Taxi Office 38 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Voluntary Sector Office / Venue (B1) 39 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other 40 6 9.7 166.0 5.4

TOTAL MISC 7 11.3 181.4 5.9 Vacant 41 2 3.2 117.0 3.8 Derelict 42 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

TOTAL VACANT AND DERELICT 2 3.2 117.0 3.8 TOTAL 62 100.0 3,069.6 100.0



Analysis by Use Class

3.35 Analysis of premises by use class has been undertaken, illustrated in Table 3.6 below. Units were classified by use class during site visits made to the centre. Around half (51.6%) of units and floorspace (44.3%) in Wirksworth are in A1 use. The town also contains a sizeable proportion of A2 (14.5%) and A3 (11.3%) units.

Table 3.6 – Wirksworth Premises by Use Class

Use Class No Units % Floorspace % A1 32 51.6 1357.8 44.23 A2 9 14.5 758.2 24.70 A3 7 11.3 396.6 12.92 A4 5 8.1 239.9 7.82 A5 2 3.2 34.1 1.11 Vacant 2 3.2 117.0 3.81 C3 5 8.1 166.0 5.41 Total 62 100 3069.6 100



4. QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF RETAIL OFFER

INTRODUCTION

4.1 This section of the report presents the findings of the qualitative need assessment for Matlock and Wirksworth. It provides a summary of the empirical review of need including accessibility, environmental quality and future opportunity options in the two centres. This approach is in accordance with the requirement of PPS6 and complements the quantitative need analysis presented in Section 5.

4.2 In addition to reporting the findings of the qualitative need assessment, the qualitative findings of the local Household Survey and the key issues that emerged from the Wirksworth Retailer Survey are presented in this chapter. Together these provide an empirical evidence base for assessing the views of local residents and local businesses regarding the quality and appropriateness of the retail offer in the two centres.

MATLOCK

4.3 Recent work carried out in Matlock outlines the case and provides the rationale for making improvements to the town centre and enhancing the attractiveness of the town. This part of the study has mainly been informed by recent qualitative work undertaken in Matlock, supplemented by site visits to verify and update the information where necessary. The following documents are of particular importance:

• Matlock Town Centre Healthcheck and Action Plan (2004);

• Matlock Public Sector Employees Survey (2005);

• Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan (likely adoption date 2008); and

• Options Appraisal for a New Leisure Centre and Tourism Destination (2004).



Matlock Healthcheck and Action Plan

4.4 To ascertain the qualitative need for the town’s future development, the Matlock Healthcheck and Action Plan was commissioned by the Town Council in 2004. The work provides much of the qualitative evidence baseline for the town and has informed subsequent work including the Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan.

4.5 The Matlock Healthcheck and Action Plan involved extensive involvement of local residents, businesses and stakeholders and was based on a review of a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) undertaken in 2001 by Matlock Town Council. Despite being some 5 years old, the general issues remain broadly relevant to Matlock. The findings of the SWOT analysis are summarised below:

Strengths

• Setting of the town in outstanding natural environment;

• Strength of local community including communal activities, groups and festivals;

• Quality of medical, emergency, social, commercial and education services; and

• Proximity to the national road network.

Weaknesses

• Slow decline of Matlock’s economy;

• Lack of ‘buzz’ in town centre;

• Need for aesthetic and functional improvements to town centre;

• Congestion and shortage of car parking;

• People choosing to shop in centres other than Matlock;

• Number of low paid and seasonal jobs; and

• Lack of visitor and leisure attractions including hotel, lack of theatre or performing arts venue and provision for young people.



Opportunities

• Using redevelopment of Cawdor Quarry to address current lack of large supermarket, provide new residential units, parking, creation of integrated transport system, provision of relief road and possible reduction in congestion around Crown Square;

• Development options associated with the market;

• Railway station improvements;

• Environmental improvements to Snitterton Road;

• Design and aesthetic improvements to town centre, especially Firs Parade;

• New community, sport, leisure and youth facilities; and

• Using tourism as a catalyst for development.

Threats

• Inappropriate changes being made that would compromise the traditional appearance of the town;

• Doing ‘nothing’ and being left behind; and

• Balancing the needs of tourists and residents.

4.6 The Healthcheck expanded on the issues identified in the SWOT analysis and undertook further research and analysis of four key aspects of the town: its environment, transport & access, economy and social & community.

4.7 Results of the stakeholder consultation on the Healthcheck suggested most residents felt Matlock was in need of a ‘facelift’ – including wide-spread support for improved retail provision - and that there were a number of opportunities to achieve this. The consultation found that residents were broadly supportive of sensitive change to the town which does not compromise the special qualities of Matlock.

4.8 A schedule of key priorities and initial analysis of their feasibility fed into an overall vision for Matlock comprising a visual concept for Matlock. Four strategic opportunity sites with the potential to address the town’s priorities were identified as:



• Crown Square;

• Firs Parade;

• Major opportunity site, including the Lido, bus station and market; and

• Gateway opportunity site (Bakewell Road – Riverside).

4.9 The Action Plan provided the following rationale for the 4 strategic opportunity sites:

• Creating a better pedestrian environment, particularly around Crown Square and the Town Hall;

• Creating a substantial new public space in the civic heart of Matlock;

• Improving access to the river frontage along Bakewell Road;

• Facilitating new development to increase the capacity of the town and make Matlock more attractive to potential shoppers;

• Removing or reducing parking in key public spaces by providing alternatives nearby; and

• Providing a flexible framework which can be adapted to accommodate planned changes to the highway layout around Crown Square and the bridge.

4.10 These concepts for Matlock have since been taken forward by the Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan, considered below.

Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan

4.11 The Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan (AAP) is currently being produced to enable the District Council to formalise and guide the development of the opportunity sites identified in the Matlock Healthcheck and Action Plan. The AAP will be subject to statutory consultation in autumn 2006 before undergoing independent examination in 2007. It is anticipated that the AAP will be adopted as a Development Plan Document (DPD) by July 2008. The strategic aims of the AAP listed below are based on findings of the Matlock Healthcheck and Action Plan and urban design, commercial and environmental analysis.

• Improve the retail offer, image and attractiveness of Matlock town centre;

• Prioritise the ease of movement in the town centre;



• Improve access to the river frontage;

• Promote high quality development on key opportunity sites;

• Develop high quality public realm;

• Ensure provision of new cultural and community facilities; and

• Provide affordable housing.

4.12 A range of development options and design work have been prepared for the sites within the town centre identified by the Matlock Healthcheck and Action Plan (see above). More general options for improvements to the street scene and public realm are also included in the AAP.

Options Appraisal for a New Leisure Centre and Tourism Destination (2004)

4.13 The District Council’s plans to redevelop The Dimple, a nine hectare site on the A6 between Matlock and Darley Dale, for leisure and tourism could significantly raise the profile of the area and generate additional tourist visits and also lead to a small increase in the demand for retail in Matlock.

4.14 Commissioned by the Council in 2004, an Options Appraisal for a new leisure centre and tourism destination at The Dimple resulted in four potential development options for this strategic site based on the mix, scale and type of built facilities.

4.15 Although the report did not specifically examine the new leisure development’s impact on Matlock town centre, it did demonstrate that there would be significant economic benefits to the town and its surroundings.

County Council Employee Survey (2005)

4.16 In 2005, Derbyshire County Council and DDDC undertook an email survey of their employees regarding shopping habits and perceptions of Matlock town centre. This was considered important given the role of both Councils as major employers. Some of the key findings of the survey were used to inform the analysis set out in Section 6 of this report.



WIRKSWORTH

4.17 As for Matlock, recent work carried out in Wirksworth provides an evidence base and provides the rationale for making improvements to the town centre and enhancing the attractiveness of the town.

4.18 This part of the study has mainly been informed by recent qualitative work undertaken in Wirksworth by the Council, supplemented by site visits and surveys by Atkins that were used to verify and update the information where necessary. The following work is of particular importance:

• Council audit of Wirksworth (DDDC, 2005);

• Wirksworth Retailer Survey (Atkins, 2006);

• Householder Survey (Atkins, 2006).

Wirksworth Retailer Survey

4.19 A survey of existing retailers in Wirksworth was undertaken to gain an insight into the qualitative need of the town. The survey enabled the expansion or relocation intentions of the indigenous retailers to be identified along with the perception of the performance of the centre as a whole. The qualitative research complements the quantitative analysis of Chapter 3.

4.20 The main purpose of the retailer survey was to gain an appreciation of the attitudes of local businesses in terms of expansion or relocation plans, their perception of the performance of the town and potential areas for improvement. A total of 27 face to face interviews were completed during June 2006 with a range of indigenous retailers. Table 4.1 provides a breakdown of interviews undertaken by retail category.

Table 4.1 – Number of Interviews by Retail Category

Retail Category No. of Interviews % Convenience 5 18.5 Comparison 11 40.7 Service 11 40.7 TOTAL 27 100



Characterisation of Retailers

4.21 The overriding majority of retailers in the town are local independent traders, many of which are longstanding and in some cases, have been based in the town for well over 50 years. The only multiples in the town are banks, all 3 of which are well established. Some retailers do have other outlets elsewhere in Derbyshire – most frequently in Matlock and Ashbourne.

4.22 The impression gained from retailers is that the town has a fairly localised but stable catchment, something reflected in the number and success of traditional convenience stores such as bakers, butchers and greengrocers. Many people living in Wirksworth appear to shop locally rather than relying on a one-stop supermarket.

Advantages of Operating in Wirksworth

4.23 The main advantages of trading in Wirksworth are associated with being located in a small town with a strong and tight-knit community. Many retailers stressed the number of regular customers they have and said that repeat business forms the main-stay of their business. Being located in a small, community orientated town was therefore cited as a major benefit. Retailers commented that the lack of a large supermarket was of benefit. Many traders believed that the building of a supermarket or encouraging larger / multiple shops to locate in the town would be inappropriate and would probably destroy the character of the town.

4.24 Some retailers were fairly positive about the town saying it is up and coming and that its image as a ‘dirty’, former quarrying town was changing. Evidence of some new creative, service orientated enterprises including cafes, boutiques, and arts / crafts outlets reinforce this notion. The low level of vacant premises was highlighted by some retailers as a positive aspect of being located in the town.

4.25 Many retailers highlighted the importance of the September arts festival and other smaller events as being important not only for businesses, but also for the community and said they were of value in promoting the town as a place to visit. Permanent tourism attractions, especially the National Stone Centre, the Heritage Centre and the Ecclesbourne Valley Railway were also highlighted as positive features of Wirksworth in terms of their contribution to bringing people into the town.

4.26 The introduction of some CCTV coverage and improvements to pavement drainage was cited as positive points by some retailers located on St Johns Street to the south of the town.



Constraints of Operating from Wirksworth

4.27 When asked to identify business constraints or problems associated with being located in the town, relatively few were identified. The issues that were raised should be considered in the knowledge that no businesses that participated in the retailer survey said they were considering to re-locate from the town. This indicates a certain level of satisfaction amongst retailers in operating in Wirksworth.

4.28 The main constraint identified by almost every retailer related to parking. The main concerns relate to the quantity, location and cost of parking and retailers said parking was a serious issue for both customers and staff.

4.29 Retailers perceived that on market days (Tuesdays), parking became a serious problem. Not only does the main car park in the market place get taken over by market traders, which reduces the supply of parking provision in the town, but the town is generally at its busiest on Tuesdays which makes the situation worse.

4.30 The cost of parking in the market place was seen as being too expensive, with the cost of parking for a day having risen to above £4. Some respondents said they relied on being able to park informally at friends or at the petrol station forecourt to avoid the charge. The closure of the car park on the site which was formerly a doctor’s surgery in the south of the town was raised as a serious problem amongst retailers in this part of Wirksworth. A number of respondents thought trade had dropped off since the closure of this car park as opportunities for stopping off in this part of the town had been reduced.

4.31 To address the situation, one retailer stated that a car park should be built on the salt heap opposite the Spar shop and petrol station to the north of the town. There were few other suggestions for dealing with the issue although some questioned whether the market should continue to take up valuable parking spaces on Tuesdays.

4.32 In terms of the town itself, there was a feeling among some retailers that because many of the town’s assets are ‘hidden’ from the main road, Wirksworth misses out on potential through trade that it may otherwise attract. Some felt that the town has always been ‘on the brink of something good’ but has never quite made it to a place that is attractive to visitors. There was a general consensus among retailers in feeling that more needs to be done to encourage visitors into the town.

4.33 One retailer felt that landscaping improvements should be made to the market place to help improve the image of the town. Support was found for making more of the market, which was perceived as declining and not being as good as before in terms of its size and the variety of traders. The creation of the New Opportunities for Wirksworth (NOW) interest group was cited as positive step in promoting the town.



Plans to Relocate From Existing Premises

4.34 Findings of the survey suggest that the vast majority of retailers are satisfied with operating in Wirksworth. Although some constraints were raised, when retailers were asked whether they had plans to relocate away from Wirksworth, none said they did. The larger businesses in Wirksworth that require locally based offices in other towns generally already have such offices in place.

4.35 There is a certain amount of movement of retailers within the town, with two businesses saying they had moved recently to a different unit, and another saying it had plans to relocate within Wirksworth in the near future. Investment in premises is generally an ongoing process among the smaller businesses, with some of the larger (generally comparison) retailers having more comprehensive investment plans for their premises.

HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

4.36 To gain an appreciation of people’s perceptions of the retail offer in Matlock and Wirksworth, a household telephone survey was used. This same survey was used to quantify the shopping patterns of residents living within the catchment area of the two towns (This part of the analysis is detailed in Section 6 of this report).

4.37 This section summarises the results of the qualitative elements of the survey. The household survey proforma which formed the basis of the telephone interviews is provided in Appendix B. The full tables of results are also provided in Appendix B. The methodology used for the survey is provided in Section 6.

Perceptions of Retail Offer

4.38 For Matlock, 38.8% of respondents visit the centre at least once a week for food shopping (Table 4.2). A further 29% of respondents never visit Matlock for food shopping. A greater proportion of respondents use Matlock for non-food shopping (Table 4.3), meaning the centre is relatively more attractive for non food shopping.

4.39 Roughly the same proportion of respondents visit Wirksworth at least once a week for a food (13%) and non food shop (12.7%).



Table 4.2 - Frequency of Visits to Matlock / Wirksworth for Food Shopping

Matlock Wirksworth No. % No. % Every Day 15 2.8 13 2.5 2-6 Days a Week 95 17.9 32 6.0 Once a Week 96 18.1 24 4.5 Once a Fortnight 43 8.1 15 2.8 Once a Month 62 11.7 22 4.2 Once a Year 21 4.0 11 2.1 Less Often 45 8.5 25 4.7 Never 153 28.9 388 73.2 Total 530 100 530 100

Table 4.3 - Frequency of visits to Matlock / Wirksworth for Non Food Shop

Matlock Wirksworth No. % No. %

Every Day 25 4.7 18 3.4 2-6 Days a Week 84 15.8 28 5.3 Once a Week 89 16.8 21 4.0 Once a Fortnight 52 9.8 16 3.0 Once a Month 95 17.9 60 11.3 Once a Year 28 5.3 53 10.0 Less Often 45 8.5 57 10.8 Never 112 21.1 277 52.3

Mode of Transport

4.40 The mode of transport people use to get to Matlock and Wirksworth is almost identical for food and non food shopping. The overwhelming majority of people (80%) use a private car to reach the centres for shopping. Around 4% rely on a lift, with a further 4% walking. Around 10% of users travel by bus to the centres, a slightly higher proportion doing so for non food shopping. Virtually no respondents said they cycle to undertake any kind of shopping.

Preferred Qualities of Matlock

4.41 Of the respondents who answered the question, around half (50%) said that they shop in Matlock primarily due to the proximity of the centre to their home. Around 19% said they choose Matlock for shopping due to the good range of shops on offer. The absence of a large sized supermarket in the town is shown by the fact that only



4% said that they use Matlock because of the good range of supermarkets on offer. Around 4% stated the small/unusual range of shops as their reason.

Preferred Qualities of Wirksworth

4.42 Of the respondents who answered the question, only a quarter of respondents stated that they shop in Wirksworth due to the proximity of the centre to their home. Around 23% said they use the centre because of the good range of shops. The street market (6%) the nice/old fashioned shops (5.4%) were further popular answers.

4.43 In a further question, the attractive environment and friendliness of the people/community were seen as strong attractors to both Matlock and Wirksworth.

Problems Associated with Matlock

4.44 Respondents were asked to identify the problems associated with the retail offer in Matlock. The poor range of shops was highlighted by 35% of those who gave an answer, and a further 19% identified the lack of supermarkets. The lack of parking (11%) and levels of traffic congestion (9%) were also cited as significant problems amongst respondents to the question.

4.45 When asked a separate question about the problems associated with the layout and atmosphere of the town, 22% said the unattractive environment was a major consideration, 17% said the basic layout was an issue, 13% stated the danger from vehicles and 10% cited litter.

Problems Associated with Wirksworth

4.46 The faults identified with Wirksworth by respondents are similar to those of Matlock. The poor range of shops was the most common answer (36%), with lack of parking (16%) and lack of supermarket (14%) also highlighted as issues. However, traffic congestion was not identified as a major problem as with Matlock.

4.47 When asked a separate question about the problems associated with the layout and atmosphere of Wirksworth, the unattractive environment was cited as a serious issue, (13%), as was the danger from vehicles (11%) and the narrow entrance for vehicles coming into the town.

Improvements that would encourage additional use of Matlock

4.48 The most significant answers given when respondents were asked what would encourage them to use the centre more were more major shops (15%), a bigger or



better supermarket (18%) and a better range of shops (15%). Parking was only cited by 8.5% of respondents that answered the question.

Improvements that would encourage additional use of Wirksworth

4.49 Satisfaction with Wirksworth as a small retail centre appears relatively high. 31% of respondents said that nothing or very little could be done to improve the centre (excluding the don’t know category). More major shops and stores (11%) and bigger and better supermarkets (10%), and a better range of shops were the most common factors cited by respondents.



5. RETAILER NEED

INTRODUCTION

5.1 In fully meeting the requirements of PPS6, it is useful to identify key property market indicators which can inform the wider assessment of need for retail development in Matlock and Wirksworth. This includes a review of retailer need from external operators, subject to the availability of information.

INVESTMENT FACTORS

5.2 Retailer interest from national and regional operators in towns where they are not currently represented depends on a number of key factors including:

• investment return and turnover potential;

• scale and diversity of the current retail offer (i.e. a centre’s position in the regional / national hierarchy);

• degree of catchment area market opportunity in terms of current unmet retail need and over-trading in existing stores;

• availability of suitable sites and premises; and

• corporate investment strategy of individual operators.

5.3 Both Matlock and Wirksworth offer retail operators an investment opportunity in terms of potential market share gained through the clawback of expenditure currently lost to centres outside the catchment area and a significant degree of over-trading at key stores. Conversely, the existence of larger, more diverse centres may be more appealing to major operators given that they attract a larger market from existing catchment areas.

5.4 It is important to highlight that Wirksworth is significantly smaller and less diverse than Matlock in terms of its retail offer. Whilst national and regional retailers may consider Wirksworth town centre as a potential location for new stores, it is likely that other larger centres (including Matlock) will be considered highly more preferable.



This will be reinforced by the availability of suitably sized and located sites and premises: Matlock town centre offers significantly more potential in the supply of development sites that potentially meet the requirements of regional and national operators.

RETAILER INQUIRIES

5.5 Table 5.1 identifies the current and recent inquiries for sites and premises in Matlock from regional and national operators. It should be highlighted that retailer inquiries are not restricted to individual settlements as operators will be considering a variety of locations within Derbyshire. Comparable data for Wirksworth is not available.

Table 5.1 – Retailer Inquiries

ALDI STORES LTD 14,600 sq ft 28/02/2006

BAKERS OVEN LTD 1,750 - 2,500 sq ft 19/01/2006

BAKERS OVEN LTD 2,000 - 2,500 sq ft 20/03/2006

ETHEL AUSTIN LTD 2,500 - 5,000 sq ft 13/03/2006

HALFORDS LTD 4,000 - 10,000 sq ft 31/07/2006

JACK FULTON FROZEN VALUE 1,000 - 2,500 sq ft 12/06/2006

JACK FULTON FROZEN VALUE 1,000 - 2,500 sq ft 12/06/2006

MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS LTD 700 - 2,000 sq ft 17/02/2006

PEACOCKS STORES LTD 5,000 - 15,000 sq ft 08/06/2006

PETS AT HOME LTD 5,000 - 12,000 sq ft 31/01/2006

SAKS HAIR (HOLDINGS) LTD 1,000 sq ft 08/06/2006

SAVERS HEALTH & BEAUTY LTD 1,400 - 2,500 sq ft 04/08/2006

SPECSAVERS OPTICAL SUPERSTORES LTD 1,000 - 1,500 sq ft 10/03/2006

VIYELLA HOLDINGS LTD 800 - 1,250 sq ft 10/04/2006

WHITBREAD GROUP PLC 5,000 - 7,000 sq ft 27/02/2006

Source: Focus, 2006

5.6 Figure 5.1 illustrates how retailer inquiries in Matlock and similar settlements in Derbyshire have increased over the last five years in line with general macro-economic conditions.



Figure 5.1 – Retail Inquiries 1992-2006

Source: Focus, 2006

PROPERTY MARKET INDICATORS

5.7 Figure 5.2 highlights long-term trends in rental growth in Derbyshire. This highlights the rapid decline in rental growth following the recession of the early years of the current decade. Rental growth has been positive in recent years although conservative compared to the high of the property market boom during the late 1990s.

Figure 5.2 – Rental Growth Trends 1992-2005

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Ann

ual R

enta

l Gro

wth

(%)

Source: IPD, 2006



5.8 Table 5.2 provides indicative initial investment yields for high street properties in Matlock and Wirksworth. These have been declining over the last 5 years which reflects growing investment confidence in prospects for rental growth in retail property. Table 5.3 provides indicative Zone A and Zone B rental values for the two towns.

Table 5.2 – Indicative Initial Investment Yields (Retail)

2001 2003 2005

Matlock 7.0% 6.2% 5.4%

Wirksworth 8.1% 7.3% 6.6% Source: Atkins / IPD

Figure 5.3 – Indicative Rental Values 2005/06

Zone A (£/sq.m) Zone B (£/sq.m)

Matlock £250-£330 £100-£140

Wirksworth £140-£200 £70-£100 Source: Atkins / Valuation Office

CONCLUSION

Matlock

5.9 Analysis of available information on recent external retailer inquiries supplemented by analysis of key property market indicators suggest that retailer demand in Matlock has increased steadily over the last five years in line with national economic trends. Investment yields have been falling whilst rental values have increased steadily which indicates growing confidence in the investment value of prime retail property in Matlock. Rents are competitive compared to the major retail centres in Derbyshire including Chesterfield and Derby although investment yields are higher which reflects the higher degree of risk and lower degree of rental growth potential perceived by national and regional investors. Despite this, the competitive rental market may be attractive to some of the major retailers, particularly if suitable sites of appropriate size and location are made available to the market.

5.10 Whilst interest in Matlock is apparent from significant regional and national retailers, inquiries are concentrated on those that are typically represented in market towns similar to Matlock. These operators often do not require large, prime sites and extensive catchment populations. In seeking to improve the profile of Matlock as a location for other types of regional and national retailers, it will be important to:



• Assemble a number of high quality, prime sites of a size and location suitable to major retails;

• Promote the opportunity of latent demand in the town’s catchment area and the potential for claw back of leaked expenditure; and

• Build on the interest and commitment of Sainsbury’s to the town.

Wirksworth

5.11 Property market data for Wirksworth is limited given that it is a small centre with a low volume of transactions which typically are used as the source for data (e.g. on investment yields and rents). This lack of transaction information not only reflects the size of the town but also the fact that many of the retail premises are used by owner-occupier businesses.

5.12 The size threshold used by most regional and national operators means that Wirksworth typically will not be recorded by major retailers as a potential location interest. Indeed, as highlighted above, the town is characterised by long-established independent retailers which are strongly connected to the local community. This is an important feature of the town and resembles a key strength in terms of its viability and vitality. Local residents tend to remain loyal to these retailers if quality is maintained. Wirksworth also provides a range of niche outlets which are in keeping with the scale and character of the town and are attractive to both resident shoppers and the passing tourist trade.

5.13 Compared to Matlock, rents are lower and yields higher in Wirksworth. This reflects the limited interest and opportunity for investment by major retailers. Wirksworth performs an important role for its residents and increasingly for tourists. Consequently, it is essential that planning policies seek to support the viability of existing traders and attract a more diverse range of similar types of businesses. Such policies should complement the character of the town which primarily should focus on accommodating small, mostly indigenous businesses.



6. QUANTITATIVE NEED IN MATLOCK & WIRSWORTH

INTRODUCTION

6.1 This section sets out a quantitative capacity assessment of potential need for future retail development in Matlock and Wirksworth. The approach and methodology taken in the assessment is described below, which is in accordance with the requirements of PPS6. The analysis is provided in terms of projected expenditure for convenience and comparison shopping facilities.

6.2 All monetary values presented in this section are at 2004 prices3.

APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

6.3 The quantitative assessment of future retail needs in the two centres is based on a staged approach. In summary, the following steps can be identified in the process:

(i) Definition of a catchment area for the two centres. This catchment area was refined by conducting a telephone survey of 530 households. The refined catchment area is sub-divided into five main zones for ease of analysis (see Appendix A)4. The proforma for the telephone interviews and the survey results are provided in Appendix B;

(ii) Estimates of existing and future population based on per capita expenditure projections. Population estimates within the catchment area and local per capita expenditure figures were provided by Experian. Assumptions regarding future population growth are based on ONS / Derbyshire County Council population projections for Derbyshire;

(iii) Assessment of the existing market share of expenditure by residents within the catchment area experienced by the two centres (provided by the household survey);

3 2004 has been used as the base year as this is the most recent year for which all necessary data can be gathered. 4 Six zones were initially identified for the catchment area with one being dropped after 30 respondents in postcode zone DE45 1 indicated that only a very small proportion of residents in this area utilised Matlock or Wirksworth for shopping.



(iv) Assessment of existing and committed retail floorspace provision in Derbyshire Dales and surrounding local authority areas;

(v) Turnover estimates of existing and committed retail floorspace based on national benchmarks for major retailers and independent retailers;

(vi) Assessment of net expenditure and floorspace capacity taking into account long term patterns of growth in expenditure per capita, population growth, increases in floorspace turnover efficiency over time (£/sq.m) and potential changes in the District’s market share.

6.4 Given the sensitivity of the forecasting analysis to changes in key assumptions, four future scenarios have been designed. This allows the forecasting process to be able to test all reasonable outcomes based on both optimistic and conservative assumptions. Together the scenarios provide a comprehensive assessment of future retail need, which unlike the reliance on a single set of assumptions, ensure robust and objective results to inform policy development. It is important to highlight that the quantitative assessment which will directly inform LDF town centre and retail policies will, in part, depend on the Council’s future Core Strategy of the new development plan. Of particular importance will be the preferred policy approach to be taken to population and housing growth, town centre renaissance and concentration of new development.

6.5 The analysis set out in this Section is based on the following four scenarios which have been developed by the consultant’s:

(i) No population growth and constant market share;

(ii) Moderate population growth and constant market share;

(iii) No population growth and increased market share5;

(iv) Moderate population growth and increased market share.

6.6 The analysis also gives consideration to the potential impact of key initiatives planned for the area and specific circumstances which may influence future expenditure patterns. These include:

• the proposed development of a new foodstore at Cawdor Quarry in Matlock;

5 Increased market share (3% increase per annum over the 10 year period between 2006 and end 2016) reflects scope to clawback an element of the existing high levels of expenditure leakage outside of the District.



• town centre change options and development opportunities being considered as part of the emerging Matlock Town Centre Masterplan Area Action Plan;

• policy aspirations and opportunities for increasing visitor spend in Matlock and Wirksworth and diversifying the local tourism market;

• the nature and extent of controversial planning applications for change of use of retail premises in Wirksworth;

• the current and future employment role of Matlock.

6.7 A forecasting period of 2004 to 2021 has been adopted and is presented in five yearly milestone results starting in 2006. It is particularly important to note that forecasting analyses are subject to increasing margins of error, the longer the forecasting period. Indeed, in planning for future retail provision at a local level it is inappropriate to use the results much beyond a 10 year timescale for purposes other than examining potential long term scenarios. Moreover, the analysis should also be subject to periodic review to take into consideration more up-to-date information and significant changes in local and/or sub-regional circumstances.

6.8 Table 6.1 sets out the key assumptions which underlie the retail forecasting model adopted for the District. Key sources are also identified.



Table 6.1 – Key Forecasting Model Assumptions

Indicator Value Source

Catchment Population (2004)

43,430 Experian Goad / ONS

Population Growth Catchment Area 0.467% pa (Scenarios 2 & 4)6 ONS, 2005 / Derbyshire CC

Market Share 2006 Convenience: 32.1% (Scenarios 1 & 2)

Comparison: 25.0% (Scenarios 3 & 4)

Atkins Household Survey 2006

Market Share 2011 (increasing 3% pa from 2006 empirical levels)

Convenience: 45.2% (Scenarios 1 & 2)

Comparison: 40% (Scenarios 3 & 4)

Atkins (reflecting scenario of claw back of some of existing leakage outside of the catchment area)

Market Share by end 2016 (increasing 3% pa from 2006 empirical levels)

Convenience: 65% (Scenarios 1 & 2)

Comparison: 58% (Scenarios 3 & 4)

Atkins (reflecting scenario of claw back of some of existing leakage outside of the catchment area)

Expenditure per capita in Catchment Area (2004 prices)

Convenience: £1,636

Comparison: £2,924

Experian Goad, July 2006

Expenditure Growth % pa

Convenience: 0.7%

Comparison: 4.3%

Experian Ultra Long Growth rate (Retail Planner Briefing Note 2.2, 2005)

Special Forms of Trading

Convenience: 1.9%

Comparison: 7.7%

Experian (Retail Planner Briefing Note 2.2, 2005)

Turnover Efficiency Rate

1% pa in £/sq.m. (convenience and comparison) Atkins

Source: Atkins

6.9 The remainder of this section sets out the results of the forecasting model in accordance with the steps outlined above.

6 Assumptions regarding population projections may be subject to change in light of potential future national, regional and/or local research and policy initiatives.



POPULATION PROJECTIONS

6.10 Table 6.2 sets out the population projections for the catchment area for the period 2006 to 2021. Based on ONS projections published by Derbyshire County Council, population growth for the catchment area is forecast to be 0.47% per annum over the period. On this basis, the catchment population is assumed to increase from 43,430 in 2004 to 47,013 in 2021 (Scenarios 2 and 4).

Table 6.2 – Catchment Area Population Growth (Scenarios 2 & 4)

2004 2006 2011 2016 2021 Average Growth PA (%)

Catchment Area 43,430 43,837 44,871 45,930 47,013 0.47

Source: Experian / ONS / Atkins Retail Expenditure Projections

6.11 The level of retail expenditure available within the defined catchment area to influence the requirement for providing additional retail floorspace in the two town centres is based on the application of expenditure per capita to the existing and future population of each zone. Moreover, consideration needs to be given to the expected growth in patterns of expenditure per capita. In line with standard practice, Experian’s ultra long-term growth rates of 0.7% per annum for convenience goods and 4.3% per annum for comparison goods7 have been applied.

6.12 Table 6.3 sets out the gross projected retail expenditure for residents living within catchment area. The population growth assumptions underlie the four scenarios.

7 Based on historical evidence of growth in the period 1967-2003 (national).



Table 6.3 – Gross Retail Expenditure Projections from Catchment Area Residents 2004-2021

Convenience (£,000) Comparison (£,000)

No Population Growth

(Scenarios 1 & 3)

Moderate Population Growth

(Scenarios 2 & 4)

No Population Growth

(Scenarios 1 & 3)

Moderate Population Growth

(Scenarios 2 & 4)

2004 69,702 69,702 117,211 117,211

2006 70,681 71,343 127,508 128,703

2011 73,189 75,618 157,383 162,606

2016 75,787 80,149 194,259 205,440

2021 78,477 84,952 239,774 259,558

Note: Includes discount for Special Forms of Trading8. See Table 5.1 for assumptions.

Source: Atkins

MARKET SHARE

6.13 Overall, the proportion of total catchment area expenditure spent in Matlock or Wirksworth in 2006 is:

• 32.1% for convenience goods; and

• 25.0% for comparison goods.

6.14 The following tables provide details of market share by major store and location for food and non-food goods.

6.15 It can be seen from Table 6.4 that over 27% of food expenditure from the catchment area is currently directed to Matlock. Significantly, less than 3% is spent in Wirksworth. Within Matlock, the majority of spending (23.4%) is attributable to Somerfield. Indeed, compared to company standard sales density ratios, this degree of market share suggests that the store is overtrading by approximately 70%. This provides an indication that the store is successful but also that that the current provision in the town centre is inadequate for food shopping.

6.16 Chesterfield, Belper, Ripley and Alfreton are the main locations outside the catchment area which attract leaked expenditure.

8 Experian benchmarks have been used as special form of trading market shares estimates. In particular a proportion of 1.9% of total has been considered for convenience goods, 7.7% for comparison and 5.5% for total retail. DTZ SEERA – Town Centre Futures, November 2004.



Table 6.4 – Market Share 2006 – Convenience Goods (Food)

Shopping Location / Zone A B C D E Total

Co-op / Alldays Matlock 1.6% 0.0% 2.1% 0.9% 0.0% 1.0% Somerfield Matlock 43.4% 12.9% 31.6% 17.1% 3.2% 23.4% Matlock Market 0.8% 1.4% 3.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% Other, Matlock 3.9% 1.4% 3.2% 0.9% 1.1% 2.2% Matlock 49.6% 15.7% 40.0% 18.9% 4.2% 27.6% Kens Supermarket Wirksworth 0.0% 15.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 2.4% Wirksworth, Other 0.0% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% Wirksworth 0.0% 17.1% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 2.6% Tesco Chesterfield 7.0% 1.4% 13.7% 3.6% 0.0% 5.4% Morrison’s, the Pavements, Chesterfield 7.0% 2.9% 13.7% 7.2% 0.0% 6.4% Other, Chesterfield 16.3% 2.9% 11.6% 12.6% 0.0% 9.6% Chesterfield 30.2% 7.1% 38.9% 23.4% 0.0% 21.4% Bakewell 0.0% 0.0% 11.6% 0.9% 0.0% 2.4% Morrisons, Belper 2.3% 18.6% 1.1% 11.7% 46.3% 14.8% Other Belper 0.8% 5.7% 0.0% 3.6% 15.8% 4.8% Belper 3.1% 24.3% 1.1% 15.3% 62.1% 19.6% Ashbourne 0.0% 5.7% 0.0% 1.8% 0.0% 1.2% Buxton 0.0% 1.4% 1.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% Tesco, Alfreton 5.4% 4.3% 2.1% 13.5% 3.2% 6.0% Other, Alfreton 0.8% 1.4% 1.1% 1.8% 1.1% 1.2% Alfreton 6.2% 5.7% 3.2% 15.3% 4.2% 7.2% Sainsbury's Ripley 5.4% 1.4% 0.0% 17.1% 18.9% 9.0% Other Ripley 1.4% 1.1% 2.7% 3.2% 1.6% Ripley 5.4% 2.9% 1.1% 19.8% 22.1% 10.6% Derby 1.6% 11.4% 2.1% 1.8% 4.2% 3.6% Other 3.9% 8.6% 1.1% 2.7% 2.1% 3.4%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Source: Household Survey, 2006



6.17 Table 6.5 highlights the degree of food expenditure self-containment within each zone as well as leakage from each zone to shopping locations outside the catchment area. It can be seen that Zone A (Matlock) displays the greatest degree of self-containment for food. However, given the size and role of Matlock as a market town, the table highlights that the area remains subject to a large element of leakage to locations outside the catchment area.

6.18 Expenditure leakage beyond the catchment area is high from Zone B (Wirksworth) and very high from Zones D and E. This reflects the general lack of food shopping provision in these locations as well as a good degree of choice in other settlements. Interestingly, only a relatively small proportion of residents living in the Wirksworth zone (16%) choose to undertake most of their food shopping in nearby Matlock. A similar proportion (17%) choose to shop in Wirksworth. This provides another indication that Matlock currently underperforms its role as a market town for convenience shopping. It also suggests that Wirksworth is very limited in terms of choice for convenience shopping.

6.19 Despite the low amount of expenditure in Matlock by residents of Zone B (Wirksworth), residents of Zone C spend approximately 40% of total food expenditure in Matlock. This largely reflects the proximity of Darley Dale which contains a significant proportion of residents located in Zone C.

Table 6.5 - Food Expenditure Self Containment and Leakage by Zone (2006)

Zone A B C D E Total

A 49.6% 15.7% 40.0% 18.9% 4.2% 27.6%

B 0.0% 17.1% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 2.6% C, D & E 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Beyond Catchment 50.4% 67.1% 60.0% 81.1% 94.7% 69.8%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100.0% Source: Household Survey, 2006

6.20 Table 6.6 sets out the market share for clothing, footware and related comparison goods. It can be seen that market share for Matlock and particularly Wirksworth are very low even amongst the residents of Zones A and B. Similarly, Table 6.7 highlights the extent of leakage from the catchment area for these types of goods amounts to 90%. This is explained by the lack of choice and low quantum of provision of non-bulky comparison in Matlock and Wirksworth coupled with the draw of larger centres such as Chesterfield and Derby.



Table 6.6 - Market Share: Clothing, Footware, Fashion 2006


Matlock 15.1% 5.9% 7.7% 9.4% 1.1% 8.4% Wirksworth 0.8% 7.4% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 1.4% Chesterfield 56.3% 10.3% 68.1% 34.0% 2.1% 36.6% Belper 1.6% 4.4% 1.1% 3.8% 22.1% 6.4% Alfreton 1.6% 2.9% 0.0% 6.6% 1.1% 2.5% Ripley 0.0% 1.5% 0.0% 2.8% 6.3% 2.1% Derby 7.9% 52.9% 4.4% 20.8% 50.5% 24.7% Nottingham 6.3% 5.9% 2.2% 10.4% 5.3% 6.2% Sheffield 2.4% 0.0% 6.6% 3.8% 1.1% 2.9% Other 7.9% 8.8% 9.9% 8.5% 9.5% 8.8%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%


Table 6.7 - Self Containment & Leakage – Clothing, Footware, Fashion 2006


A 15.1% 5.9% 7.7% 9.4% 1.1% 8.4% B 0.8% 7.4% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 1.4% C, D & E 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%


6.21 Table 6.8 sets out the current market share for DIY and other bulky goods. Whilst Matlock plays a fairly limited role in this segment of the market, Wirksworth displays a relatively healthy share of expenditure for bulky goods. This is particularly the case in comparison to the town’s role in providing food and non-bulky shopping opportunities. Wirksworth’s relative strength in the bulky goods market reflects the town’s variety of small independent stores which trade successfully and enjoy a good degree of consumer loyalty. This provision of local stores is also likely to be popular with local residents in that their presence reduces the need to travel further distances to purchase and transport bulky goods.

6.22 Despite the importance of Wirksworth in drawing customers from all Zones except E for bulky goods shopping, overall leakage from the catchment area is over 60%. Chesterfield and Derby are key destinations for this type of shopping outside the catchment area (together accounting for around 41% of total catchment expenditure).



Table 6.8 - Market Share – DIY & Other Bulky Goods 2006


Wilkinsons, Matlock 0.8% 1.5% 4.2% 1.0% 0.0% 1.5% William Twigg, Matlock 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% Other Matlock 14.7% 4.4% 14.8% 6.9% 1.1% 9.0%

Matlock 17.1% 5.9% 18.9% 7.8% 1.1% 10.9% Wirksworth 30.1% 54.4% 23.2% 28.4% 9.9% 28.0% Homebase, Chesterfield 7.3% 0.0% 10.5% 6.9% 1.1% 5.6% Other Chesterfield 35.0% 4.4% 26.3% 21.6% 1.1% 19.6% Chesterfield 42.3% 4.4% 36.8% 28.4% 2.2% 25.3% Kingsway Retail Park Derby 1.6% 8.8% 1.1% 2.0% 25.3% 7.1% Other Derby 1.6% 16.2% 2.1% 8.8% 22.0% 9.2% Derby 3.3% 25.0% 3.2% 10.8% 47.3% 16.3%

Belper 0.0% 2.9% 0.0% 2.9% 20.9% 5.0% Online/Internet 4.1% 1.5% 4.2% 5.9% 3.3% 4.0% Other 3.3% 5.9% 13.7% 15.7% 15.4% 10.6%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%


Table 6.9 - Self Containment & Leakage – DIY & Other Bulky Goods 2006


A 17.1% 5.9% 18.9% 7.8% 1.1% 10.9% B 30.1% 54.4% 23.2% 28.4% 9.9% 28.0%

C, D & E 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%


Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%


6.23 Taking into account the market share for convenience and comparison goods, Table 6.10 highlights total expenditure within the catchment area in 2006.



Table 6.10 - Retail Expenditure in Catchment Area 2006

Expenditure (£,000)

Convenience 21,346

Comparison 31,877

Note: Includes discount for Special Forms of Trading. See Table 5.1 for assumptions. Excludes inflow of expenditure from outside catchment area

Source: Atkins

6.24 Tables 6.11 and 6.12 set out projections of existing and future retail expenditure in the catchment area for the period up to 2021. These projections are based on the scenarios described in paragraph 5.4 and the assumptions provided in Table 5.1.

Table 6.11 - Projections of Future Convenience Goods Expenditure (£’000)

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

2004 21,050 21,050 21,050 21,050

2006 21,346 21,546 21,346 21,546

2011 22,103 22,837 33,082 34,179

2016 22,888 24,205 45,624 48,250

2021 23,700 25,656 49,598 53,690

Source: Atkins. Note: See Table 5.1 for assumptions.

Table 6.12 - Projections of Future Comparison Goods Expenditure (£’000)

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

2004 29,303 29,303 29,303 29,303

2006 31,877 32,176 31,877 32,176

2011 39,346 40,652 62,953 65,042

2016 48,565 51,360 106,842 112,992

2021 59,944 64,889 139,069 150,544

Source: Atkins. Note: See Table 5.1 for assumptions.

TURNOVER

6.25 Section 3 of this report provides an assessment of the existing retail floorspace in Matlock and Wirksworth. In order to estimate the annual turnover of existing convenience and comparison floorspace in the two centres, a range of sales density ratios have been applied to the floorspace specific stores using national benchmarks



for these operators9. In accordance with standard practice, estimates for independent retailers have been based on assumptions drawing on experience elsewhere and specialist knowledge.

6.26 Table 6.13 summarises estimates of current turnover from existing floorspace in each of the two retail centres.

Table 6.13 - Estimates of Existing Retail Turnover in Matlock & Wirksworth (£’000).

Matlock Wirksworth Total

Convenience 15,208 910 16,118

Comparison excluding VAT 20,644 2,416 23,060

Comparison including VAT 24,257 2,839 27,096

Source: Atkins / Retail Rankings & Verdict 2005. Turnover figures are based on ratios of £/sqm net pa. Comparison turnover includes adjustment for VAT @ 17.5%.

6.27 Table 6.14 sets out estimates of total turnover for convenience and comparison goods in Matlock and Wirksworth during the period up to 2021. These estimates are based on an efficiency ratio of 1% pa and exclude potential developments and vacant premises.

Table 6.14 - Projections of Future Retail Turnover (£’000)

Convenience Comparison (inc. VAT)

2006 16,278 27,367

2011 17,109 28,763

2016 17,982 30,230

2021 18,899 31,772

Source: Atkins.

Note: Comparison turnover includes adjustment for VAT @ 17.5%. Efficiency ratio (increase in floorspace turnover) assumed at 1% pa. Excludes proposals and vacancies.

CAPACITY FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL FLOORSPACE

6.28 Taking into consideration the projections of future retail expenditure and floorspace turnover, Tables 6.15 to 6.18 set out the study findings in terms of potential net capacity for additional floorspace collectively in Matlock and Wirksworth. This is calculated for each year by subtracting expected turnover from the various estimates for future expenditure. A sales density ratio (£/sqm) is then applied to estimate the potential need for additional retail development.

9 Retail Rankings & Verdict 2005.



6.29 The tables provide estimates for each of the four scenarios described earlier in this section and exclude proposals for new stores and existing vacant floorspace.

Table 6.15 - Future Retail Needs (Scenario 1)

Scenario 1 No population growth Constant market share (2006 levels) 2006 2011 2016 2021 Convenience Residual Spending (£ '000) 5,067 4,994 4,905 4,801 Sales per sqm of new net floorspace 8,242 8,663 9,105 9,569 Capacity/need for new net floorspace sqm 615 576 539 502

Comparison Residual Spending (£ '000) 4,510 10,583 18,335 28,172

Sales per sqm of new net floorspace 3,606 3,790 3,983 4,187 Capacity/need for new net floorspace sqm

1,251 2,792 4,603 6,729

Source: Atkins. Excludes planning commitments. Totals subject to rounding.


Scenario 2 Moderate population growth Constant market share (2006 levels) 2006 2011 2016 2021 Convenience Residual Spending (£ '000) 5,263 5,728 6,223 6,756 Sales per sqm of new net floorspace 8,242 8,663 9,105 9,569 Capacity/need for new net floorspace sqm 639 661 684 706



1,334 3,137 5,305 7,911





Scenario 3 No population growth Increasing market share 2006 2011 2016 2021 Convenience Residual Spending (£ '000) 5,067 15,972 27,642 30,698 Sales per sqm of new net floorspace 8,242 8,663 9,105 9,569 Capacity/need for new net floorspace sqm 615 1,844 3,036 3,208



1,251 9,021 19,233 25,629


Table 6.18 - Future Retail Needs (Scenario 4) Scenario 4 Moderate population growth Increasing market share 2006 2011 2016 2021 Convenience Residual Spending (£ '000) 5,267 17,070 30,268 34,791 Sales per sqm of new net floorspace 8,242 8,663 9,105 9,569 Capacity/need for new net floorspace sqm 639 1,971 3,324 3,636


Sales per sqm of new net floorspace 3,606 3,790 3,983 4,187 Capacity/need for new net floorspace sqm 1,334 9,572 20,777 28,370


IMPLICATIONS

6.30 Tables 6.15 to 6.18 demonstrate that, under the four scenarios, based on the expenditure forecasts there is a potential need in the District for additional development of:

• 576 to 1,971 sq.m (net) convenience floorspace by 2011;

• 502 to 3,324 sq.m (net) convenience floorspace by 2016;



• 2,792 to 9,572 (net) comparison floorspace by 2011; and

• 4,603 to 20,777 sq.m (net) comparison floorspace by 2016.

6.31 The range of possible outcomes from the capacity analyses illustrates the sensitivity of underlying assumptions adopted in the model. Consequently, in planning for new retail provision in Matlock and Wirksworth, it is important to ensure that the most realistic and achievable assumptions are utilised when quantifying future floorspace need in the two towns. Market share and population growth are the two key determinants which affect the outcome of the scenarios set out above. Estimates of future capacity are particularly sensitive to changes in market share.

6.32 In establishing robust estimates of need and opportunity for retail growth in Matlock and Wirksworth, the results of the capacity analyses should be tempered by giving particular consideration to the following local factors:

• the effect of implementing existing planning permissions within and outside the catchment area;

• the high degree of expenditure leakage outside of the catchment area and potential for clawback;

• the extent to which existing stores are over or under-trading;

• the changing role of the town centres as destinations in their own right for tourism, leisure and related uses; and

• the employment role of the town centres and effect of daily in-commuters.

Planning Commitments

6.33 It is important to take into consideration the likely impact of development commitments both within and outside the catchment area on estimates of future retail capacity. With regard to significant planning commitments within the catchment area, these can potentially affect capacity estimates and broader shopping behaviour by:

• reducing any surplus capacity in the short-term; and

• encouraging greater trade draw to the town centres in which the commitments are located. In the medium term, new stores of a significant size and quality can play an important role in clawing back expenditure which previously leaked to locations outside the catchment area.



6.34 Within Derbyshire Dales, and specifically Matlock and Wirksworth, only one significant planning commitment has been identified. This is the proposed Sainsbury’s store at Cawdor Quarry, Matlock which is likely to provide a total floorspace of 2,600 sq.m net of which 20% would be given over to the sales of comparison goods. Table 6.19 illustrates the potential effect on the quantitative capacity analyses at key dates.

Table 6.19 - Net Floorspace Capacity 2006-21 (‘000 sq.m. net)

Scenario Goods Type 2006 2011 2016 2021

1 Convenience -1,465 -1,504 -1,541 -1,578

Comparison 731 2,272 4,083 6,209

2 Convenience -1,441 -1,419 -1,396 -1,374

Comparison 814 2,617 4,785 7,391

3 Convenience -1,465 -236 956 1,128

Comparison 731 8,501 18,713 25,109

4 Convenience -1,441 -109 1,244 1,556

Comparison 814 9,052 20,257 27,850

Convenience

6.35 Table 6.19 indicates that, having taken into consideration the Sainsbury’s proposal for Matlock, there is no surplus capacity in 2006 for convenience floorspace. This remains the case under all four scenarios at 2011. It is not until 2016 when surplus capacity becomes available for convenience floorspace.

6.36 Whilst the capacity analysis does not provide any significant justification for further convenience floorspace in addition to the Sainsbury’s proposal over the next five years, it is important not to undermine the current need for new food provision. The proposed food store for Matlock will be an important driver in attracting additional shoppers to the town. This is likely to have a significant impact on existing levels of expenditure leakage to surrounding settlements (outside the catchment area). Consequently, on the assumption that a new foodstore similar to that proposed by Sainsbury’s is implemented, it is likely that Scenario 4 will provide a reasonable basis on which to plan for convenience shopping over the next 5 to 10 years taking account of the other factors discussed below.

6.37 Whilst it is reasonable to assume that the Sainsbury’s proposal will have a positive effect on trade draw to Matlock, the capacity analysis indicates that there is little scope for further convenience developments over the next 5 years. This is emphasised not only by the limited quantum of residual expenditure but also the on-



going choice provided by settlements outside the catchment area. Moreover, the offer of other centres will be strengthened by a significant convenience store development planned for Clay Cross (comprising approximately 5,364 sq.m gross for major food retailer).

6.38 The only potential exception to capping any further convenience development within the study area may relate to the provision of small top-up facilities. These are important to reinforce the role of smaller towns such as Wirksworth as a focus for the local catchment population. Such facilities also add to the viability and vitality of these towns. Given the lack of food retailing opportunities in Wirksworth and the substantial degree of leakage from this local zone, it would be reasonable to permit the provision of up to 2 local convenience units in appropriate locations within the town. However, these should not be greater than 200 sq.m. net.

Comparison

6.39 Table 6.19 demonstrates only a limited amount of immediate surplus capacity for additional comparison floorspace. However, a significant surplus is evident by 2011 with a quantitative need of 9,000 sq.m net evident under the most growth-oriented Scenario (4) in five years time. This increases potentially to a maximum of 20,000 sq.m net in 2016.

6.40 As for convenience shopping in the study area (with the exception of bulky goods in Wirksworth), market shares are low for comparison goods. Consequently, significant quantitative need can only be demonstrated if it can be assumed that a reasonable increase in market share / expenditure clawback can take place over the next 10 to 15 years. Whilst focused on food shopping, the implementation of the Sainsbury’s proposal will have a positive impact on Matlock’s trade draw in the future. Moreover, the strategic factors described later in this section are also likely to increase the scope for expenditure clawback. However, assessing the realistic degree of clawback and associated increase in market share for comparison goods requires consideration of the following issues:

• type of comparison goods and floorspace;

• qualitative features and balance of existing provision in Matlock and Wirksworth; and

• planned development within and outside the catchment area.

6.41 With regard to the type of comparison goods being sold, this study has already distinguished between clothing and other fashion goods (non-bulky) and DIY and other bulky goods. With regard to the latter, it was highlighted that Wirksworth



attracts a significant draw of expenditure as a result of its provision of relatively small, independent and successful stores. Currently, Matlock is not a strong performer in terms of bulky goods floorspace provision. Conversely, Wirksworth does not play a strong role in the provision of non-bulky comparison goods units whilst Matlock has a reasonably good mix and range of these types of stores. We consider it is important to protect the respective roles which differentiate Matlock and Wirksworth.

6.42 In planning for potential additional bulky goods foorspace in the study area, it is important that a proposal presently exists for the development of a Wickes DIY store (2,787 sq.m gross) in Darley Dale on the site of the existing DFS storage and distribution centre (B8). Whilst, at the time of writing, the proposal did not have planning permission, it is necessary for this study to assess the potential impact on capacity levels should the store receive consent. Outside the study area, a large DIY store has planning permission on the Derby Road south of Chesterfield town centre.

6.43 On the assumption that both the Darley Dale and Chesterfield proposals are implemented, we consider that there is insufficient surplus capacity to enable the construction of other large DIY stores in the study area without threatening the viability of smaller, independent stores. However, this should not apply to the provision of additional units aimed at independent traders which complement the existing offer of Matlock but particularly Wirksworth. Such units should not exceed approximately 450 sq.m. net.

6.44 Considering the results of the capacity analyses and the existing qualitative features of Matlock and Wirksworth, we consider that the provision of additional comparison floorspace serving the non-bulky goods market offers the greatest potential growth sector for Matlock and Wirksworth. The former has a reasonably good mix of non-bulky shopping facilities although there is potential for significant improvement. With an increasing ability to clawback expenditure lost to other locations, we consider that plans for increasing provision for this type of shopping could be based on a hybrid of Scenarios 2 and 4.

6.45 Overall, excluding the Wickes proposal for Darley Dale, we consider that there is scope for an additional 4,500 sq.m. (net) of comparison floorspace by 2011 and 8,000 sq.m (net) by 2016. Including the Wickes proposal, we estimate that surplus capacity drops to 3,000 sq.m. (net) and 6,500 sq.m (net) respectively. The majority of additional floorspace should be for provision of non-bulky goods in Matlock. This should aim to reinforce Matlock’s role as the key market town in the Derbyshire Dales District whilst complementing Wirksworth’s community role.



Leakage & Potential Clawback

6.46 Reference has already been made above regarding the importance of achieving a significant degree of clawback of leaked expenditure to create surplus retail capacity in Matlock and Wirksworth. It has also been highlighted that increasing the quality and scale of targeted provision in the town centres (particularly Matlock) is likely to have a positive impact on trade draw. Further discussion is provided below regarding the role of wider initiatives aimed at significantly improving the tourism and leisure function of Matlock which could also have the effect of increasing trade draw.

6.47 The other significant factor which impacts on a centre’s scope for clawing back expenditure relates to the degree of over or under-trading of existing shops10. Where existing stores are over-trading, this tends to indicate not only that the businesses are successful but also that there is an undersupply of retail floorspace relative to the catchment population. Our initial investigations indicate that many of the most significant stores in Matlock are over-trading. This is certainly the case for Somerfield which is over-trading by approximately 60%11.

6.48 Consequently, anecdotal evidence that stores are over-trading in Matlock indicates that there is latent demand for additional floorspace in the town. Moreover, it also suggests that there are qualitative deficiencies related to lack of choice and diversity in the centre.

Tourism & Leisure Role

6.49 Matlock and Wirksworth are attractive and popular destinations for day-trip tourists and people seeking a range of leisure activities. This reflects the inherent strengths and appeal of the towns themselves as well as their strategic location as a gateway to the Peak District.

6.50 Derbyshire Dales District Council and its partners have been pursuing a range of initiatives to improve the quality and scope of tourism and leisure capacity of Matlock in particular. This includes the improvement of open space and related leisure facilities in the town centre, the development of a detailed masterplan for the town centre, and plans for a major multi-purpose leisure facility on the outskirts of the town (‘The Dimple’). Collectively, these measures are likely to be successful in attracting greater tourist and leisure numbers and associated expenditure to the town. Moreover, it is important to highlight that structural changes in tourism demand reinforce the role of towns such as Matlock and Wirksworth as important growth

10 Over-trading represents a higher amount of sales revenue per sq.m relative to the national company benchmark. Under-trading is the converse. 11 Based on household survey (2006)



locations in terms of visitor numbers. These structural changes indicate growth in demand for high quality, short leisure breaks and business related tourism.

6.51 In implementing these strategic initiatives, the profile of Matlock will rise as more local, regional and national visitors are drawn to the town. This is likely to have a positive effect on retail demand as a result of two key factors:

(i) Contributing to clawback of retail expenditure as more use is made of the town for uses other than retail (particularly leisure); and

(ii) Direct expenditure on retail goods by visitors that is not accounted for by the household-driven capacity analyses.

6.52 With regard to the latter, we have provided estimates of the likely direct demand for retail floorspace arising from visitor expenditure. This is summarised in Table 6.20.

Table 6.20 - Tourism Impact on Matlock Retail Demand

Spending 2006 2011 2016 2021

Convenience 441,323 481,547 531,666 587,003

Comparison 661,985 722,320 797,500 880,504

Total 1,103,308 1,203,867 1,329,166 1,467,507 Sales Density Convenience 8,242 8,663 9,105 9,569

Comparison 3,606 3,790 3,983 4,187 Floorspace (sq.m)

Convenience 54 56 58 61 Comparison 184 191 200 210

Total 237 246 259 272

Source: Base shopping expenditure: ETC, STEAM Model for Matlock 2003 Projections assumed 1.6% growth in visitor expenditure pa up to 2010 & 2.0%pa growth after 2010 (East Midlands Tourism Strategy, EMDA)

6.53 Table 6.20 indicates that direct tourism expenditure on shopping in Matlock currently amounts to approximately £1.1million per annum12. Assuming an approximate split of 40% convenience and 60% comparison, this is sufficient to sustain a total of 237 sq.m net retail floorspace. The table also provides projections of tourism expenditure in Matlock based on growth targets set out in the East Midlands Tourism Strategy (Emda). Whilst actual tourism expenditure growth in Matlock over the next

12 ETC, STEAM Model (2003). The equivalent data was not available for Wirksworth.



10-15 years may well exceed the regional targets, it is important for our estimates not to be over-optimistic in terms of tourism-related demand for retail. However, it is important for the Council to set in place a robust monitoring system of tourism expenditure in the District and the main settlements. This can provide the basis for updating the evidence base on which informed planning policy decisions can be made.

Employment Role

6.54 Another factor which requires consideration in planning for retail development in a settlement such as Matlock relates to floorspace demand created by the town’s workplace population. This is particularly important in Matlock in that its workplace population (7,200) is high relative to its resident population (approximately 10,000)13. Moreover, the number of people working in Matlock is relatively high given the town’s rural location. Matlock provides a base for both Derbyshire Dales District Council and Derbyshire County Council which largely explains the significance of the town as an employment location.

6.55 Table 6.21 provides an estimate of the potential demand for retail floorspace created by expenditure by the daily workplace population on convenience and comparison goods in Matlock town centre. Whilst the estimates set out in the table reflect the entire workplace population (excluding self-employment), the per head expenditure estimates are based on a comprehensive employee survey carried out by Derbyshire CC and Derbyshire Dales DC. It is important to note that the estimates have been discounted to allow for the expenditure of workers who live in the study catchment area and therefore are accounted for by the household survey14.

Table 6.21 – Matlock Workforce Retail Demand

Expenditure Convenience Comparison

Person per week £25 £25

Person per year £1,000 £1,000

All per year £4,279,800 £4,279,800

Floorspace 535 1,070 Source: Base workplace expenditure data provided by public sector employee survey (Derbyshire CC). Floorspace demand estimates provided by Atkins.

13 Source: Neighbourhood Statistics, ONS. 14 The public sector employee survey indicated that 40% of workers in Matlock live within the catchment area. This ratio has been applied to the entire workforce population in Matlock.



6.56 The table indicates that the daytime workplace population in Matlock sustains approximately 500 sq.m (net) of convenience floorspace and 1,000 sq.m (net) of comparison floorspace. These estimates have not been projected for future years in order to avoid the potential for being over-optimistic in terms of worker-related floorspace demand. This is particularly important given the need to allow for the fact that a proportion of residents living within the catchment area work outside this area. Consequently these residents will support the demand for retail floorspace in locations other than Matlock and Wirksworth.



7. CONCLUSIONS

INTRODUCTION

7.1 The study provides a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the retail need in Matlock and Wirksworth in the period up to 2021. The approach to the study is based on bespoke projections of expenditure on convenience and comparison goods within the defined catchment area illustrated in Appendix A.

OVERALL FINDINGS

7.2 The capacity analysis has shown that a high degree of expenditure from the study catchment area leaks to other, larger settlements in the surrounding area (particularly Chesterfield, Belper, Derby). The degree of leakage is especially high for non-bulky comparison goods. The high degree of leakage reflects a relatively low market share of available expenditure from the catchment area enjoyed by Matlock and Wirksworth.

7.3 In planning for future retail provision, any significant element of growth in floorspace is dependent primarily on the ability to increase the towns’ market share by clawing back some of the lost expenditure. Whilst the scale and diversity of existing and planned provision in major settlements to the east of Matlock and Wirksworth will always attract a significant amount of expenditure from the catchment area, it is important to highlight that current low levels of market share presents an opportunity for retail operators to absorb latent trade from the local catchment population.

Convenience

7.4 There is little scope for an increase in convenience provision in Matlock and Wirksworth in addition to the Sainsbury’s proposal. Nevertheless, it is important for the results of the quantitative analysis not to distract from some of the key qualitative deficiencies in the centres. Consequently, we consider that planning policies should not restrict the market from improving the provision of small top-up facilities in both towns. These are important to reinforce the role of market towns as a focus for the local catchment population and add positively to local viability and vitality.



Comparison

7.5 The study has indicated that there is sufficient surplus capacity to support the provision of additional bulky and non-bulky floorspace to serve the Matlock and Wirksworth markets.

7.6 Excluding the Wickes proposal for Darley Dale, we consider that there is scope for an additional 4,500 sq.m. (net) of comparison floorspace by 2011 and 8,000 sq.m (net) by 2016 to serve both towns. Including the Wickes proposal, we estimate that surplus capacity drops to 3,000 sq.m. (net) and 6,500 sq.m (net) respectively.

7.7 In considering proposals for large comparison outlets, which are mostly likely to come forward from bulky goods operators, we consider that it is particularly important to have regard to:

• the potential impact on small, independent traders established in Matlock and Wirksworth;

• the need to satisfy the sequential test; and

• the appropriateness of scale and nature of proposed development in light of the character and role of both towns.

7.8 In addition to providing estimates of future retail demand from residents living in the catchment area, this study has also given consideration to tourism and workplace demand for retail floorspace. In terms of convenience demand, the scale of additional need arising from tourism and workplace demand is insufficient to justify a deviation from our conclusions provided above in respect of resident catchment demand. However, the tourism and workplace factor reinforce the need to allow flexibility in the provision of small convenience stores in both Wirksworth and Matlock.

7.9 The most significant gap in retail provision in Matlock and Wirksworth is in the non-bulky comparison goods category. Improving the choice and diversity of stores providing these goods should be an important element of the strategy to rejuvenate and improve the town centres.

7.10 Consequently, taking into consideration our estimates of tourism and workplace retail demand, we conclude that:



• Excluding the Wickes proposal at Darley Dale, we propose there is sufficient capacity for an additional 5,500 sq.m (net) of comparison floorspace by 2011 and 9,500 sq.m (net) by 2016.

• Including the Wickes proposal, we propose there is sufficient capacity for additional 4,000 sq.m (net) of comparison floorspace by 2011 and 8,000 sq.m (net) by 2016.

7.11 The following sets out the implications of the study findings for Matlock and Wirksworth as separate settlements.

MATLOCK

7.12 Matlock is one of the key market towns in the District and is significantly larger and more diverse compared to Wirksworth. It provides an important focus for shopping, leisure, employment and provision of services in the Derbyshire Dales.

7.13 In 2004, the Town Council commissioned a Healthcheck and Action Plan. Despite the attractiveness of Matlock and its strong market town role, the document highlighted a number of key weaknesses including:

• People choosing to shop in other centres rather than Matlock;

• The need for functional and physical improvements to the town centre;

• Congestion and poor linkages within the town centre;

• Lack of a major, good-sized supermarket; and

• Need for improved diversity and choice of shopping opportunities.

7.14 These views were reinforced in the residents household survey conducted as part of this study. In particular, the survey highlighted:

• The importance of the centre in being close to residents’ homes and serving as a focus for the local community;

• Lack of diversity and choice for all main types of goods;

• Lack of major food shopping facility; and

• Need for investment in the environment and layout of the town centre.



7.15 Despite the current weaknesses of Matlock as a shopping destination, it is important to highlight that a range of significant initiatives have taken place in, and are planned for Matlock, which are likely to increase the draw of shoppers to the town. In particular, the provision of new and improved tourism and leisure facilities will raise the profile of Matlock as a visitor destination in its own right. Moreover, this provision is set in the context of expanding tourism and leisure demand for high quality short-breaks in rural areas.

7.16 Moreover, implementation of plans to develop a major new retail store (Sainsbury’s) in Matlock will have a positive effect on other traders in the town. Increasing the provision of good quality retail space will have an upward impact on the catchment area’s market share.

7.17 Whilst the Sainsbury’s proposal will be an important driver in attracting additional shoppers to the town, the capacity analysis indicates that there is little scope for a significant increase in convenience provision over and above this (particularly in the period up to 2011). Nevertheless, as highlighted above, we consider that planning policies should not restrict the market from improving the provision of small top-up facilities if commercial market conditions are suitable.

7.18 Given the role of Matlock as a key market town in the District and the potential for assembling new significant, high quality development sites through the AAP, we consider that the majority of new comparison provision for the study catchment area should be focussed in the town. Consequently, preference for all forms of new major retail development should be given to Matlock. As a guideline, this may include all A1 proposals greater than 200 sq.m (net).

7.19 Improving the scale and diversity of the retail offer is particularly important to sustaining the future of Matlock as a key market town. Moreover, the need to improve this type of provision is also important to the tourism and leisure offer of Matlock.

WIRKSWORTH

7.20 Wirksworth is a small town with a population of approximately 5,000 (around 50% that of Matlock). The town is characterised by a mix of small, mostly independent convenience and comparison retailers as well as a range of service activities. Vacancies are low and environmental conditions are of a good quality. Building on the work of the District and Town Councils, this study has assessed the perceptions of both local retailers and residents in terms of Wirksworth strengths and weaknesses as a place to shop and trade.



7.21 Many local retailers are well-established independent traders that are committed to the town through strong community ties. The businesses largely serve the immediate population of Wirksworth which reflects its role as a local/neighbourhood centre. The traders consider that large retail developments would be inappropriate for the size and nature of the town and could threaten to undermine the viability of small stores. They also highlighted the growing importance of tourism and passing trade to the future prosperity of town as a shopping location. Indeed, they highlighted the importance of local attractions and events including the September Arts Festival, National Stone Centre, Heritage Centre and the Ecclesbourne Valley Railway.

7.22 The household survey reinforced the views of local traders in relation to Wirksworth serving a very local market, giving residents the choice not to travel for aspects of their shopping needs. However, given the scale of Wirksworth as a retail location, it is inevitable that a significant component of retail needs will be provided by other centres unless the role and character of Wirksworth is to be transformed. Of particular appeal to local residents who use Wirksworth for shopping is the town’s attractive environment, availability of niche and traditional shops and strong sense of community. Residents are less satisfied with the availability of car parking.

7.23 With regard to planning for future retail provision in Wirksworth, it is important to consider this in light of the town’s current role as well as that of Matlock. The latter provides a significantly larger retail offer and serves a broader catchment area reflecting its role as a key market town in the Dales. Consequently, we consider that it is appropriate to plan for most additional retail development to be located in Matlock, subject to the sequential test. However, despite the appropriateness of maintaining the respective roles of Matlock and Wirksworth, there are a number of important factors that should be taken into consideration in developing planning policies for the town:

• a small element of retail expenditure clawback to Wirksworth could be important to maintaining the competitiveness of existing (and future) traders;

• a greater degree of choice particularly for convenience goods would be beneficial to local residents and tourists and would improve the town’s viability and vitality; and

• facilitating growth in the provision of traditional and niche shopping facilities would complement Wirksworth’s existing role, strengthen its viability and vitality and appeal equally to local residents and tourists.

7.24 Bearing in mind the above factors, we consider that small scale retail proposals should be promoted for Wirksworth. Collectively, these are unlikely to impact significantly on the capacity for additional retail floorspace within the catchment area.



However, appropriate new provision in Wirksworth could make an important contribution to the health of the town. Subject to size restrictions, this new provision could take place within both the convenience and comparison categories. With regard to the latter, particular emphasis should be given in policies to strengthening the role of Wirksworth as a location for the provision of niche, largely independent shops.

7.25 Whilst adopting positive planning policies for the provision of some new floorspace in Wirksworth, we consider that it is essential for proposals to complement the existing role of the town. Consequently, proposals should be small scale in size, say up to a maximum of 200 sqm (net). Moreover, policies should also require that proposals are in keeping with the character of Wirksworth and its growing role as a visitor destination.

ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSALS FOR RETAIL DEVELOPMENT

7.26 Having regard to this assessment of the potential need for broad retail floorspace categories in Matlock and Wirksworth, applications for new retail developments should be considered on their own merit. Development should be appropriate in terms of scale and the nature of the centre’s existing role and shopping patterns evident within the catchment area.

7.27 The capacity assessment set out in this report should be used as a guide to inform LDF policies for convenience and comparison shopping. When considering proposals for niche retail markets, policies should place the onus on applicants to demonstrate the need for such uses, particularly for relatively large schemes.

7.28 All proposals for new retail development should be assessed in accordance with the sequential approach. Moreover, these tests should be guided by a goods-based assessment rather than a format-based assessment in line with Government guidance. Any deviation from this principle should be justified by a developer, who should demonstrate that its proposal cannot be implemented using a goods-based approach.

7.29 It is important to note that all estimates of retail capacity should be subject to review as more up-to-date information becomes available and/or retail development circumstances change significantly.

Matlock & Wirksworth Retail Capacity Study - Appendices

5035263 Appendices Flysheets.doc

APPENDIX A

Study Catchment Area


APPENDIX B (i)

Household Survey Proforma


1

APPENDIX B(i) MATLOCK AND WIRKSWORTH RETAIL CAPACITY STUDY HOUSEHOLD SURVEY PROFORMA Respondent Details Address

Postcode

Catchment Zone

A B C D E

Shopping Habits FOOD Q.1 In which town or shopping centre do you undertake most of your main shopping for food (one answer only) Study Area Town / Shopping Centre Co-op / Alldays, Matlock Somerfield, Matlock Matlock Market Kens Supermarket or Mini Market, Wirksworth Other Matlock Other Wirksworth Other Town / Shopping Centres Tesco, Chesterfield Sainsbury’s, Chesterfield Morrisons, The Pavements, Chesterfield Morrisons, Staveley, Chesterfield Somerfield, Chesterfield Co-op, Chesterfield Other Chesterfield Co-op, Bakewell Other Bakewell Darley Dale Morrisons, Belper Other Belper Sainsbury’s Ashbourne Other Ashbourne Co-op, Clay Cross Other Clay Cross Morrisons, Buxton


2

Study Area Town / Shopping Centre Other Buxton Tesco, Alfreton Other Alfreton Sainsbury’s, Ripley Other Ripley Mansfield Other All respondents should continue with survey even if they don’t predominantly shop in Matlock or Wirksworth Q.2 How often do you visit Matlock for food shopping Every

Day 2-6 Day

a Week

Once a

Week

Once a Fortnight

Once a

Month

Once a

Year

Less Often

Never

Shopping trips

Q.3. How often do you visit Wirksworth for food shopping Every

Day 2-6 Day

a Week

Once a

Week

Once a Fortnight

Once a

Month

Once a

Year

Less Often

Never

Shopping Trips

Q.4. What mode of transport do you use most often when you do your main food shopping?

Options

Own car

Shared car

Motorbike

Walk

Taxi

Train

Bicycle Bus

Other (Write In)


3

NON-FOOD Q.5 In which town or shopping centre do you undertake most of your shopping for clothing, footwear and other fashion goods. One answer only. Study Area Town / Shopping Centre Matlock Wirksworth Other Town / Shopping Centres Chesterfield Bakewell Darley Dale Belper Ashbourne Clay Cross Buxton Alfreton Ripley Mansfield Derby Nottingham Other All respondents should continue with survey even if they don’t predominantly shop in Matlock or Wirksworth Q.6 In which town or shopping centre do you undertake most of your shopping for products such as washing machines, fridges, furniture, DIY items. Bear in mind that this could include large out-of-town retail stores. One answer only. Study Area Town / Shopping Centre Wilkinsons, Matlock William Twigg, Matlock Other Matlock Wirksworth Other Town / Shopping Centres Homebase, Chesterfield Other Chesterfield Tabwell Tools, Bakewell The Home Store, Bakewell Other Bakewell Waterside Retail Park, Ilkeston Other Ilkeston Kingsway Retail Park, Derby Other Derby Darley Dale Belper


4

Study Area Town / Shopping Centre Ashbourne Clay Cross Buxton Alfreton The Home Improvement Centre,Ripley Mansfield Other Q.7. How often do you visit Matlock for non-food shopping Every

Day 2-6 Day

a Week

Once a

Week

Once a Fortnight

Once a

Month

Once a

Year

Less Often

Never

Shopping trips

Q.8. How often do you visit Wirksworth for non-food shopping Every

Day 2-6 Day

a Week

Once a

Week

Once a Fortnight

Once a

Month

Once a

Year

Less Often

Never

Shopping Trips

Q.9 Which mode of transport do you use most often when you shop for non-food items?

Options

Own car

Shared car

Motorbike

Walk

Taxi

Train

Bicycle

Bus

Underground

Other (Write In)


5

TOWN CENTRE QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT Q. 10 What do you like about the shopping in both Matlock and Wirksworth? Note: Multiple responses

Matlock Wirksworth

Good range of shops

Good supermarkets

Good range of services

Competitive prices

Street market

Close to home or work/can walk/cycle

Good walk/cycle ways

Able to park outside shops

Easy parking/good car parks

Good bus service

Good rail service

Good access for disabled people

Nothing

Don’t know

Other


6

Q.11. What do you like about both Matlock and Wirksworth in terms of layout and atmosphere? Note: Multiple responses

Matlock Wirksworth

Attractive environment/nice place

Clean and well maintained streets

Compact shopping centre/enclosed shopping centre

Safe/secure (cctv)

Friendly people/community

Nothing

Don’t know

Other

Q. 12 What do you dislike about the shopping in Matlock and Wirksworth? Note: Multiple responses

Matlock Wirksworth

Poor range of shops

No good supermarkets

Too expensive

Poor quality goods

Unattractive shops

Traffic congestion

Lack of parking

Cost of parking

Poor bus service

Poor rail service

Poor tube service

Poor access/facilities for disabled people


7

Matlock Wirksworth

Nothing

Don’t know

Other

Q.13. What do you dislike about Matlock’s and Wirksworth’s layout and atmosphere? Note: Multiple responses

Matlock Wirksworth

Unattractive environment

Streets dirty/badly maintained

Danger from vehicles

Poor security/unsafe

Poor street lightining

Pollution

Basic layout

Anti-social behaviour

Vandalism/graffiti

Nothing

Don’t know

Other

Q.14 What improvements or new facilities would encourage you to make more use of Matlock or Wirksworth town centres

Matlock Wirksworth

More major shops and stores

Bigger or better supermarket

Better range of shops

Better quality shops


8

Matlock Wirksworth

More entertainment/leisure facilities

More restaurants/cafes

On street entertainment/attraction

More parking

Closer parking

Lower parking charges

Better bus services/ bus station

Better pedestrian access

Better cycle ways

Cleaner/better maintained streets and pavements

More paved areas with no traffic/pedestrianisation

More/better seats and flower displays and litter bins etc…

More/better public toilets

Closed circuit TV cameras for security

Better facilities for disabled people

Reduced traffic levels/pollution

Nothing/Very little

Don’t know

Other


APPENDIX B (ii)

Household Survey Results


1 Appendix B(ii).doc

APPENDIX B (ii) – RESULTS OF HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

FOOD

Q1: In which town or shopping centre do you undertake most of your main shopping for food?

Table 1.1 – Main Locations for Food Shopping by Location of Respondent (%)

Catchment Zone A B C D E Study Area Town / Shopping Centre Co-op / Alldays Matlock 1.6 0.0 2.1 0.9 0.0 Somerfield Matlock 43.4 12.9 31.6 17.1 3.2 Matlock Market 0.8 1.4 3.2 0.0 0.0 Matlock, Other 3.9 1.4 3.2 0.9 1.1 Kens Supermarket Wirksworth 0.0 15.7 0.0 0.0 1.1 Wirksworth, Other 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other Town / Shopping Centres Tesco Chesterfield 7.0 1.4 13.7 3.6 0.0 Morrisons, the Pavements, Chesterfield 7.0 2.9 13.7 7.2 0.0 Other, Chesterfield 16.3 2.9 11.6 12.6 0.0 Other, Bakewell 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.9 0.0 Morrisons, Belper 2.3 18.6 1.1 11.7 46.3 Other Belper 0.8 5.7 0.0 3.6 15.8 Other Ashbourne 0.0 5.7 0.0 1.8 0.0 Other Claycross 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other Buxton 0.0 1.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 Tesco, Alfreton 5.4 4.3 2.1 13.5 3.2 Other, Alfreton 0.8 1.4 1.1 1.8 1.1 Sainsbury's Ripley 5.4 1.4 0.0 17.1 18.9 Other Ripley 0.0 1.4 1.1 2.7 3.2 Other Derby 1.6 11.4 2.1 1.8 4.2 Other 3.9 8.6 1.1 2.7 2.1

(Base: 500 respondents from catchment zones A, B, Ci, D and E)



Q2/3: How often do you visit Matlock / Wirksworth for food shopping?

Table 1.2 – Frequency of Visits to Matlock / Wirksworth for Food Shopping

Matlock Wirksworth No. % No. % Every Day 15 2.8 13 2.5 2-6 Days a Week 95 17.9 32 6.0 Once a Week 96 18.1 24 4.5 Once a Fortnight 43 8.1 15 2.8 Once a Month 62 11.7 22 4.2 Once a Year 21 4.0 11 2.1 Less Often 45 8.5 25 4.7 Never 153 28.9 388 73.2 Total 530 100 530 100

(Base: 530 respondents from all catchment zones A, B, Ci, Cii, D and E)

Q4: What mode of transport do you use most often when you do your main food shopping?

Table 1.3 – Main Mode of Transportation used for Food Shopping

No. % Own car 426 80.4 Shared Car 24 4.5 Motorbike 0 0.0 Walk 24 4.5 Taxi 7 1.3 Train 0 0.0 Bicycle 1 0.2 Bus 47 8.9 Other 0 0.0 Mobility Vehicle 1 0.2 Total 530 100




NON-FOOD

Q5: In which town or shopping centre do you undertake most of your shopping for clothing, footwear and other fashion items?

Table 1.4 – Main Locations for Clothes Shopping by Location of Respondent (%)

Catchment Zone A B Ci D E Matlock 15.0 5.9 7.4 9.3 1.1 Wirksworth 0.8 7.4 0.0 0.0 1.1 Chesterfield 55.9 10.3 65.3 33.6 2.1 Belper 1.6 4.4 1.1 3.7 22.1 Alfreton 1.6 2.9 0.0 6.5 1.1 Ripley 0.0 1.5 0.0 2.8 6.3 Derby 7.9 52.9 4.2 20.6 50.5 Nottingham 6.3 5.9 2.1 10.3 5.3 Sheffield 2.4 0.0 6.3 3.7 1.1 Other 7.9 8.8 9.5 8.4 9.5


Q6: In which town or shopping centre do you undertake most of your shopping for products such as washing machines, fridges, furniture, DIY items etc?

Table 1.5 – Main Locations for other Comparison Shopping by Location of Respondent (%)

Catchment Zone A B C D E Wilkinsons, Matlock 0.8 1.5 4.2 1.0 0.0 William Twigg, Matlock 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other Matlock 14.7 4.4 14.8 6.9 1.1 Wirksworth 30.1 54.4 23.2 28.4 9.9 Homebase, Chesterfield 7.3 0.0 10.5 6.9 1.1 Other Chesterfield 35.0 4.4 26.3 21.6 1.1 Kingsway Retail Park Derby 1.6 8.8 1.1 2.0 25.3 Other Derby 1.6 16.2 2.1 8.8 22.0 Belper 0.0 2.9 0.0 2.9 20.9 Online/Internet 4.1 1.5 4.2 5.9 3.3 Other 3.3 5.9 13.7 15.7 15.4




Q7/8: How often do you visit Matlock / Wirksworth for non-food shopping?

Table 1.6 – Frequency of visits to Matlock / Wirksworth

Matlock Wirksworth No. % No. %

Every Day 25 4.7 18 3.4 2-6 Days a Week 84 15.8 28 5.3 Once a Week 89 16.8 21 4.0 Once a Fortnight 52 9.8 16 3.0 Once a Month 95 17.9 60 11.3 Once a Year 28 5.3 53 10.0 Less Often 45 8.5 57 10.8 Never 112 21.1 277 52.3


Q9: Which mode of transport do you use most often when you shop for non-food items?

Table 1.7 – Mode of Transport used for non-Food Items

No. % Own Car 420 79.2 Shared Car 16 3.0 Motorbike 0 0.0 Walk 24 4.5 Taxi 5 0.9 Train 3 0.6 Bicycle 0 0.0 Bus 60 11.3 Mobility Vehicle 2 0.4




Q10: What do you like about shopping in both Matlock and Wirksworth?

Table 1.8 – Preferred Qualities of shopping in Matlock

No. % (all) % (of those that gave an answer)

Good range of shops 49 8.7 18.7 Good supermarkets 11 2.0 4.2 Good range of services 6 1.1 2.3 Competitive prices 8 1.4 3.1 Street market 3 0.5 1.1 Close to home/can walk/cycle 126 22.4 48.1 Good walk/cycle ways 4 0.7 1.5 Able to park outside shops 2 0.4 0.8 Easy Parking/Good Car Parks 11 2.0 4.2 Good Bus Service 6 1.1 2.3 Good Rail Service 1 0.2 0.4 Good Access for disabled people 2 0.4 0.8 Nothing 174 31.0 N/A Don't know 118 21.0 N/A Free Parking 1 0.2 0.4 Small/unusual shops 10 1.8 3.8 It's somewhere different 2 0.4 0.8 Do not shop in Matlock 8 1.4 N/A Friendly/nice 7 1.2 2.7 Children's play facilities 3 0.5 1.1 Resturants 2 0.4 0.8 Visiting Relatives 1 0.2 0.4 Charity Shops 2 0.4 0.8 Wilkinsons 2 0.4 0.8 Estate Agents 1 0.2 0.4 Relaxing 2 0.4 0.8 Total 562 100 100




Table 1.9 – Preferred Qualities of shopping in Wirksworth

No. % (all)

% (of those that gave an answer)

Good range of shops 39 6.9 23.2 Good supermarkets 8 1.4 4.8 Good range of services 8 1.4 4.8 Competitive prices 9 1.6 5.4 Street market 10 1.8 6.0 Close to home/can walk/cycle 43 7.6 25.6 Good walk/cycle ways 2 0.4 1.2 Able to park outside shops 2 0.4 1.2 Easy Parking/Good Car Parks 4 0.7 2.4 Good Bus Service 2 0.4 1.2 Good Rail Service 2 0.4 1.2 Good Access for disabled people 0 0.0 0.0 Nothing 89 15.8 N/A Don't know 282 50.0 N/A Small individual businesses 5 0.9 3.0 Don't shop in Wirksworth 25 4.4 N/A Cake shops/Coffee Shops etc 4 0.7 2.4 Westons Electrical Shops 7 1.3 4.2 Somewhere different 1 0.2 0.6 Nice/old fashioned 9 1.6 5.4 Butchers/Grocers 2 0.4 1.2 Shops close together 1 0.2 0.6 Small compact town 3 0.5 1.8 Cultural/Art Galleries 2 0.4 1.2 Does not have a supermarket 1 0.2 0.6 Factory Shop 3 0.5 1.8 Only visit one shop 1 0.2 0.6 Total 564 100 100




Q11: What do you like about Matlock and Wirksworth in terms of layout and atmosphere:

Table 1.10 – Preferred Qualities of Matlock in terms of layout and atmosphere


Attractive environment/nice place 185 29.6 48.7 Clean and well maintained streets 36 5.8 9.5 Compact shopping centre/enclosed shopping centre 27 4.3 7.1 Safe/Secure (CCTV) 7 1.1 1.8 Friendly people/community 84 13.5 22.1 Nothing 91 14.6 N/A Don't know 152 24.4 N/A Park 23 3.7 6.1 Convenient/accessible 3 0.5 0.8 Swimming Pool 1 0.2 0.3 Congested 1 0.2 0.3 River 1 0.2 0.3 Not as good as it used to be 2 0.3 0.5 Better than it was 1 0.2 0.3 Quiet/relaxing 2 0.3 0.5 Old fashioned 1 0.2 0.3 Don't visit there 1 0.2 N/A Good Parking/Free Parking 4 0.6 1.1 Xmas Parade 1 0.2 0.3 Holiday Atmosphere 1 0.2 0.3 Total 624 100 100




Table 1.11 - Preferred Qualities of Wirksworth in terms of layout and atmosphere


Attractive environment/nice place 104 17.4 45.2 Clean and well maintained streets 29 4.9 12.6 Compact shopping centre/enclosed shopping centre 21 3.5 9.1 Safe/Secure (CCTV) 4 0.7 1.7 Friendly people/community 58 9.7 25.2 Nothing 59 9.9 N/A Don't know 305 51.2 N/A Character 4 0.7 1.7 Library 1 0.2 0.4 Laid Back 1 0.2 0.4 Old fashioned/quaint 7 1.2 3.0 Don't visit there 1 0.2 N/A Quiet/peaceful 1 0.2 0.4 Easy Parking 1 0.2 0.4 Total 596 100 100




Q12: What do you dislike about the shopping in Matlock and Wirksworth?

Table 1.12 – Faults of Matlock Town Centre Retail Offer


Poor Range of Shops 207 26.5 34.8 No good supermarkets 114 14.6 19.2 Too expensive 26 3.3 4.4 Poor quality goods 28 3.6 4.7 Unattractive shops 15 1.9 2.5 Traffic congestion 54 6.9 9.1 Lack of parking 68 8.7 11.4 Cost of parking 38 4.9 6.4 Poor bus service 6 0.8 1.0 Poor rail service 1 0.1 0.2 Poor access/facilities for disabled people 3 0.4 0.5 Nothing 74 9.5 N/A Don't know 112 14.3 N/A Lack of clothes shops 5 0.6 0.8 Too many charity shops 10 1.3 1.7 Unattractive Park 2 0.3 0.3 Too busy/too many tourists 5 0.6 0.8 Poor pavements 1 0.1 0.2 Too sleepy 3 0.4 0.5 Too many tourist gift shops 1 0.1 0.2 Needs modernising 1 0.1 0.2 Banks don't open on Saturday 1 0.1 0.2 Prefer to shop elsewhere 1 0.1 0.2 Too far away to visit 1 0.1 0.2 Poor parade 1 0.1 0.2 Lack of toilets 1 0.1 0.2 General low opinion of Matlock as a whole 1 0.1 0.2 Poor Market 1 0.1 0.2 Total 781 100 100




Table 1.13 – Faults of Wirksworth Retail Offer


Poor Range of Shops 51 9.1 36.4 No good supermarkets 19 3.4 13.6 Too expensive 5 0.9 3.6 Poor quality goods 1 0.2 0.7 Unattractive shops 1 0.2 0.7 Traffic congestion 9 1.6 6.4 Lack of parking 23 4.1 16.4 Cost of parking 11 2.0 7.9 Poor bus service 2 0.4 1.4 Poor rail service 2 0.4 1.4 Poor access/facilities for disabled people 2 0.4 1.4 Nothing 125 22.2 N/A Don't know 298 52.9 N/A Too far away/do not visit 7 1.2 5.0 Everything 1 0.2 0.7 Poor market 2 0.4 1.4 Shops to small/too compact 2 0.4 1.4 Generally unattractive 1 0.2 0.7 Unfriendly 1 0.2 0.7 Total 563 100 100




Q13: What do you dislike about Matlock’s and Wirksworth’s layout and atmosphere?

Table 1.14 – Faults of Matlock in terms of Layout and Atmosphere


Unattractive environment 43 7.5 22.4 Streets dirty/badly maintained 19 3.3 9.9 Danger from vehicles 24 4.2 12.5 Poor security/unsafe 4 0.7 2.1 Poor street lighting 3 0.5 1.6 Pollution 10 1.7 5.2 Basic layout 33 5.8 17.2 Anti-social behaviour 10 1.7 5.2 Vandalism/graffiti 6 1.0 3.1 Nothing 197 34.4 N/A Don't know 183 32.0 N/A Poor Parking 6 1.0 3.1 First Parade 4 0.7 2.1 Too old fashioned 3 0.5 1.6 Too many tourists 2 0.3 1.0 Poor accessibility for disabled 2 0.3 1.0 Too built up around the centre 1 0.2 0.5 Too busy/congested 6 1.0 3.1 Does not cater for tourists 1 0.2 0.5 Boring/Dull 3 0.5 1.6 Lack of amenities/sports centre 1 0.2 0.5 Generally not nice 1 0.2 0.5 Not as good as it used to be 1 0.2 0.5 Crown Square Island 2 0.3 1.0 Too many empty buildings/shops 2 0.3 1.0 Run down/tatty 2 0.3 1.0 Poor Bakewell 1 0.2 0.5 Inconvenience 1 0.2 0.5 Bouncers on pub doors 1 0.2 0.5 Total 572 100 100




Table 1.15 – Faults of Wirksworth in terms of layout and atmosphere


Unattractive environment 8 1.5 12.7 Streets dirty/badly maintained 4 0.7 6.3 Danger from vehicles 7 1.3 11.1 Poor security/unsafe 4 0.7 6.3 Poor street lighting 1 0.2 1.6 Pollution 4 0.7 6.3 Basic layout 2 0.4 3.2 Anti-social behaviour 7 1.3 11.1 Vandalism/graffiti 4 0.7 6.3 Nothing 150 27.5 N/A Don't know 332 60.9 N/A Too Hilly 1 0.2 1.6 Too narrow coming in and out of Wirksworth 4 0.7 6.3 The change to the market square car park 2 0.4 3.2 Paying for parking 1 0.2 1.6 Poor parking 3 0.6 4.8 Too many tourists 1 0.2 1.6 Too out of the way 1 0.2 1.6 Too busy/congested 1 0.2 1.6 Don't visit/shop in Wirksworth 3 0.6 4.8 No atmosphere/no life 3 0.6 4.8 It's better than Matlock 2 0.4 3.2 Total 545 100 100.00




Q15: What improvements or new facilities would encourage you to make more use of Matlock or Wirksworth town centres?

Table 1.16 – Improvements that would Encourage Additional use of Matlock Town Centre

No. % (all) % (excluding don't

know's) More major shops and stores 142 12.9 14.6 Bigger or better supermarket 171 15.6 17.6 Better range of shops 148 13.5 15.3 Better quality shops 67 6.1 6.9 More entertainment/leisure facilities 30 2.7 3.1 More resturants/cafes 21 1.9 2.2 On street entertainment 7 0.6 0.7 More parking 82 7.5 8.5 Closer parking 38 3.5 3.9 Lower parking charges 39 3.6 4.0 Better bus services/bus station 18 1.6 1.9 Better pedestrian access 21 1.9 2.2 Better cycle ways 1 0.1 0.1 Cleaner/better maintained streets and pavements 10 0.9 1.0 More paved areas with no traffic/pedestrianisation 30 2.7 3.1 More/better seats and flower displays and litter bins 7 0.6 0.7 More/better public toilets 3 0.3 0.3 CCTV 4 0.4 0.4 Better facilities for disabled people 8 0.7 0.8 Reduced traffic levels/pollution 24 2.2 2.5 Nothing/very little 49 4.5 5.1 Don't know 127 11.6 N/A A new road/by pass 6 0.5 0.6 Less parking 1 0.1 0.1 The whole layout needs changing 5 0.5 0.5 Needs modernising 3 0.3 0.3 Shops spaced too far apart 1 0.1 0.1 Upgrade the Library 1 0.1 0.1 Public transport waiting area 1 0.1 0.1 Introduce park and ride 1 0.1 0.1 Better facilities for children 1 0.1 0.1 Re-introduce the tram 1 0.1 0.1 Marks and Spencer 3 0.3 0.3 McDonalds 1 0.1 0.1 More/Nicer Pubs 2 0.2 0.2 Less Charity Shops 2 0.2 0.2 Less pubs and clubs 2 0.2 0.2 Less Building Societies 2 0.2 0.2 Improve the market 4 0.4 0.4 Demolish Firs Parade 2 0.2 0.2 European style square 1 0.1 0.1 DIY Stores 4 0.4 0.4 Improved Bus Service 1 0.1 0.1 Pubs/Bars along the front 1 0.1 0.1 Banks open Saturday 2 0.2 0.2 A bridge 1 0.1 0.1 Better night life 1 0.1 0.1

Total 1097 100 100




Table 1.17 - Improvements that would Encourage Additional use of Wirksworth Town Centre

No. % (all) % (excluding don't know's)

More major shops and stores 44 6.6 10.5 Bigger or better supermarket 40 6.0 9.5 Better range of shops 40 6.0 9.5 Better quality shops 14 2.1 3.3 More entertainment/leisure facilities 8 1.2 1.9 More resturants/cafes 8 1.2 1.9 On street entertainment 4 0.6 1.0 More parking 39 5.8 9.3 Closer parking 12 1.8 2.9 Lower parking charges 15 2.2 3.6 Better bus services/bus station 7 1.0 1.7 Better pedestrian access 3 0.4 0.7 Better cycle ways 1 0.1 0.2 Cleaner/better maintained streets and pavements 6 0.9 1.4 More paved areas with no traffic/pedestrianisation 1 0.1 0.2 More/better seats and flower displays and litter bins 1 0.1 0.2 More/better public toilets 1 0.1 0.2 CCTV 1 0.1 0.2 Better facilities for disabled people 1 0.1 0.2 Reduced traffic levels/pollution 8 1.2 1.9 Nothing/very little 129 19.3 30.8 Don't know 250 37.4 N/A Better access for pushchairs 1 0.1 0.2 Bigger/better swimming pool 3 0.4 0.7 Improved public transport 3 0.4 0.7 Too far away 7 1.0 1.7 Bigger police presence 1 0.1 0.2 Better facilities for children 3 0.4 0.7 Less Pubs 1 0.1 0.2 Free Parking 1 0.1 0.2 Improved landscape maintenance 1 0.1 0.2 Introduce park and ride 1 0.1 0.2 Don't visit Wirksworth 3 0.4 0.7 Bypass 1 0.1 0.2 Better quality pubs 1 0.1 0.2 Banks open on Saturday 1 0.1 0.2 Better facilities for the elderly 1 0.1 0.2 Improve the Market Area 4 0.6 1.0 Introduce a one-way system 1 0.1 0.2 More promotions 1 0.1 0.2 Improve the health centre 1 0.1 0.2

Total 669 100 100 (Base: 530 respondents from all catchment zones A, B, Ci, Cii, D and E)