Portas review divides opinions
THE government-commissioned review into the UK’s high streets by Mary Portas received mixed reviews from the region’s property sector, with the head of one local firm questioning her suitability to conduct it.
Ms Portas’s recommendations to the government included a series of measures to reinvigorate town centres, including the strengthening of town centre management through the creation of new “town teams”, developing the Business Improvement District Model and encouraging the creation of new markets.
It proposed adapting the current business rate system to provide more support to independent retailers, encourage more affordable town centre parking and creating a more level playing field in planning terms by ensuring councils adopt a “town centre first” approach.
She said: “I don’t want to live in a Britain that doesn’t care about community. And I believe that our high streets are a really important part of pulling people together in a way that a supermarket or shopping mall, however convenient, just never can.
“Those who see high streets purely in commercial terms need a reality check, because, without the engagement and collaboration of local people many high streets will die and retailers, landlords and local authorities alike will see their investment wasted.”
Mike Redshaw, director of Bury-based property consultancy Nolan Redshaw, criticised what he perceived to be the Government’s infatuation with asking celebrities to lead reviews for which they are not fully qualified.
He said: “When you consider that we have leading real estate institutions in Cambridge and Reading universities, together with a professional body with both practitioners and researchers within the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, it is hard to believe that a celebrity such as Mary Portas is asked to lead a review into the future of the high street.
“It is very easy to see why the high street is currently suffering, with a lack of parking, competition from the internet, rents and rates out of kilter with demand, a change in the family structure giving little free time to working parents, etc, but the issues and potential solutions need careful research by both academics and practitioners.
“A revitalised high street would be dependent on a number of variables, but the Government should be asking our real estate institutions and professional bodies to lead the review, not a lady with a strange haircut who calls herself a guru!”
Mark Barker, a Manchester-based partner at law firm Cobbetts, pointed out that councils being encouraged to cut parking costs were already having to slash budgets.
Ms Portas had also argued that gyms, creches and other community services should be placed within town centres to encourage greater use.
However, Mr Barker said that “traditional retail anchors still work”.
“For example, the new Primark in Stockport has had a dramatic effect in refreshing the town centre and has massively increased footfall. The key is attracting the right anchor retailer.”
He agreed with Ms Portas that independents should be encouraged, but said the problems they faced was simply an economic one, with rents in desirable town centres often proving unaffordable.
Redshaw added: “The Government needs to accept that it is very difficult to go against the market and people have shown their approval for food stores.
He added that the idea that town centres could adopt a more continental model “can only work in a town that is thriving”.
Sammy Jones, head of retail at GVA’s Manchester office, said the current lack of retail-led town centre development schemes looked set to continue.
“Weak comparison goods retail spending growth, coupled with accelerating internet sales growth, is now likely to be the long-term outlook.
“This prospect, combined with marginal development viability due to restrictive development finance from the banks, lower capital values and capital value growth, means the sluggish development pipeline could well persist for many years.
“This will affect the more costly and complex town centre schemes most, but will have less effect on cheaper out-of-centre schemes.”
