by Terence Kaye
Week on week the property press carry announcements of new developments that will comprise “a major out-of-town retail centre with extensive leisure provision”. Rather like television where it is impossible to talk about “sex” without “violence”, so “retail” and “leisure” have become irrevocably intertwined in the minds of property developers, planners and the general public.
Leisure operators and those developers actually involved in schemes which combine both elements are now fully aware of the raison d’etre that truly brings them together, or at least should be if their schemes are to succeed, but what of the general perception?
The popular theory for the marriage of retail and leisure runs broadly along the following lines — We build a major out-of-town shopping centre with department stores, supermarket, key national retailers and the absolutely essential “buzz” elements, the famous trio of “Festival Retail”, “Theme Shopping and a “Food Court”.
Additionally, on the same site, a leisure element is introduced: this will probably comprise an 8/10-screen multiplex cinema, 10 pin bowling centre, 1,000-person bingo and social club, nightclub, health club and various catering units — a total of 120,000/150,000 sq ft.
It looks an interesting — even an exciting — package, but why have we done it? The scenario, many would have us believe, is that during the week, Mrs Average takes the family hatchback to the exciting new shopping centre, purchases the week’s supplies, puts them in the back of the car and goes off to enjoy a film or a workout in the health club followed by a drink or a meal.
We ignore the fact that, upon returning home three or four hours later, she will find the frozen food has thawed, some of the fresh food gone bad and she will have to spend the rest of the afternoon cleaning out the hatchback.
We have also forgotten that even if Mrs Average is not a working Mum she is none the less likely to be a busy housewife with just about enough time to do the shopping — and and perhaps have a quick snack in the food court — before rushing off to collect the children from school. She is unlikely to have two or three hours to spend at leisure.
So we move on to Saturday, the day that Mr and Mrs Average and their 2.7 children jump into the now clean hatchback and go off to the exciting new shopping centre to buy major items of furniture, household goods and clothing. What an opportunity to draw them to all the attractions in the leisure complex!
Unfortunately we have once again misjudged the situation. They have spent hours walking around the shopping centre and everyone is tired and irritable. They have been successful in purchasing some flat-pack furniture which mum and dad want to get home to assemble. This purchase does not fit properly into the hatchback, so the tailgate has to be left open. Should the family go off to see a film or participate in some other activity they may well return to find their purchase, and possibly their car, has been stolen. A decision is made — they all return home.
If this scenario appears to be a lampoon it is only because in exaggerating the points it is making, the lampoon also highlights them. The truth of the matter is that retail and leisure do not feed off each other and they certainly cannot be relied upon to bring each other success. They are brought together for much more practical and simplistic reasons.
In recent years entertainment and leisure activities have become increasingly more sophisticated, so that many of them can no longer be housed in 50-year-old cinemas or ballrooms adapted for their current use. Furthermore, many major leisure operators are not primarily interested in the development of single-activity units but are looking to build a leisure multiplex providing a range of activities appealing to the widest demographic profile so as to ensure that more people spend more time — and more money — within the centre.
Additionally the aspirations of the clientele have risen substantially. The massive spending on DIY shows that the public are consistently seeking to improve and upgrade their lifestyle at home and consequently they rightly expect a similar or higher standard of ambiance when going out to be entertained. Traditionally the place of entertainment was supposed to take you out of the real world into one that creates excitement and anticipation by its decor and style. Only during the last 10 or 15 years have many operators allowed their venues to deteriorate to standards below those acceptable to their clients.
These three factors have resulted in the appearance of the first generation of purpose-built leisure properties. But where are they to be constructed?
City-centre sites are probably too valuable since, contrary to popular belief, the leisure industry is unable or unwilling to pay prices that can compete with those for alternative forms of development. Additionally, people prefer to drive to their entertainment, especially in the evening, and consequently substantial car parking is required, a rare and expensive commodity in any town centre. The third and most disturbing factor is the growing inner-city decay and urban violence which makes many town and city centres “no-go” areas at night.
The shopping developer has already beaten a path out of town and taken his schemes to where the people live — land was cheaper and more plentiful. What better for the leisure operator than to share this land, and the infrastructure — most especially the extensive car parking which his business requires, in the main after the shoppers have gone home.
The leisure operator has found the ideal solution for he will benefit from the public being educated to make these out-of-town centres their destination for the full spectrum of shopping. This bring us to the true behavioural pattern of our friends Mr and Mrs Average and their 2.7 children: when on their shopping expeditions they are made aware of the variety of leisure activities available which they will indeed wish to visit. However, they will do this by organising a separate outing specifically to enjoy the entertainment and leisure facilities. They may well attend more than one of the attractions, either together or separately, and will probably take a meal in one of the themed restaurants or bars within the complex. By separating the two activities the family has been able to fulfil its expectations from the shopping trip and, separately, enjoy its leisure time free from other stress.
While attending the leisure activity, the family may take a leisurely stroll window shopping through the retail area which could well result in creating additional retail sales at a later date.
Having, it is to be hoped, disposed of some of the mythology that has grown up around the retail/leisure idea in a few short years, we must now consider two important influences, the first of which encourages conception while the second results in an unacceptable high level of “stillbirths”.
As a general rule planners are inclined to encourage the introduction of new leisure/entertainment activities within their area, subject to obvious safeguards, more especially if the project is to include the provision of “community leisure” such as swimming pool or multi-purpose sports centre.
In the past these facilities have been offered as a planning gain on the assumption that they will be operated by the local authority. This is a burden that many authorities are now unable or unwilling to bear and consequently the developer can find himself faced with a responsibility for which he has neither the inclination nor the experience.
However, an experienced leisure operator will probably be willing to take on the responsibility as part of the agreement that enables him to operate the profitable commercial elements — developer, operator and local authority all become well satisfied.
Problems may arise with the planners if insufficient care is taken in respect of the provision of car parking, for although there is substantial shared use of this facility because of different trading hours, as referred to previously, the retailers’ day is constantly lengthening and there can be little doubt that Sunday trading will become legal in the very near future. Consequently there are many overlap periods when shoppers’ cars are still on site as the leisure customers arrive. The parking requirements for each element of the leisure complex will vary, and consequently a careful calculation must be made to assess the number of attitional spaces required to maintain a smooth parking operation.
The knock-on effect on the roads serving the complex must also be considered, since traffic flow patterns for leisure uses are completely different to those for shopping public, the peaks and troughs being substantially more acute.
A final word of warning when dealing with the planners — they are no longer impressed by detailed proposals of a major shopping centre supported by imaginative artists’ impressions of a “Disney World” complex that is supposedly to be incorporated within the scheme. They know, from experience, that the majority of these leisure centres are developed only in the mind of the artist and not within their planning area. It is essential to properly research the facilities that presently serve the area, identify new attractions that are actually going to be utilised and then, most important, ensure that the leisure industry is interested in operating at the chosen location. Leisure development — a with any other form of development — has to be properly researched.
Leisure development — again as with any other form of development — also has to be properly funded, which brings us to our “stillborn” schemes, since the institutional funding market continues to turn its back on the leisure industry. The reasons are well documented and do not require repetition.
In any case we are searching for a solution, not an explanation. The ideal solution is to agree a leisure development brief with an operator, sell him the land he requires and let him develop the leisure complex, leaving yourself with a straightforward retail shopping centre. By virtue of the size of the development the leisure operator would have to be a major company and therefore able to raise funds through conventional City sources.
However, with land values for retail development now reaching “telephone number” proportions it may not be possible for the developer to release even 2 acres at a price that is economic for the leisure operator. The alternative solution is for the operator to take the upper floors of a development (preferably not more than two levels and ideally one) in “shell” form into which he constructs his complex.
In an attempt to overcome funding problems the developer will probably sell the operator a long-leasehold interest so that the ultimate investor has a “clean” shopping centre investment with only a ground rent receivable from the leisure element.
Needless to say this simple exercise creates its own problems: the developer would be selling the leisure operator a lease of, say, 99 or 125 years, since the traditional view was that the shopping centre would remain standing into eternity. Only recently have these centres become environments of fashion, which has resulted in many of the developments of the 1960s and even 1970s being substantially reconstructed or even demolished to bring them up to date and incorporate current trends. The investing institution is now likely to require the same flexibility which would be denied them if the leisure complex, sitting atop the shopping, has been sold on a long lease. The alternative available is to sell the operator a lease that is for the same term as the retail units.
The marriage of retail and leisure is, in reality, at its earliest stages. However, there can be no doubt that it is set to last, because knowledgeable developers are joining forces with experienced leisure operators to create the correct mix of elements, each being able to succeed in its own right rather than relying on the other or, worse still, one overpowering the other. There are now 40 or more major retail and leisure schemes proposed around the country and those which develop and flourish will be the ones driven by research and reason, not myth and mythology.
