Marylebone High Street District Cent re
Shopping Area Health Check
January 2007 CONTENT
PART 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PART 2: MAIN REPORT
1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1 The Study...... 1 National and London Policy ...... 1 The London Hierarchy ...... 2 2.0 DIVERSITY OF USE AND REPRESENTATION...... 1 Introduction ...... 1 Total Retail Floorspace ...... 1 Diversity of Use...... 2 NLP’s Attitudinal Assessment ...... 3 Range of Shops and Services ...... 3 Quality of Shops and Services...... 5 Food Supermarkets ...... 6 Places to Eat and Drink...... 7 Entertainment and Leisure Facilities...... 9 Mix of Use Summary...... 10 3.0 MARYLEBONE HIGH STREET’S ROLE AND CATCHMENT AREA ...... 12 Introduction ...... 12 Catchment Area and Customer Profile ...... 12 Main Purpose of Visit to the Centre ...... 16 Duration and Frequency of Visit...... 19 4.0 BUSINESS PERFORMANCE...... 21 Introduction ...... 21 Business Trading Performance in Marylebone High Street ...... 21 Property Indicators...... 22 Availability of Premises and Vacancy Levels...... 23 Property Requirements ...... 23 Business Occupier’s Views on Rents and Rates ...... 23 5.0 NLP’S AMENITY APPRAISAL...... 25 Introduction ...... 25 Day-Time Amenity Appraisal...... 25 Night-Time Amenity Appraisal...... 25 6.0 ACCESSIBILITY AND MOVEMENT ...... 27 Introduction ...... 27 Layout of the Centre ...... 27 Modal Split ...... 28 Public Transport...... 29 Car Parking ...... 30 Pedestrian Flow ...... 33 Traffic Congestion...... 34 Accessibility Summary ...... 35 7.0 SAFETY AND CRIME...... 37 Introduction ...... 37 Personal Safety...... 37 Business Security ...... 38 Safety and Crime Summary...... 39 8.0 THE CENTRE’S ENVIRONMENT ...... 40 Introduction ...... 40 Shopping Environment...... 40 Litter and Cleanliness ...... 41 Environmental Summary...... 42 9.0 CENTRE BOUNDARY AND FRONTAGE DESIGNATIONS ...... 43 Introduction ...... 43 Defining Marylebone High Street District Centre’s Boundary and Frontages ...... 43 Shopping Frontages...... 43 10.0 RETAIL CAPACITY ANALYSIS...... 46 Introduction ...... 46 Local Catchment Area ...... 46 Population and Spending...... 47 Existing Retail Floorspace ...... 47 Existing Spending Patterns 2006...... 47 Operator Demand for Space...... 50 Development Opportunities...... 51 11 SUMMARY OF THE DISTRICT CENTRE’S STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES ... 54 Strengths...... 54 Weaknesses ...... 54 Opportunities...... 55 Threats...... 55
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Methodology Appendix B - PPS6 Measures of Vitality and Viability Appendix C - NLP’s Attractions Appraisal Appendix D - NLP’s Day-Time Amenity Appraisal Appendix E - NLP’s Night-Time Amenity Appraisal Appendix F - PMRS Pedestrian Flowcounts and thermal maps Appendix G - In-street Visitor Survey Results Appendix H - Household Residents Survey Results Appendix I - Business Occupier Survey Results Appendix J - Land Use Map Appendix K - Centre Boundaries and Frontage - National and Local Policy Appendix L - Retail Capacity Assessment Methodology Appendix M - Operator Requirements
Glossary PART 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Study
Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners has undertaken a vitality and viability study of the 7 designated District Shopping centres in Westminster. This report provides an analysis of Marylebone High Street. The Government (PPS6) advises local authorities to base their development plans on assessments of their retail centres, and are advised to monitor the health of their shopping centres.
Marylebone High Street’s Current Role and Structure
Marylebone High Street primarily serves residents in Westminster and Camden and workers and tourist visitors in the Marylebone area. The centre is predominantly one primary shopping street (Marylebone High Street, which leads into Thayer Street), and is linear in shape. The main concentration of A1 retail uses is located on Marylebone High Street. The centre is in close proximity to Baker Street Underground tube station.
i Marylebone High Street is the 3rd largest of the 7 District Centres, and has a good range of shops and services of high quality. The centre has a mix of national multiples and a good range of specialist and independent retailers. There is a good selection of food/supermarket stores within Marylebone High Street, and it attracts a high proportion of food and grocery shopping trips.
The range and quality of shops and services in Marylebone High Street District Centre was rated very highly by visitors, residents and business occupiers in the area; the centre was ranked top of the 7 District Centres by all three groups for both categories. In addition to retail facilities Marylebone High Street has a reasonable number of places to eat and drink of good quality. It has reasonably good entertainment and leisure facilities when compared with the other 6 District Centres in Westminster.
Marylebone High Street District Centre has a dual role serving local residents and commuters as well as occasional visitors from across London and beyond. The centre plays and important role as a local shopping centre, attracting more of its local residents than any other centre.
Marylebone High Street attracts the majority of its customers from the upper socio-economic groups, and this mix is broadly consistent with the socio-economic characteristics of the local catchment area. The centre appears to attract a lower proportion of AB (professional/ managerial) customers and a higher proportion of C1 (Skilled workers) customers when compared with the local catchment characteristics, which implies that more affluent local residents are more likely to shop elsewhere.
Marylebone High Street’s catchment area has a higher proportion of high-earning households compared with the average for all centres, and a lower proportion of low-income households (under £25,000). The centre’s local catchment area appears to be one of the most affluent, perhaps only behind St. John’s Wood, and broadly comparable with Queensway/Westbourne Grove’s local catchment area.
Health Check Summary
A summary of the Health Check analysis is shown in the Table 1 below. Factors highlighted gold are rated as positive attributes in Marylebone High Street District Centre. Factors highlighted as gray are negative attributes, while green represents neural factors where
ii views were mixed. Marylebone High Street’s rank amongst Westminster’s 7 District Shopping Centres is also shown.
Table 1 suggests that Marylebone High Street rates highly for most factors, with the exception of traffic congestion, car parking charges/availability and public transport. Generally satisfaction levels are higher amongst visitors and residents than business occupiers.
Table 1: Health Check Summary
Visitors’ Residents’ Business NLP Analysis Views/Rank Views/Rank Occupiers’ Views/Rank Current Business Occupier n/a n/a Positive n/a Performance 1st Past Business Occupier n/a n/a Neutral n/a Performance 1st Future Business Occupier n/a n/a Positive n/a Performance 1st Range of Shops/Services Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive 1st 1st 1st Quality of Shops/Services Very Positive Very Positive Positive Very Positive 1st 1st 1st Food supermarkets Very Positive Very Positive n/a Very Positive 1st 1st Places to Eat/Drink Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive 1st 1st 1st Entertainment/Leisure/ Positive Positive Neutral Positive Night-time facilities 3rd 1st 2nd Layout of centre Very Positive n/a n/a n/a 1st Bus services Neutral Negative n/a 7th Neutral 7th Train/Underground services n/a 7th Positive n/a 6th Car parking availability Negative Negative n/a 4th Negative 1st Car parking charges Very Negative 1st Very Negative n/a 5th 5th Traffic congestion Neutral Negative Neutral n/a 4th 5th 4th Personal Safety Very Positive Positive n/a 1st Very Positive 1st Security n/a 1st Neutral n/a 1st Shopping Environment Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive 1st 1st 1st Street cleaning n/a Very Positive n/a n/a 1st Average Score – Over +1 = Very Positive, + 0.26 to +0.99 = Positive, +0.25 to -0.25 = Neutral, -0.26 to -0.99 = Negative, less than -1.00 = Very Negative.
In terms of its vitality and viability this centre is still considered to be “healthy” and this has not changed since the 2002 health check.
iii Retail Capacity Based on the survey results we estimate that Marylebone High Street District Centre’s market penetration (or market share) within the local catchment area is as follows:
Comparison expenditure - 10%; i.e. 90% of the catchment area’s comparison expenditure is spent elsewhere – outside of Marylebone High Street, and potentially outside the local catchment area, and
Convenience expenditure - 58%.
These figures indicate that the majority of comparison expenditure within the local catchment area is not spent within Marylebone High Street. For comparison shopping Oxford Street/the West End attract a significant amount of shopping trips. For convenience shopping Marylebone High Street, and in particular the Waitrose store, attracts a reasonably high market share in the local catchment area. The inflow estimate for Marylebone High Street is 50% for convenience shops and 85% for comparison shops.
Surplus convenience expenditure is expected to be insignificant at 2011 and 2016, due to the relatively low population growth in this part of the Borough and the lower growth in expenditure per capita, based on Experian projections. However, existing convenience floorspace is currently trading at a high density and there may be scope for additional convenience sales floorspace in the centre (1,990 sqm gross by 2011 or 2,397 sqm gross by 2016).
Surplus comparison expenditure is expected to be £5.54 million by 2011 and £10.33 million by 2016. As indicated above these estimates could be viewed as maximum figures bearing in mind the proposed development at nearby White City. The quantitative floorspace capacity based on population and expenditure projections is 1,264 sqm gross by 2011, or 2,189 sqm gross by 2016.
There are no identified vacant or underused sites near the centre. The additional retail floorspace may only be achieved by the occupation of vacant units by Class A1 use, the redevelopment of existing commercial floorspace to provide higher density development and the change of use of non-retail uses to retail floorspace. There are limited opportunities for major development within or adjacent to this centre. The absence of development sites and the projected need for retail floorspace suggests that the Council should continue to control and prevent the loss of existing Class A1 floorspace in this District Centre.
iv Defining Marylebone High Street’s Centre Boundary and Frontages The current Secondary Frontages are contiguous with the Core Shopping Frontages. The land use survey indicates that these Secondary Frontages still retain a predominance of Class A1 to A5 uses and vacancy levels are low. The Secondary Frontage on the east side of Marylebone Lane was vacant at the time of the survey and could be dedesignated. Elsewhere there is no reason to exclude any of the Secondary Frontages from the centre boundary.
The Council’s Adopted Unitary Development Plan (UDP) states that no more than 30% of Marylebone High Street’s Core Frontage will be permitted to be used for non-A1 use. No more than 45% of this centre’s Secondary Frontage will be permitted to be used for non-A1 use. The current proportion of Core Frontage in non-A1 usage is 28% just below the Council’s threshold The current proportion of Secondary Frontage in non-A1 usage is 56% and the current policy criteria have been breached. The 45% threshold in the Secondary Frontage needs to be reviewed.
We believe the Council should review its frontage policies, considering the following options should be considered:
No change – keep the Core and Secondary Frontages as they are and keep the current limits on non-A1 use.
Change the non-A1 limit – keep the Core and Secondary Frontages as they are but increase the current limits on non-A1 use in the Secondary Frontages, so they become more meaningful say 60%.
Adopt a new approach – restrict all changes of use in the Core Frontages area from A1 to non-A1. A more flexible approach to changes of use could be adopted in the Secondary Shopping Frontages.
These options should be discussed by policy and development control officers at Westminster.
v PART 2 – MAIN REPORT 1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Study
1.1 Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners (NLP) were commissioned by Westminster City Council to carry out a vitality and viability study of the 7 designated District Centres in the City. This Health Check provides an analysis of Marylebone High Street. A summary of the methodology adopted is contained in Appendix A of this report.
1.2 This report provides a basis for assessing the vitality and viability of the District Centre and for future monitoring of the 'health' of the District Centre. Westminster carried out Health Check Appraisals in 1997 and 2002. In 1997, Health Checks for 46 centres were undertaken throughout Westminster. In 2000, four of these health check surveys were updated and two Health Checks for new centres were also undertaken. Health Checks were undertaken in the 2002 study for all centres. Health Checks for the 7 district centres have been undertaken in 2006. Where possible comparisons have been made with the results of the previous Health Checks.
National and London Policy
1.3 The Government advises local authorities to base their Development Plans and policies on assessments of their retail centres, as set out in guidance contained within Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS6 revised) March 2005. Local authorities are advised to monitor the health of their shopping centres and to regularly collect information on key indicators. A list of key indicators, as set out at paragraph 4.4 of PPS6, is shown in Appendix B of this report.
1.4 Policy 3D.1 within the London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy 2004 relates to town centres, and this policy states that the Mayor and London Boroughs should: “enhance access to goods and services and strengthen the wider role of town centres, including UDP policies to:
Encourage retail, leisure, and other related uses in town centres, and discourage them outside the town centres;
Improve access to town centres by public transport, cycling and walking;
Enhance the quality for retail and other consumer services in town centres
Support a wide role for town centres as locations for leisure and cultural activities, as well as business and housing;
1 Require the location of appropriate health, education and other public and community services in town centres;
Designate core areas primarily for shopping uses and secondary areas for shopping and other uses and set out policies for the appropriate management of both types of area;
Undertake regular town centre health checks; and
Support and encourage town centre management, partnerships and strategies including the introduction of Business Improvement Districts in appropriate locations.”
1.5 This centre Health Check will form part of the background information to assist in the preparation of policies and proposals for the District Centre. This study will feed into the preparation of relevant Development Plan Documents prepared as part of the Council’s Local Development Framework, including the Core Strategy and the shopping policies within the Development Control Policies Development Plan Document (DPD).
The London Hierarchy
1.6 The London Plan sets out a hierarchy/classification of town centres across London, i.e. International Centres (2), Metropolitan Centres (10), Major Centres (35) and District Centres (160).
1.7 Knightsbridge and the West End are identified as the two International Centres, at the top of the hierarchy of shopping centres in London. Both are within Westminster. Metropolitan Centres are the main centres servicing the outer London Boroughs (e.g. Bromley, Croydon, Kingston and Harrow). Major and District Centres are spread across London. The City of Westminster has one Major Centre and seven District Centres designated in the London Plan, although the Council classifies Queensway/Westbourne Grove as a District Centre and Edgware Road South as ‘CAZ Frontage’. Marylebone High Street is categorised as a District Centre in the London Plan. The London Plan indicates that this broad classification of centres should be refined in the light of local circumstances through Development Plans.
1.8 The City of Westminster is divided into two zones in terms of retail policy, the Central Activities Zone (CAZ) and CAZ Frontages; and areas outside the CAZ. The CAZ contains the two International Centres in London; the West End and Knightsbridge; other shopping areas such as Victoria Street, as well as numerous small parades and
2 individual shops. Outside the CAZ there are 7 District Centres and 39 Local Centres designated in the UDP.
Marylebone High Street and the Surrounding Area
1.9 Marylebone High Street is located to the north of Westminster’s central area, south of Regents Park. The centre serves residents in Westminster and Camden and workers and tourist visitors in the Marylebone area.
1.10 The nearest competing Major Centre is Edgware. However, the nearest major competing ‘International Centre’ is Oxford Street which is only a short walking distance from the southern end of Marylebone High Street District Centre. The presence of Oxford Street curtails the function of Marylebone High Street.
1.11 Marylebone High Street District Centre is made up of one primary shopping street (Marylebone High Street), which leads into Thayer Street. The main concentration of A1 retail uses is located on Marylebone High Street. The centre is in close proximity to Baker Street Underground tube station.
3 4 2.0 DIVERSITY OF USE AND REPRESENTATION
Introduction
2.1 This section examines the mix of town centre uses within Marylebone High Street District Centre, and highlights changes since the 2002 Health Check Survey was undertaken. For the first time, the views of visitors, residents and businesses occupiers have also been assessed and are included within the survey results. It should be noted that the Use Classes Order has changed since the 2002 Health Check reports were undertaken, and Class A3 has now been broken down into three categories; Class A3 – restaurants/cafés, Class A4 – pubs/bars and Class A5 hot- food takeaways. Therefore, direct comparisons are not always possible.
Total Retail Floorspace
2.2 Total retail floorspace in Marylebone High Street is broken down in Table 2.1. In total, Marylebone High Street has 24,402 sqm of retail floorspace. In 2002 there was 31,674 sqm of retail floorspace, which suggests floorspace has fallen by a significant amount. The total retail floorspace (24,402 sqm) is marginally above the average (22,492 sq. m) for the 7 District Centres. Marylebone High Street has a higher proportion of A1 comparison retail than the District Centre average. Conversely, the centre has a lower than average proportion of A1 convenience retail and Class A5 use floorspace. It also has a significantly lower than average proportion of vacant premises suggesting there is relatively high demand for property in the area.
Table 2.1: Total Retail Floorspace
Use A1 - Conv A1- Comp A2 A3 A4 A5 SG Vacant TOTAL Floorspace Sqm 2,499 13,464 2,063 3,642 1,289 45 0 1,400 24,402 Percentage 10.2% 55.2% 8.5% 14.9% 5.3% 0.2% 0.0% 5.7% 100.0% District Centre Ave. 3,657 9,408 2,048 3,340 883 330 376 2450 22,492 District Centre Ave 16.3% 41.8% 9.1% 14.8% 3.9% 1.5% 1.7% 10.9% 100.0% Percentage. Source: City of Westminster GIS System and Site Survey October 2006
1 Figure 2.1: Retail Floorspace in Marylebone High Street
Retail Floorspace in Marylebone High Street
Vacant 5.7% SG 0.0% A5 0.2% A1- Conv 10.2% A4 5.3%
A3 14.9%
A2 8.5%
A1- Comp 55.2%
Diversity of Use
2.3 Marylebone High Street is a mixed-use District Centre, serving predominantly local residents, and high end comparison shoppers. Marylebone High Street has a good selection of comparison shops, restaurants, and cafés. The diversity of uses represented in the centre is summarised in Table 2.2.
2.4 The overall number of units has increased from 222 to 228 units since 2002. The number of A1 units in Marylebone High Street has increased by 8 units and within the Class most changes have been relatively minor with the exception of Independent retailers, the number of which has increased by 10 units. The number of Class A2 units has dropped slightly (- 3 units) while the number of A3 units has risen slightly (+4 units). The number of pubs/bars (A4 units) has remained constant and the number of A5 units has risen from none to one. The number of vacant units has dropped as has the number of health uses (-3 and -1 units respectively). There remain no hotels or arts/culture units, and one sui generis unit.
2 Table 2.2: Diversity of Uses
Use Class Number Number % % of Units of Units of Units of Units 2002 2006 2002 2006 Class A1 Retail 135 143 60.8% 62.7% Department/principle stores 000.0% 0.0% International retailers 220.9% 0.9% National retailers 20 23 9.0% 10.1% Specialist Independent 29 30 13.1% 13.2% Independent 62 72 27.9% 31.6% Convenience 22 16 9.9% 7.0% Class A2 26 23 11.7% 10.1% Class A3 Takeaway/Restaurant 1 n/a 0.5% n/a Class A3 Restaurant/Café 31 36 14.0% 15.8% Class A4 Pubs/Bars 883.6% 3.5% Class A5 Takeaway 010.0% 0.4% Sui Generis 110.5% 0.4% Vacant Units 18 15 8.1% 6.6% Arts/Culture 000.0% 0.0% Health uses 211.0% 0.4% Hotels 000.0% 0.0% TOTAL 222 228 100.0% 100.0% Source: Land Use Survey May 2002 and October 2006
NLP’s Attitudinal Assessment
2.5 NLP’s attitudinal assessment of the attractions and amenity of the centre is summarised in Appendix C. Marylebone High Street’s attractions score has increased slightly since 2002, and the centre’s overall score for attractions is now 65.4%. This is much higher than the average across all 7 centres of 48.4%. Marylebone High Street’s main strength is the quality of its shops and the quality of its general shopping environment, although the centre lacks cultural/community events such as theatres, sports facilities and also local services such as a library.
Range of Shops and Services
2.6 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on the range of shops and services in the centre (Question 14 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 2.3 below.
2.7 The numbers rating the centre for its range of shops and services as good significantly outnumbered those suggesting it was poor. The average score was +1.55 substantially above the quite good mark (a score of zero is neutral i.e. neither good nor poor). All 7 District Centres achieved above neutral scores (above 0).
3 Marylebone High Street achieved the best average score of all 7 District Centres indicating that its range of shops and services is good.
Table 2.3: Visitors’ Views on the Range of Shops and Services (% of visitors)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 61 28 12 12 4 10 18 Quite Good 35 51 55 59 55 49 42 Neither Good/Poor 2 11 28 19 31 20 16 Quite Poor 2 168 413 12 Very Poor 0 109344 Don’t Know 0 802349 Average Score 1.55 1.13 0.73 0.74 0.56 0.48 0.63 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.8 Residents interviewed in the household survey were asked a similar question (Question 07 Appendix H) relating to the range of shops and services. The results are summarised in Table 2.4 below.
Table 2.4: Residents’ Views on the Range of Shops and Service (%)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 43 19 9 14 10 7 14 Quite Good 26 36 30 14 19 14 15 Neither Good/Poor 19 28 31 30 37 29 38 Quite Poor 6 7 21 23 20 27 26 Very Poor 0 5614 10 16 5 Don’t Know 6 535471 Average Score 1.11 0.60 0.15 -0.09 -0.01 -0.34 0.07 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.9 Again the average score for the centre was positive (+1.11), although residents’ views were less positive than visitors’ views this was a trend mirrored across all District Centres. Again Marylebone High Street was ranked highest of all of the District Centres in relation to range of shops and services. Within the other centres views amongst residents were mixed (i.e. scores around neutral – zero).
2.10 Businesses in the centre were also asked about the range of shops and services (Question 10 Appendix I), and the results are summarised in Table 2.5 below. Business views were mostly positive with an overall score 0.98 (almost ‘quite good’) These figures suggest that businesses may be slightly more concerned with the range of shops and services than residents/customers. However, views were mixed
4 in most other centres. Marylebone High Street was the only centre to achieve a positive rating.
Table 2.5: Businesses’ Views on the Range of Shops and Services (%)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 31 440006 Quite Good 41 22 29 9 35 15 17 Neither Good/Poor 21 39 25 27 24 19 28 Quite Poor 2 17 21 36 31 31 28 Very Poor 2 9 14 27 3 27 17 Don’t Know 2 970785 Average Score 0.98 -0.05 -0.15-0.82 -0.04 -0.75 -0.35 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Quality of Shops and Services
2.11 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on the quality of shops and services in the centre (Question 14 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 2.6 below.
2.12 There were no visitors in Marylebone High Street suggesting that the quality of shops and services was poor or very poor. The average score was +1.65, substantially above the quite good mark. All centres achieved above neutral scores (above zero). Marylebone High Street achieved the best average score of all 7 District Centres by a large margin.
Table 2.6: Visitors’ Views on the Quality of Shops and Services (% of visitors)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 67 16 11 76726 Quite Good 31 59 55 55 61 48 44 Neither Good/Poor 2 15 27 21 22 20 10 Quite Poor 0 1613 8 16 3 Very Poor 0 002034 Don’t Know 0 9223613 Average Score 1.65 0.99 0.73 0.53 0.68 0.43 1.00 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.13 Residents interviewed in the household survey were asked a similar question (Question 07 Appendix H) and the results are summarised in Table 2.7 below. Again the average score for the centre was positive (+1.39), although residents’ views were less positive than visitors’ views. Generally residents’ views were less positive than visitors’ comments in all centres. Marylebone High Street was again ranked highest of all 7 District Centres.
5 Table 2.7: Residents’ Views on the Quality of Shops and Service (%)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 45 14 7 13 10 7 21 Quite Good 43 38 21 20 16 23 36 Neither Good/Poor 4 26 39 28 48 39 33 Quite Poor 2 12 21 16 18 96 Very Poor 0 5919 4 11 2 Don’t Know 6 534411 2 Average Score 1.39 0.45 -0.03 -0.09 0.10 0.05 0.68 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.14 Businesses in the centre were also asked about the quality of shops and services (Question 10 – Appendix I), and the results are summarised in Table 2.8 below.
2.15 The views amongst businesses in relation to the quality of shops and services were predominantly positive, with an overall score of quite positive (1.00). Marylebone High Street was the only centre to achieve a significant positive rating. Harrow Road and Praed Street District Centres achieved the lowest scores.
Table 2.8: Businesses’ Views on the Quality of Shops and Services (%)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 31 040006 Quite Good 48 44 29 0 31 15 39 Neither Good/Poor 12 30 29 55 31 19 22 Quite Poor 2 0 18 18 24 35 22 Very Poor 5 13 0 27 7 19 0 Don’t Know 2 13 00 712 11 Average Score 1.00 0.20 -0.21 -0.73 -0.07 -0.65 0.31 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Food Supermarkets
2.16 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on the size quality of supermarkets in the centre (Question 14 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 2.9 below. All of the District Centres achieved a positive score (above zero). Marylebone High Street achieved the best average score (1.20) predominantly due to the presence of Waitrose.
6 Table 2.9: Visitors’ Views on Food Supermarkets (% of visitors)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 29 18 03 44 9 Quite Good 48 50 34 63 72 41 29 Neither Good/Poor 5 15 57 21 11 15 19 Quite Poor 2 067717 11 Very Poor 1 3137411 Don’t Know 15 14 23 819 21 Average Score 1.20 0.93 0.26 0.55 0.79 0.27 0.17 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.17 Residents interviewed in the household survey were asked a similar question (Question 07 Appendix H) and the results are summarised in Table 2.10 below. The average scores for Marylebone High Street’s household survey were similar to those achieved in the visitor survey, which was not the case with the other 6 District Centres. In Marylebone High Street residents had predominantly positive views with an average score above quite good (1.15) being recorded. Marylebone High Street had the highest average score of all 7 District Centres. Within all other centres views amongst residents were mixed (i.e. scores around neutral i.e. zero).
Table 2.10: Residents’ Views on the Supermarkets (%)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 43 9714 18 11 6 Quite Good 36 17 16 20 30 18 13 Neither Good/Poor 15 34 16 24 18 9 34 Quite Poor 6 19 36 24 18 30 35 Very Poor 0 7 20 13 11 21 10 Don’t Know 0 14 65 511 2 Average Score 1.15 0.02 -0.48 -0.01 0.28 -0.33 -0.29 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Places to Eat and Drink
2.18 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on the quality and number of places to eat and drink in the centre (Question 14 – Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 2.11 below.
2.19 The majority of visitors rated the quality and number of places to eat/drink as very good. The average score was +1.56, substantially above the quite good mark. All centres achieved above neutral scores (above 0). Marylebone High Street had the highest average score, in this respect.
7 Table 2.11: Visitors’ Views on Places to Eat and Drink (% of visitors)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 61 28 5511 11 40 Quite Good 31 50 51 60 60 57 40 Neither Good/Poor 1 11 38 18 15 16 7 Quite Poor 3 2 24 8364 Very Poor 0 105321 Don’t Know 4 833888 Average Score 1.56 1.11 0.58 0.54 0.79 0.76 1.24 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.20 Residents interviewed in the household survey were asked a similar question (Question 07 Appendix H), and the results are summarised in Table 2.12 below. Again Marylebone High Street had the highest average score (1.36) of all 7 District Centres.
Table 2.12: Residents’ Views on Places to Eat and Drink (% of residents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 47 29 13 8 15 9 20 Quite Good 34 24 16 8 29 21 41 Neither Good/Poor 13 24 21 14 21 18 23 Quite Poor 0 10 16 20 15 18 11 Very Poor 0 3 11 20 1 11 2 Don’t Know 6 9 23 30 19 23 3 Average Score 1.36 0.72 0.04 -0.55 0.51 -0.03 0.67 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.21 Businesses in Marylebone High Street were also asked about places to eat and drink (Question 10 Appendix), and the results are summarised in Table 2.13 below. The results were broadly comparable with customer/residents’ views, with an average score of 1.17 being achieved.
Table 2.13: Businesses’ Views on Places to Eat and Drink (% of businesses)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 38 17 0017 8 22 Quite Good 50 44 36 18 45 42 22 Neither Good/Poor 5 13 7 36 17 15 28 Quite Poor 5 0 29 27 14 86 Very Poor 2 4 25 18 38 6 Don’t Know 0 22 40 319 17 Average Score 1.17 0.89 -0.44 -0.45 0.61 0.43 0.60 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
8 Entertainment and Leisure Facilities
2.22 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on entertainment and leisure facilities (day-time and night-time facilities) in the centre (Question 14 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 2.14 below.
2.23 Day-time and night-time facilities entertainment/leisure facilities in Marylebone High Street achieved similar scores, and were both rated positively. Marylebone High Street had a higher average score for night-time entertainment and leisure facilities (0.50) compared to day-time facilities (0.39). In both cases these scores were lower than those found in Queensway/Westbourne Grove and the day-time score was also lower than that recorded in St John’s Wood.
Table 2.14: Visitors’ Views on Entertainment and Leisure Facilities (% of visitors)
Day Time Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 13 7914413 Quite Good 20 54 46 43 23 29 40 Neither Good/Poor 13 13 26 14 13 18 12 Quite Poor 8 3 10 10 15 12 3 Very Poor 7 0114 11 4 12 Don’t Know 39 23 8 19 34 33 20 Average Score 0.39 0.85 0.57 0.08 -0.08 0.22 0.48 Night Time Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 11 861259 Quite Good 26 43 46 44 23 24 28 Neither Good/Poor 9 17 29 12 17 11 6 Quite Poor 5 3910 10 14 4 Very Poor 7 0214 15 6 14 Don’t Know 42 30 7 19 33 40 39 Average Score 0.50 0.79 0.50 0.10 -0.21 0.13 0.21 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.24 Residents interviewed in the household survey were asked a similar question (Question 07 Appendix H) relating to evening/night-time facilities. The results are summarised in Table 2.15 below. Marylebone High Street achieved the highest average score (0.79) of all 7 District Centres. The only other centre to achieve a positive score was Queensway/Westbourne Grove.
9 Table 2.15: Residents’ Views on Night-Time Facilities (% of residents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 17 10 64 74 3 Quite Good 36 31 16 5 14 18 24 Neither Good/Poor 23 17 21 15 23 23 28 Quite Poor 2 17 11 15 20 14 14 Very Poor 2 0 13 23 8914 Don’t Know 19 24 33 38 27 32 16 Average Score 0.79 0.45 -0.15 -0.78 -0.13 -0.07 -0.14 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
2.25 Businesses in the centre were also asked about the entertainment and leisure facilities there (Question 10 Appendix I), and the results are summarised in Table 2.16 below. Marylebone High Street received a negative score (-0.10), which was lower than the average score achieved in Queensway/Westbourne Grove, the only District Centre that obtained a positive average score.
Table 2.16: Businesses’ Views on Entertainment and Leisure Facilities (% of businesses)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 9 4000011 Quite Good 24 30 4031 40 Neither Good/Poor 24 39 18 9 14 27 22 Quite Poor 19 9 18 46 24 15 28 Very Poor 17 0 46 45 21 46 17 Don’t Know 7 17 14 0 10 8 22 Average Score -0.10 0.37 -1.25 -1.36 -0.38 -1.12 -0.50 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Mix of Use Summary
2.26 A summary of the above analysis is shown in Table 2.17. Factors highlighted gold are rating as positive attributes in Marylebone High Street, while green represents neural factors where views were mixed. Marylebone High Street’s rank amongst Westminster’s 7 District Shopping Centres is also shown.
10 Table 2.17: Summary Analysis for Range/Quality of Facilities
Visitors’ Residents’ Business NLP Analysis Views/Rank Views/Rank Occupiers’ Views/Rank Range of Shops/Services Very Positive Very Positive Positive Very Positive 1st 1st 1st Quality of Shops/Services Very Positive Very Positive Positive Very Positive 1st 1st 1st Food supermarkets Very Positive Very Positive n/a Very Positive 1st 3rd Places to Eat/Drink Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive 1st 1st 1st Entertainment/Leisure/ Positive Positive Neutral Positive Night-time facilities 2nd 1st 2nd Average Score – Over +1 = Very Positive, + 0.26 to +0.99 = Positive, +0.25 to -0.25 = Neutral, -0.26 to -0.99 = Negative, less than -1.00 = Very Negative.
11 3.0 MARYLEBONE HIGH STREET’S ROLE AND CATCHMENT AREA
Introduction
3.1 Marylebone High Street District Centre’s role is demonstrated by the mix of uses outlined in the previous section, and in particular the presence of a large number of high-end comparison retailers. In addition the results of an in-street survey of visitors and the household survey of local residents provide information on how customers use the centre and what catchment area the centre serves. This section explores how the centre is used and the characteristics of the centre’s customers and local residents.
Catchment Area and Customer Profile
3.2 Over 90% of the visitors in Marylebone High Street indicated where they live by postcode. Of those who gave their postcode, 26% live within the local postcode area (W1). A further 32% live within other West London postcodes and 24% live in the rest of London. These results are consistent with the proportions of visitors who walked (51%) and who travelled by public transport (33%) to the centre. Around 17% of visitors live outside London. These results indicate that Marylebone High Street has a dual role serving local residents (W1) and commuters as well as visitors from across London and beyond.
3.3 The household survey results indicated that over 79% of local residents had shopped at Marylebone High Street during the last three months. This was the highest figure out of the 7 District Centres, marginally better than Harrow Road (79%). However, 76.6% of residents who regularly use the centre indicated that they choose to shop here because the centre is convenient to get to from home. These results suggest that the centre has an important local shopping role, similar to the situation at Harrow Road, St John’s Wood and Warwick Way/Tachbrook Street. The centre’s relatively low market share may be explained by the very strong competition from other centres within walking distance, especially Oxford Street. Respondents were asked (Question 11 Appendix H) which other shopping centres they use once a month or more, the main centres were:
Oxford Street/the West End 27%;
Knightsbridge 11%; and
12 Edgware Road 3%.
Socio-Economic Characteristics
3.4 The SEG socio-economic characteristics of visitors interviewed within Marylebone High Street is shown in Table 3.1, and this is compared with visitors within the other District Centres. The socio-economic characteristics obtained from the household survey within the local catchment area of each centre are also shown in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Socio-Economic Characteristics of Visitors and Residents (% of visitors and residents)
SEG of Visitors Marylebone Queensway/ Warwick Praed St Church Harrow All (%) High St Westbourne Way/ Street John’s St/ Rd Centres Grove Tachbrook Wood Edgware St Rd AB 37 25 22 25 54 5 12 26 Professional/Managerial C1 45 35 39 31 25 37 34 35 Skilled Non-Manual C2 6 17 17 12 11 16 17 14 Skilled Manual DE 10 24 22 32 10 40 35 25 Semi-Skilled/Unskilled Refused 2 0000321 SEG of Residents Marylebone Queensway/ Warwick Praed St Church Harrow All (%) High St Westbourne Way/ Street John’s St/ Rd Centres Grove Tachbrook Wood Edgware St Rd AB 54 28 39 36 48 33 29 37 Professional/Managerial C1 31 47 27 40 30 28 26 33 Skilled Non-Manual C2 7 11 76713 12 9 Skilled Manual DE 8 8 18 13 7 18 27 15 Semi-Skilled/Unskilled Refused 0 7958866 Source: NEMS Household and in- Street Surveys 2006
3.5 Marylebone High Street attracts the majority of its customers from the upper socio- economic categories (37% from AB and 45% from C1), and this mix is broadly consistent with the socio-economic characteristics of the local catchment area. However, the centre appears to attract a lower proportion of AB customers and a higher proportion of C1 customers when compared with the local catchment characteristics, which implies that more affluent local residents are more likely to shop elsewhere. This is a pattern experienced within all of the District Centres/their local catchment areas with the exception of St. John’s Wood.
3.6 Marylebone High Street has a higher proportion of the most affluent AB customers and C1 customers than the other 7 District Centres.
13 3.7 Local residents were also asked about their combined household income, the results are shown in Table 3.2. A relatively high proportion refused to give details within all areas. However, the results do provide a broad indication of the relative affluence of each centre’s local catchment area.
Table 3.2: Household Income of Residents (% of residents)
Income £ Marylebone Queensway/ Warwick Praed St John’s Church Harrow All High St Westbourne Way/ Street Wood St/ Rd Centres Grove Tachbrook St Edgware Rd Below £25,000 25 20 31 27 16 48 50 31 £25,000 – 50,000 24 19 22 22 18 19 15 20 £50,000 – 100,000 14 14 16 18 13 7813 £100,000 + 20 18 7 13 25 6613 Don’t Know 17 30 24 21 28 20 21 23 Refused
3.8 Marylebone High Street’s catchment area has a high proportion of high-earning households (over £100,000) compared with the average for all 7 District Centres. The centre has a low proportion of low income-households (under £25,000) although this proportion is higher than Queensway/Westbourne Grove and St John’s Wood. Marylebone High Street’s local catchment area appears to be one of the more affluent, perhaps only behind St John’s Wood, and broadly comparable with Queensway/Westbourne Grove’s local catchment area.
Ethnicity
3.9 The ethnicity characteristics of visitors interviewed within Marylebone High Street is shown in Table 3.3, and this is compared with visitors within the other District Centres. The ethnicity characteristics obtained from the household survey within each centre’s local catchment area is also shown in Table 3.3.
3.10 Marylebone High Street attracts predominantly white-British visitors (78%). This percentage is significantly higher than the all centre average (54%) but is very similar to the catchment area of this centre (78% white-British). Marylebone High Street therefore does not have an ethnically diverse catchment area or customer base.
14 Table 3.3: Ethnicity of Visitors and Residents (% of visitors and residents)
Ethnic Group Marylebone Queensway/ Warwick Praed St John’s Church Harrow All of Visitors High St Westbourne Way/ Street Wood St/ Rd Centres (%) Grove Tachbrook St Edgware Rd White British 78 60 71 48 64 32 28 54 Afro- 3 12 7313 17 13 10 Caribbean Asian 1 0421 3 22 20 10 European 9 9594817 8 Other 9 15 10 11 6 13 12 12 Refused 0 43810 8 10 6 Ethnic Group Marylebone Queensway/ Warwick Praed St John’s Church Harrow All of Residents High St Westbourne Way/ Street Wood St/ Rd Centres (%) Grove Tachbrook St Edgware Rd White British 75 66 72 75 69 65 41 66 Afro- 0 6410622 5 Caribbean Asian 9 3268655 European 10 11 10 7 10 10 14 8 Other 6 75799612 Refused 0 7744434 Source: NEMS Household and in- Street Surveys 2006
Car Ownership
3.11 Car ownership of visitors and residents is shown in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4: Car Ownership Amongst of Visitors and Residents (% of visitors and residents)
Number of Marylebone Queensway/ Warwick Praed St John’s Church Harrow All Cars owned High St Westbourne Way/ Street Wood St/ Rd Centres by Visitors Grove Tachbrook St Edgware (%) Rd None 29 47 60 66 26 69 65 52 1 43 27 34 26 42 27 28 32 2 19 20 5825 5512 3+ 9 6106023 Number of Marylebone Queensway/ Warwick Praed St John’s Church Harrow All Cars owned High St Westbourne Way/ Street Wood St/ Rd Centres by Residents Grove Tachbrook St Edgware (%) Rd None 39 38 38 34 22 57 49 40 1 36 41 49 51 50 29 37 42 2 22 16 11 10 16 9 10 13 3+ 3 20110 102 Refused 0 4242443 Source: NEMS Household and in- Street Surveys 2006
3.12 Car ownership amongst visitors interviewed in Marylebone High Street was 71%, significantly above the average for all 7 centres surveyed 47%. Marylebone High Street also appears to attract a higher proportion of car owning customers when compared with its local catchment characteristics (with a lower car ownership rate of 61%). The visitor and household surveys identified that most customers walk to
15 Marylebone High Street, which implies that car ownership is not necessarily an important issue affecting the vitality and viability of this centre. However, Marylebone High Street was the only centre out of the 7 District Centres where the results do not imply that local residents without access to a car are more likely to shop in their local centre.
Main Purpose of Visit to the Centre
3.13 The survey of visitors to Marylebone High Street established the main reason for their visit to the centre (Question 01 Appendix G). The results, as shown in Table 3.5, provide a good indication of the centre’s current role.
3.14 The majority of respondents’ main purpose for visiting the centre was to shop (72%). The centre had the 2nd highest proportion visiting restaurants/cafes/public houses (10%) out of the 7 District Centres. This centre also had the 2nd highest proportion of visitors shopping for both food and non-food goods (13%) behind Harrow Road. These results suggest that the centre has a good mix of convenience and comparison units complemented by a range of eating and drinking facilities.
Table 3.5: Main Purpose of Visit (% of all visitors)
Reason for Visit (%) Marylebone Queensway/ Warwick Praed St John’s Church St/ Harrow High St Westbourne Way/ Street Wood Edgware Rd Grove Tachbrook Rd St Shopping for Food 27 51 40 14 27 56 40 Shopping for Both Food and 13 9898814 Non-Food Shopping for Non-Food Goods 12 1 27 54314 Visit the Market 0 001091 Window Shopping 3 210315 Overall Proportion Shopping 72 75 84 55 59 76 73 Services e.g. bank, PO, 9 15 3 10 824 hairdresser Work/Business Purposes 15 9723 19 18 19 Restaurant/Café/Public House 10 51220 02 Social/Leisure e.g. Meeting 1 375344 Friends, gym To Have a Walk/Stroll Around 8 54410 75 Healthcare e.g. Doctor, 5 2116 421 Dentist, Optician Tourism, e.g. Holiday, Day Trip 0 103000 Live here/going home 0 023230 School/College 0 832003 Other 5 379612 Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
NB – Totals add to more than 100% because more than one purpose for visit was given by some respondents.
16 Figure 3.1 – Main purpose of Visit
100%
90% Other 80% Live Here/going home Healthcare 70% To Have a Walk/Stroll Around Social/Leisure/Tourism 60% Restaurant/Café/Public House Work/Business/Education 50% Services e.g. bank, PO, hairdresser 40% Window Shopping Visit the Market 30% Shopping for Non-Food Goods Shopping for Both Food and Non-Food 20% Shopping for Food
10%
0%
t t d ad ree ree oa rove t t R eG dS e n igh S ar row Ro r H ae w r Pr dg Ha stbou St John's Wood We y/ ylebone hSt/E a ar M hurc nsw ick Way/ Tachbrook Street C uee rw Q Wa
3.15 Of those who did not indicate shopping was a main reason for their visit, 42% suggested they intended to do some shopping during their visit (Question 02 – Appendix G). These results suggest that a large number of trips to the centre have a multi-purpose, i.e. shopping and another activity.
3.16 Most visitors gave ‘food shopping only’ as their main purpose for visiting the centre (27%). This was a higher proportion than in Praed Street but lower than all other District Centres studied. Marylebone High Street had the 2nd highest proportion shopping for non-food goods only (13%).
3.17 Only 10% of visitors indicated that they intended to visit leisure/entertainment facilities or eat or drink during their visit (Question 05 Appendix G), compared with an average of 24% for all 7 centres. The on-street surveys were undertaken during the daytime and interviews were conducted in the main shopping area. Therefore, the on-street survey results may understate the social/leisure and restaurant/bar activities.
Intended Visitor Purchases
3.18 Respondents were asked what they intended to buy during their visit (Question 03 – Appendix G). The majority of customers within each District Centre intended to buy food and grocery items. Marylebone High Street had the lowest proportion buying food and grocery goods (68%) with the exception of Praed Street. The average spend on food and grocery goods was £10.60 per customer (Question 04 – Appendix
17 G), which was the 2nd lowest of the 7 centres surveyed and lower than the overall average of £12.60 for the District Centres combined. Most customers in Marylebone High Street District Centre (69%) spent less than £20 on food and groceries.
3.19 For non-food shopping only 38% of customers across all 7 centres indicated how much they would spend on non-food goods (38% intended to spend nothing). In Marylebone High Street only 12% of customers suggested they would spend nothing on non-food goods. However, over 26% suggested they did not know how much they would spend, which may imply that a fairly high proportion of customers had visited the centre to browse rather than to specifically buy certain products. Therefore, non- food shops in the centre may rely on high footfall, window shopping and impulse purchases. The average expenditure (of customers who knew how much they would spend) was £39.80 per customer, which is well over double the average for all 7 centres surveyed (£14.90), and higher than each of the other 6 District Centres.
Table 3.6: Intended Main Purchases (% of shopping visitors)
Type of Goods (%) Marylebone Queensway Church Harrow Warwick Way/ Praed St John’s High St Westbourne Street/ Road Tachbrook Street Wood Grove Edgware Food and Groceries 68 95 89 84 84 57 78 Newspapers/Magazines 3 1619 13 39 Confectionery/Tobacco 0 1511 20 73 Clothing/Footwear 13 3118 2 24 6 Furniture/Carpets/Soft 3 000100 Furnishings Domestic Electrical 1 411330 Other electrical 1 101000 (TV/Hi-Fi) Gifts/Jewellery/China 1 102233 and Glass Health/Beauty/Chemist 21 5155010 Items Books/CD’s/Videos/Toys 14 305272 /Hobbies DIY/hardware/gardening 1 401202 Other household 4 014402 Flowers 0 040102 Other 6 101711 5 Don’t Know 3 052385
Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
NB – Total add to more than 100% because more than one product was suggested by some respondents.
3.20 The vast majority of people who visit the centre to do shopping intend to buy food and groceries (94.7%) which is the highest proportion of all 7 centres. Just 2.8% of visitors to Marylebone High Street intend to buy newspapers/magazines which is considerably lower than the proportion for most other of Westminster’s District Centres with the exception of Queensway/Westbourne Grove. Over 12% of visitors
18 intended to buy clothing/footwear, this was the 3rd highest proportion after Praed Street and Harrow Road. Marylebone High Street had the highest proportion of visitors buying books/CDs/DVDs/Toys/Hobbies (13.9%) of all of the District Centres. This centre also had the largest proportion, by a large margin, of people intending to purchase health/beauty and chemist items (20.8%).
Figure 3.2 – Intended Main Purchases
100%
90%
80% Other/Don'tknow 70% Other household DIY/hardware/gardening 60% Books/CD's/Videos/Toys/ Hobbies Health/Beauty/Chemist Items 50% Gifts/Jewellery/China and Glass Electrical Goods 40% Furniture/Carpets/Soft Furnishings Clothing/Footwear 30% CTN Food and Groceries 20%
10%
0%
d d et tre treet treet ood Roa Roa S W re w o gh S ed a n's arr Hi oh e Pr J H t t/ Edgwa bon achbrook S S
aryle ay/ T M Church S ick W rw a Queensway/Westbourne Grove W
Duration and Frequency of Visit
3.21 Table 3.7 shows the time visitors intended to spend in Marylebone High Street. The overall average length of stay was approximately 49 minutes, which was the third highest in the 7 centres and around the average for the 7 centres combined (50 minutes).
19 Table 3.7: Duration of Visit
Duration of Visit % of Respondent
0-15 min 14 16-30 min 33 31 min-1 hour 10 1-1½ hours 20 1½-2 hours 4 2-3 hours 2 Over 3 hours 15 Don’t Know 3 Average Duration 49 minutes All Centres Averages Average Duration of Visit Queensway/Westbourne Grove 73 minutes St John’s Wood 57 minutes Marylebone High Street 49 minutes Harrow Road 48 minutes Praed Street 48 minutes Church St./Edgware Rd 43 minutes Warwick Way / Tachbrook Street 43 minutes Average for All Centres 50 minutes Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
3.22 Table 3.8 indicates that the majority of respondents visit the centre regularly with 59% visiting once a week or more, although 22% visit once a month or less and 8% never visit the centre (i.e. they were interviewed during their first visit to Marylebone High Street). The average number of visits to this centre per week is 2.3, just above the average for all 7 District Centres.
Table 3.8: Frequency of Visit and Average Frequency
Frequency of Visit % of Respondents In Marylebone High Street Everyday 36 2-3 times a week 10 Once a week 13 Once a fortnight 9 Once a month 9 Less than once a month 13 Never 8 Don’t Know 3 Average visits per week 2.3 per week All Centres Average Average Frequency Warwick Way / Tachbrook Street 2.7 per week Church St./Edgware Rd 2.5 per week Queensway/Westbourne Grove 2.3 per week Marylebone High Street 2.2 per week Harrow Road 1.9 per week St John’s Wood 1.9 per week Praed Street 1.5 per week Average for All Centres 2.1 per week Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
20 4.0 BUSINESS PERFORMANCE
Introduction
4.1 The business occupier survey results provide information on how trading performance is perceived within the 7 District Centres surveyed. The canvas of operators provides information on the level of demand for premises within each centre. In addition trends in rental levels can indicate how a centre is performing.
Business Trading Performance in Marylebone High Street
4.2 Postal questionnaire responses were received from 42 businesses within the centre. Most of these respondents (72%) were long established businesses who have been located in the centre for over 5 years. Businesses were asked to describe their current, past and expected future trading performance, the results of which are shown in Table 4.1 below.
Table 4.1: Businesses’ Views on Trading Performance (% of businesses)
Current Marylebone Queenswa Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s Performance High Street y/ Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Westbourn Edgware Tachbrook e Grove Very Good 12 4718 14 8 11 Good 36 22 18 18 28 31 33 Satisfactory 36 48 39 46 38 38 28 Poor 12 26 32 9 17 19 28 Don’t Know 4 049340 Average Score 0.50 0.04 0.00 0.50 0.39 0.28 0.28 Past Performance Marylebone Queenswa Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s (last 12 months) High Street y/ Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Westbourn Edgware Tachbrook e Grove Improved 45 22 14 18 31 42 22 Stayed the same 24 35 32 27 28 15 45 Declined 26 39 50 36 38 39 33 Don’t Know 5 4418 34 0 Average Score 0.20 -0.18 -0.37 -0.22 -0.07 0.04 -0.11 Expected Future Marylebone Queenswa Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s Performance High Street y/ Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood (next 12 months) Westbourn Edgware Tachbrook e Grove Improve 55 43 18 27 52 31 22 Stay the same 24 35 43 27 24 39 67 Decline 7 22 21 9 17 15 6 Don’t Know 14 0 18 37 7 14 5 Average Score 0.56 0.22 -0.04 0.29 0.37 0.18 0.18 Average Score – Very good=2, Good/improve = 1, satisfactory/stay the same r= 0, Poor/decliner= -1. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
4.3 Views on current trading performance were predominantly positive. Business occupiers in Marylebone High Street considered their performance to be good with
21 and average score of 0.50 which was identical to Harrow Road but higher than all other District Centres surveyed. Businesses rated performance over the past year more negatively with an average score of 0.20, however, this trend was evident across all centres. Business occupiers were optimistic about their future performance in the next 12 months with an average score of 0.56 being recorded in Marylebone High Street, which was the highest score of all the centres.
Property Indicators
4.4 The comparative performance and importance of shopping centres, can be measured by Zone A rental levels for retail property. Published information is available for some centres in central London (source Colliers CRE), including Queensway/Westbourne Grove and Marylebone High Street, as shown in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Zone A Retail Rents (£ Per Sqm) Centre 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Oxford Street 3767 5651 5113 4844 4844 5059 5167 5221 5490 5651 Kensington High St 2153 2422 2153 2691 3229 3322 3444 3283 3283 2960 Westbourne Grove 700 700 861 1076 1615 1938 2153 2099 2260 2422 Notting Hill Gate 700 700 861 1292 1399 1507 1507 1615 1615 1776 Queensway 1076 1076 1292 1615 1615 1615 1615 1668 1722 1776 Marylebone High St 538 915 1023 1292 1292 1292 1399 1399 1399 1453 Edgware Road 646 646 1292 1292 1292 1292 1292 1346 1346 1346 Baker Street 861 861 915 1076 1184 1184 1184 1184 1238 1292 Portobello Road -----1076 1076 1076 1076 1238 Wigmore Street 484 646 753 861 1076 1076 1076 1076 1076 1184
Source: Colliers CRE In-Town Retail Rents
4.5 These figures demonstrate Oxford Street’s dominant position at the top of the shopping hierarchy. Rental levels in Marylebone High Street are relatively strong and are higher than many other central London centres. Rental growth in this centre has been strong and growth in rental levels has been steady over the last decade, but this trend has been generally experienced in other centres in London as shown in Figure 4.1 below.
22 Figure 4.1: Zone A Retail Rents Growth Trends
6000 Oxford Street
5000 Kensington HS
Westbourne Gr. 4000 Notting Hill Gate 3000 Queensway
2000 Marylebone HS Zone A Rent £psm 1000 Edgware Road
0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year
Availability of Premises and Vacancy Levels
4.6 There were 15 vacant units in Marylebone High Street. The vacancy rate (6.6%) is significantly below the Goad national shopping centre average (over 10%). The number of vacant units has fallen in this centre since 2002, from 18 to 15. The low vacancy rate and the fall in the number of vacant units since 2002 suggest that the demand for premises here is strong. This is reflected in the rental growth outlined above.
Property Requirements
4.7 A postal questionnaire was sent to over 300 national and regional multiple retailers and leisure operators, in order to ascertain their potential space requirements in the 7 District Centres in Westminster. A summary of the results is shown in Appendix M. This canvas of operators confirmed only four specific requirements for Marylebone High Street only.
Business Occupier’s Views on Rents and Rates
4.8 Businesses were asked about their views on rents and rates in the centre (Question 10 Appendix I). The results are summarised in Table 4.3 below. The number of businesses suggesting rents and rates were poor significantly outnumbered those
23 suggesting they were good. The average score in all centres was below zero (i.e. below neutral). In general dissatisfaction was slightly worse for rates rather than rents, with the exception of St. John’s Wood where rents are perceived to be particularly high.
4.9 Although businesses rated rents and rates in Marylebone High Street poorly, the centre achieved a higher average in terms of satisfaction with rents than the other District Centres with the exception of Harrow Road. In relation to rates, Marylebone High Street also had the highest average score with the exception of Harrow Road. 81% of businesses in Marylebone High Street suggested that high overheads/rents was a main issue constraining their business.
4.10 Based on our experience of similar business surveys across the country, rents and rates are usually a major issue and bone of contention amongst businesses in town centres.
Table 4.3: Businesses’ views on Rents and Rates (% of businesses)
Rents Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 0 000 00 0 Quite Good 12 0 11 0 21 46 Neither Good nor 45 44 32 64 21 19 17 Poor Quite Poor 17 4 18 0 28 23 6 Very Poor 19 30 14 9 17 23 44 Don’t Know 2 9 14 27 10 4 11 Not Answered 5 13 11 0327 17 Average Score -0.46 -0.83 -0.48 -0.25 -0.48 -0.94 -1.23 Rates Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 0 000 04 0 Quite Good 5 449 74 6 Neither Good nor 41 22 21 36 31 15 22 Poor Quite Poor 26 35 21 18 24 19 6 Very Poor 19 22 32 18 28 39 50 Don’t Know 5 9718 74 6 Not Answered 5 9 14 0315 11 Average Score -0.66 -0.89 -1.05 -0.56 -0.81 -1.05 -1.20 Average Score – Very Good=5, Quite Good=4, Neither Good nor Poor=3, Quite Poor=2, Very Poor=1 Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
24 5.0 NLP’S AMENITY APPRAISAL
Introduction
5.1 NLP undertook an amenity appraisal during the day-time and during the night-time in November 2006. This appraisal was also undertaken in 2002, which allows comparisons to be made.
Day-Time Amenity Appraisal
5.2 The day time amenity rating for Marylebone High Street has increased slightly since 2002, the overall score having risen from 82.6% to 87.0% (see Appendix D), and it has remained ranked top of all 7 District Centres. This centre scores highly on many factors, particularly in environment and safety and security issues, and also in its’ ‘feel good’ factor. Marylebone High Street is only rated as ‘poor’ in one category: ‘promotion/street events’. There have been improvements made to the centre over the last four years, in; the reduced evidence of street fouling, the impact of vacant sites, and the ease of passage for pedestrians. However, there has been a worsening in the quality of street lighting and features which identify the town.
Night-Time Amenity Appraisal
5.3 Marylebone High Street’s overall night-time appraisal rating has fallen slightly since 2002 from 89.5% to 86.8% (see Appendix E), its ranking remains at 1st out of the 7 District Centres. Marylebone High Street scores generally well in its security ratings, but poorly in promotion/street events; which has declined from a rating of ‘average’ in 2002 to ‘poor’ in 2006.
25 Wide roads are reasonably uncongested. Limited and immature landscaping.
Reasonably wide pavement of reasonably high Unit facades are well maintained and sympathetic quality. to the building styles. Upper floors are also well maintained.
Frequent pedestrian crossings facilitate Well maintained railings and bicycle parking. pedestrian flow.
26 6.0 ACCESSIBILITY AND MOVEMENT
Introduction
6.1 Accessibility to Marylebone High Street District Centre, and pedestrian movement within the centre, has been examined based on the following elements of work:
an analysis of public transport linkages;
NLP’s on site visits during the day and night-time;
analysis of the in-street survey results to establish visitors’ views;
analysis of the household survey results to establish local resident visitors’ views; and
analysis of the business postal survey results to establish local occupiers’ views.
Layout of the Centre
6.2 Marylebone High Street District Centre is made up of one primary shopping street with a number of secondary retail areas in the streets leading off from Marylebone High Street, which leads into Thayer Street. The centre is in close proximity to Baker Street Underground tube station.
6.3 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on the layout of the centre (Question 14 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 6.1 below.
Table 6.1: Visitors’ Views on the Layout of the Centre (% of visitors)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 32 19 13 3319 Quite Good 51 56 62 73 52 39 37 Neither Good/Poor 13 10 28 15 28 36 23 Quite Poor 3 233 512 4 Very Poor 0 003 32 0 Don’t Know 1 13 63 9817 Average Score 1.13 1.06 0.65 0.72 0.53 0.31 0.87 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.4 The numbers rating the centre’s layout as good significantly outnumbered those suggesting it was poor. The average score was +1.13, which is around the very good mark (a score of zero is neutral i.e. neither good or poor). All centres achieved above
27 neutral scores (above 0). Marylebone High Street achieved the best average score (1.06) of all of the District Centres.
Modal Split
6.5 Respondents to the in-centre visitor survey were asked (Question 07 Appendix G) how they had travelled to the centre. The results are summarised in Table 6.2 below. In addition, residents interviewed in the household survey (those who have shopped in Marylebone High Street during the past 3 months) were asked how they normally travel to the centre (Question 08 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 6.3 below.
Table 6.2: Visitor’s Mode of Travel (% of Visitors)
Travel Mode Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Walked 51 58 60 45 78 31 44 Car (Driver) 6 0442320 Car (Passenger) 2 001221 Motorbike/Scooter 2 000000 Bus/Coach 7 7 26 27 9 34 4 Train/Tube 26 32 8 17 6 28 26 Taxi 3 310114 Bicycle 2 026311 Other 3 000000 Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.6 The majority of visitors had walked to the centre (51%), only 8% of respondents had travelled by car. However, car travel was very low (8% or less) in all centres with the exception of St John’s Wood (21%). A significant proportion of visitors travelled to Marylebone High Street by train/tube (26%).
6.7 The household survey results for Marylebone High Street indicate (unsurprisingly) that local residents are more likely to walk to the centre (81%) than visitors in general. The results also suggest that local residents do not usually use the tube to get to the centre, but that some local residents drive there. The results suggest that visitors from outside the local catchment area are more likely to use the tube to get to Marylebone High Street.
28 Table 6.3: Local Residents’ Mode of Travel (% of Respondents)
Travel Mode Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Walked 81 69 79 77 88 84 58 Car (Driver) 6 7444520 Car (Passenger) 2 011100 Motorbike/Scooter 2 000000 Bus/Coach 2 19 11 13 4710 Train/Tube 0 030202 Taxi 0 000020 Bicycle 2 213600 Don’t Know 3 0031211 Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Public Transport
6.8 Marylebone High Street has mediocre levels of accessibility by public transport. The nearest tube station is within walking distance (Baker Street) served by the Circle, Hammersmith and City and Metropolitan lines.
6.9 No bus routes run through the centre. The nearest bus stop is located on Marylebone Road, to the north of the centre. Local residents interviewed in the household survey were asked to rate the centre in terms of public transport, and the results are in Table 6.4 below.
6.10 The number of residents rating public transport accessibility as good outnumbered those suggesting it was poor. The average score was +0.21, which is around the neutral mark (a score of zero is neutral i.e. neither good nor poor). All 7 centres achieved above neutral scores (above 0). Marylebone High Street achieved the lowest average score compared to the other 6 District Centres and this average score was considerably lower than the average score for all of the centres combined (1.04).
Table 6.4: Resident’s Views on Public Transport Accessibility (% of Respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 17 33 34 28 25 39 49 Quite Good 19 36 31 39 31 39 27 Neither Good/Poor 13 12 13 15 10 47 Quite Poor 4 341802 Very Poor 17 335140 Don’t Know 30 12 14 11 25 14 15 Average Score 0.21 1.04 1.05 0.94 0.93 1.24 1.45 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.11 Visitors interviewed in the in-street survey were asked to rate Marylebone High Street in terms of bus services, and the results are show in Table 6.5.
29 Table 6.5: Visitor’s Views on Bus Services (% of Respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 4 12 10 19 21 29 35 Quite Good 14 39 66 66 50 52 22 Neither Good/Poor 4 27 22 3345 Quite Poor 5 514333 Very Poor 13 100213 Don’t Know 60 17 1822 11 32 Average Score -0.22 0.67 0.86 1.08 1.09 1.20 1.25 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.12 Marylebone High Street scored the lowest of all 7 District Centres in terms of bus services, and was the only centre to obtain a negative average score (-0.22) in this respect.
6.13 Businesses in Marylebone High Street were also asked to rate the centre in terms of public transport, and the results are show in Table 6.6.
Table 6.6: Businesses’ Views on Public Transport Accessibility (% of respondents)
Bus Services Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 0 13 14 18 10 31 6 Quite Good 29 35 50 18 59 38 33 Neither Good/Poor 17 13 14 18 17 23 11 Quite Poor 12 940706 Very Poor 26 0490011 Don’t Know 17 30 14 36 7833 Average Score -0.43 0.75 0.79 0.57 0.78 1.08 0.25 Train/ Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s Underground High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 7 26 11 0 24 31 11 Quite Good 50 30 54 9 62 46 67 Neither Good/Poor 24 22 14 36 10 11 0 Quite Poor 7 470340 Very Poor 7 470000 Don’t Know 5 13 7 55 0822 Average Score 0.45 0.80 0.58 0.20 1.07 1.13 1.14 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Car Parking
6.14 Car parking is relatively limited within the centre with double yellow lines throughout, although there is some metered car parking in side streets, allowing visitors to park for two hours. There is also a Masterpark Car Park on Cramer Street which has 135 spaces, and charges are £9.00 for two hours and £26.00 for 9 hours.
30 6.15 The in-street survey results suggest that the proportion of visitors travelling by car to this centre is very low. Respondents were asked about their views on the availability and cost of car parking in the centre (Question 14 Appendix G). Local residents were asked a similar question in the household survey (Question 07 Appendix H), see Table 6.7.
6.16 Due to the low proportion of car borne visitors a high proportion of respondents indicated they did not know about car parking availability and charges (64%). Of those who did express a view, the numbers rating car parking availability and charges as poor significantly outnumbered those suggesting it was good. The average scores were -0.94 and -1.17. All centres achieved below neutral scores (below 0) in this respect with the exception of Church Street/Edgware Road. Marylebone High Street had the 3rd highest average score in terms dissatisfaction with the availability of parking and the 4th highest in terms of parking charges.
Table 6.7: Visitors’ Views on Availability of Car Parking and Parking Charges (% of respondents)
Availability Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s of Parking High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 2 260202 Quite Good 5 11 34 29317 Neither Good/Poor 4 6 27 33212 Quite Poor 7 10 17 75617 Very Poor 18 32 5 31 19 19 28 Don’t Know 64 39 11 57 62 70 25 Average Score -0.94 -0.97 0.23 -1.55 -0.80 -1.32 -0.70 Parking Charges Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 2 260102 Quite Good 2 7 38 03020 Neither Good/Poor 6 7 22 57011 Quite Poor 4 7 16 11 89 5 Very Poor 22 34 6 26 18 13 26 Don’t Know 64 43 13 58 63 78 36 Average Score -1.17 -1.12 0.24 -1.49 -1.60 -0.53 -1.05 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.17 The views of local residents were worse with an average score of -0.67 being recorded, marginally better than the average for the 7 District Centres combined (- 0.90). Despite these relatively negative views regarding car parking, only 7% of household survey respondents (Question 12 Appendix H) suggested they would shop more often in Marylebone High Street if there was more or cheaper car parking. Therefore improving car parking may not significantly increase the attraction of the centre, and may exacerbate traffic congestion and result in a reduction in the use of public transport.
31 Table 6.8: Residents’ Views on Availability of Car Parking and Parking Charges (% of respondents)
Availability/ Marylebone Queenswa Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s Price of Parking High Street y/ Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Westbourn Edgware Tachbrook e Grove Very Good 6 248420 Quite Good 2 7611 67 2 Neither Good/Poor 13 14 7 11 3215 Quite Poor 19 7 11 9 12 7 22 Very Poor 17 22 27 33 22 41 21 Don’t Know 43 48 44 28 53 41 40 Average Score -0.67 -0.80 -0.92 -0.67 -0.91 -1.31 -1.02 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.18 The views of businesses in Marylebone High Street were also sought (Question 10 Appendix I), and the results suggest a higher level of dissatisfaction in terms of parking charges, as shown in Table 6.9. The average scores for Marylebone High Street were -0.57 for the availability of car parking and -1.45 for charges. However, these low scores are comparable with the other 6 centres surveyed. The availability of parking whilst ranked negatively was ranked considerably better than the other 6 District Centres by businesses.
6.19 When asked what the main issues constraining their business were (Question 07 Appendix I), 29% of businesses mentioned the availability/location of car parking and 55% mentioned the price of parking.
Table 6.9: Businesses’ Views on Availability of Car Parking and Parking Charges (% of respondents)
Availability Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s of Parking High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 0 000000 Quite Good 24 0 14 0712 11 Neither Good/Poor 14 22 11 9 14 12 0 Quite Poor 43 39 14 18 31 4 33 Very Poor 19 30 57 73 48 65 50 Don’t Know 0 940076 Average Score -0.57 -1.10 -1.19 -1.64 -1.21 -1.33 -1.29 Parking Charges Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 0 400000 Quite Good 0 0407411 Neither Good/Poor 7 9 21 46 7811 Quite Poor 38 17 29 9 10 15 22 Very Poor 50 61 43 46 76 58 44 Don’t Know 5 940015 11 Average Score -1.45 -1.43 -1.15 -1.00 -1.55 -1.50 -1.12 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
32 6.20 A summary of; visitors’, local residents’ and businesses’ views on car parking in Marylebone High Street is shown in Table 6.10. In each instance the parking charges and availability was rated negatively. Business occupiers in particular were very negative in relation of car parking charges. However, visitors also were very negative about parking charges.
Table 6.10: Summary of Views on Availability of Car Parking and Parking Charges
Average Score Visitors Local Businesses Residents
Availability of Car Parking -0.94 ) -0.57 ) -0.67 Car Parking Charges -1.17 ) -1.45
Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Pedestrian Flow
6.21 Pedestrian counts were recorded at 30 different locations within the centre between 3 pm and 5 pm and 9 pm to 11 pm. The results are shown in Appendix F.
6.22 During the afternoon (3 pm to 5 pm), the average pedestrian flow across all 30 locations was 1,478 per hour, which is the 3rd highest average for all the 7 centres surveyed. The average for all of the centres was 1,257 per hour. The evening average was much lower (633 per hour) than the afternoon average, but was slightly higher than the overall average (626 per hour) for the 7 District Centres. These figures suggest that Marylebone High Street is a busy centre during the day, but also has a reasonably buoyant evening economy.
6.23 The distribution of pedestrian flows around the centre is shown on thermal maps in Appendix F. During the afternoon the highest pedestrian flows were recorded on Marylebone High Street at the junction of Moxon Street and Weymouth Street with counts of over 2,640 per hour in places. The figures indicate that the east side of Marylebone High Street generally has much higher pedestrian flows than the west side. The lowest flow counts (around or under 1,000 per hour) were recorded along Nottingham Street, Devonshire Street, New Cavendish Street, Marylebone Lane and the eastern end of Wigmore Street.
6.24 During the night pedestrian flows around the centre were slightly different than the day-time flows. At night, pedestrian flows were higher in the extreme south of Marylebone High Street and in the James Street/St Christopher’s Place area during
33 the evenings due to the presence of restaurants/bars in this area. Evening flows were low within the northern part of Marylebone High Street because this area is predominantly in retail use, the stores are closed at night.
Traffic Congestion
6.25 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on traffic congestion in Marylebone High Street District Centre (Question 14 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 6.11 below.
Table 6.11: Visitors’ Views on Traffic Congestion (% of visitors)
Traffic Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s Congestion High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 1 150135 Quite Good 16 17 35 12 12 26 32 Neither Good/Poor 33 13 39 6 26 17 13 Quite Poor 16 13 14 5915 15 Very Poor 10 31 3 20 18 6 20 Don’t Know 24 26 5 57 34 33 15 Average Score -0.24 -0.75 0.26 -0.77 -0.47 0.07 -0.15 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.26 The numbers of visitors rating traffic congestion as poor significantly outnumbered those suggesting it was good. The average score here was -0.24, which was worse than the score achieved in Church Street/Edgware Road, Praed Street and St John’s Wood.
6.27 The views of local residents were similar with an average score of -0.53 being recorded, this was a higher average score than that achieved in Queensway/Westbourne Grove, and Harrow Road.
Table 6.12: Residents’ Views on the Amount of Traffic (% of respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 0 29510 24 Quite Good 13 12 19 18 14 18 13 Neither Good/Poor 40 22 20 19 30 30 38 Quite Poor 21 29 21 16 23 14 24 Very Poor 21 28 29 38 23 27 21 Don’t Know 4 734090 Average Score -0.53 -0.74 -0.44 -0.67 -0.37 -0.50 -0.43 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.28 Businesses in Marylebone High Street were asked about their views on traffic congestion in the centre (Question 10 Appendix I). The results are summarised in Table 6.13 below. Views on traffic in Marylebone High Street were mixed and the
34 average score recorded was negative (-0.17). All of the other centres surveyed achieved a negative score, with the exception of Queensway/Westbourne Grove. These results for businesses support the results for residents and visitors, where Marylebone High Street rates relatively poorly compared with the other District Centres.
Table 6.13: Businesses’ Views on Traffic Congestion (% of respondents)
Traffic Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s Congestion High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 0 940036 Quite Good 17 17 11 36 31 23 22 Neither Good/Poor 52 44 32 9 17 31 22 Quite Poor 19 17 18 18 10 15 22 Very Poor 7 9 32 18 38 12 11 Don’t Know 5 4418 3 15 17 Average Score -0.17 0.00 -0.66 -0.22 -0.57 -0.09 -0.13 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
6.29 A summary of visitors’, local residents’ and businesses’ views on traffic congestion in Marylebone High Street is shown in Table 6.14. These results confirm that traffic congestion is more a concern for local residents and visitors than for businesses in this area.
Table 6.14: Summary of Views on Traffic Congestion
Average Score Visitors Local Businesses Residents
Traffic congestion/amount -0.25 -0.53 -0.17
Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor=0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2.
6.30 During NLP’s site visits a reasonable level of traffic on Marylebone High Street was observed.
Accessibility Summary
6.31 A summary of the above analysis is shown in Table 6.15.
35 Table 6.15: Summary Analysis for Accessibility
Visitors’ Residents’ Business Views/Rank Views/Rank Occupiers’ Views/Rank Layout of centre Very Positive n/a n/a 1st Bus services Neutral Negative 7th Neutral 7th Train/Underground services n/a 7th Positive 6th Car parking availability Negative Negative 4th Negative 1st Car parking charges Very Negative 1st Very Negative 5th 5th Traffic congestion Neutral Negative Neutral 4th 5th 4th Average Score – Over +1 = Very Positive, + 0.26 to +0.99 = Positive, +0.25 to -0.25 = Neutral, -0.26 to -0.99 = Negative, less than -1.00 = Very Negative.
36 7.0 SAFETY AND CRIME
Introduction
7.1 Safety and crime issues in Marylebone High Street District Centre have been examined based on the following elements of work:
NLP’s on site visits during the day and night-time;
analysis of the in-street survey results to establish visitors’ views;
analysis of the household survey results to establish local resident visitors’ views; and
analysis of the business postal survey results to establish business occupiers’ views.
Personal Safety
7.2 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on personal safety in Marylebone High Street (Question 14 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 7.1 below.
Table 7.1: Visitors’ Views on Personal Safety (% of visitors)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 36 18 14 8 14 12 33 Quite Good 57 50 56 68 62 63 49 Neither Good/Poor 2 19 28 13 13 19 8 Quite Poor 3 217232 Very Poor 2 201312 Don’t Know 0 913636 Average Score 1.22 0.88 0.83 0.77 0.86 0.84 1.18 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
7.3 The numbers rating the centre for personal safety as good significantly outnumbered those suggesting it was poor. The average score was +1.22, which was the highest of all 7 centres surveyed. All of the centres achieved above neutral scores (above 0).
7.4 Only 3% of visitors in Marylebone High Street suggested the centre should be made safer e.g. more CCTV and police (Question 15 Appendix G). There is therefore limited scope for improvements to perceptions of personal safety in this centre because of the high level of satisfaction already being recorded.
37 7.5 Residents interviewed in the household survey were asked a similar question (Question 07 Appendix H) relating to safety and security. The results are summarised in Table 7.2 below. Again the average score for Marylebone High Street was positive (+1.27). Marylebone High Street was ranked highest of all 7 District Centres. None of the resident respondents suggested they would visit the centre more often if safety and security was improved (Question 12 Appendix H).
Table 7.2: Residents’ Views on Safety and Security (% of respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 49 17 11 16 23 14 32 Quite Good 28 31 37 19 33 34 38 Neither Good/Poor 15 31 16 27 32 23 21 Quite Poor 4 9 21 14 7 11 4 Very Poor 0 3 10 19 49 3 Don’t Know 4 945192 Average Score 1.27 0.55 0.19 0.00 0.65 0.35 0.92 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
7.6 Businesses in Marylebone High Street were also asked about personal safety (Question 10 Appendix I), and the results are summarised in Table 7.3 below. The views amongst businesses in relation to personal safety were predominantly positive, with a positive average (0.66) overall. These figures suggest that businesses may be more concerned with personal safety than residents/customers in this area.
Table 7.3: Businesses’ Views on Personal Safety (% of respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 10 900 7011 Quite Good 62 17 18 9 38 35 17 Neither Good/Poor 14 35 18 18 31 35 28 Quite Poor 7 17 18 27 14 15 17 Very Poor 5 9 43 46 10 4 17 Don’t Know 2 13 40 012 11 Average Score 0.66 0.00 -0.89 -1.09 0.17 0.13 -0.12 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Business Security
7.7 Businesses were asked about their views on security in the centre (Question 10 Appendix I). The results are summarised in Table 7.4 below. There were quite mixed views amongst businesses in terms of security. The overall average score (0.25) which, whilst low, was still the highest average for all 7 District Centres.
38 Table 7.4: Businesses’ Views on Security (% of respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 7 00010 06 Quite Good 41 26 21 9 31 39 17 Neither Good/Poor 21 30 36 9 28 35 22 Quite Poor 21 4455 21 8 28 Very Poor 5 17 36 18 10 8 17 Don’t Know 5 22 49 011 11 Average Score 0.25 -0.17 -0.56 -0.90 0.10 0.17 -0.37 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Safety and Crime Summary
7.8 A summary of the above analysis is shown in Table 7.5.
Table 7.5: Summary Analysis for Safety and Crime Perception
Visitors’ Residents’ Business Occupiers’ Views/Rank Views/Rank Views/Rank Personal Safety Very Positive Positive 1st Very Positive 1st Security n/a 1st Neutral 1st Average Score – Over +1 = Very Positive, + 0.26 to +0.99 = Positive, +0.25 to -0.25 = Neutral, -0.26 to -0.99 = Negative, less than -1.00 = Very Negative.
39 8.0 THE CENTRE’S ENVIRONMENT
Introduction
8.1 The quality of the environment in Marylebone High Street District Centre has been examined based on the following elements of work:
NLP’s on-site visits during the day and night-time;
analysis of the in-street survey results to establish visitors’ views;
analysis of the household survey results to establish local resident visitors’ views; and
analysis of the business postal survey results to establish business occupiers’ views.
Shopping Environment
8.2 In-street survey respondents were asked about their views on the shopping environment in Marylebone High Street (Question 14 Appendix G). The results are summarised in Table 8.1 below.
Table 8.1: Visitors’ Views on the Shopping Environment (% of visitors)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 45 24 955324 Quite Good 45 56 55 69 64 50 49 Neither Good/Poor 5 9 30 18 18 24 6 Quite Poor 4 124413 9 Very Poor 0 002141 Don’t Know 1 10 428511 Average Score 1.32 1.14 0.74 0.73 0.74 0.36 0.97 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
8.3 Visitors responded positively in relation to the quality of the shopping environment with an average score of 1.32 being recorded, which was the highest of all 7 District Centres. All of the centres achieved above neutral scores (above 0).
8.4 Residents interviewed in the household survey were asked a similar question (Question 07 Appendix H) relating to the shopping environment in Marylebone High Street. The results are summarised in Table 8.2 below. Again the average score for the centre was positive at +1.43, the highest score of all 7 centres. Marylebone High Street was the only District Centre where the residents rated the shopping environment higher than the visitors.
40 Table 8.2: Residents’ Views on the Shopping Environment (% of respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 60 16 11 9 14 5 19 Quite Good 30 33 24 18 27 16 35 Neither Good/Poor 4 29 20 32 26 20 33 Quite Poor 6 10 24 17 25 25 7 Very Poor 0 9 14 21 7 25 5 Don’t Know 0 364 19 2 Average Score 1.43 0.38 -0.06 -0.25 0.17 -0.55 0.56 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
8.5 Businesses in Marylebone High Street were also asked about the general shopping environment (Question 10 Appendix I), and the results are summarised in Table 8.3 below. The business occupiers held very positive views about the general shopping environment with an average score of 1.10, which was the highest of all 7 District Centres. Business occupiers were not as positive in this respect as residents/customers, however, this trend was experienced across most of the centres surveyed. No businesses identified the quality of the shopping environment as a major issue affecting their business (Question 07 Appendix I).
Table 8.3: Businesses’ Views on the Shopping Environment (% of respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 36 900 04 6 Quite Good 43 26 11 9 31 8 33 Neither Good/Poor 19 35 36 55 31 23 33 Quite Poor 0 17 25 18 21 31 0 Very Poor 2 0 21 18 14 23 6 Don’t Know 0 13 70 312 22 Average Score 1.10 0.30 -0.62 -0.45 -0.18 -0.70 0.43 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
Litter and Cleanliness
8.6 Residents interviewed in the household survey were asked about street cleaning in Marylebone High Street (Question 07 Appendix H). The results are summarised in Table 8.4 below. The average score for this centre was positive (+1.28). Marylebone High Street was ranked joint highest out of the 7 District Centres, with St John’s Wood also achieving an average score of +1.28.
41 Table 8.4: Residents’ Views on Street Cleaning (% of respondents)
Marylebone Queensway/ Church Harrow Warwick Praed St John’s High Street Westbourne Street/ Road Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Very Good 36 9 19 25 26 18 39 Quite Good 53 48 29 23 38 34 51 Neither Good/Poor 9 24 29 27 23 21 9 Quite Poor 0 7 13 9 10 11 1 Very Poor 0 0911 35 0 Don’t Know 2 12 35 011 0 Average Score 1.28 0.67 0.37 0.44 0.75 0.56 1.28 Average Score – Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good/poor= 0, Quite poor= -1, Very poor= -2. Source: NEMS Street Survey 2006
8.7 None of the visitors interviewed during the in-street survey suggested the centre should be made cleaner, when asked what improvements to the centre they would like (Question 15 Appendix G).
Environmental Summary
8.8 A summary of the above analysis is shown in Table 8.5.
Table 8.5: Summary Analysis for Environmental Issues in Marylebone High Street
Visitors’ Residents’ Business NLP Analysis Views/Rank Views/Rank Occupiers’ Views/Rank Shopping Environment Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive Very Positive 1st 1st 1st Street cleaning n/a Very Positive n/a n/a 1st Average Score – Over +1 = Very Positive, + 0.26 to +0.99 = Positive, +0.25 to -0.25 = Neutral, -0.26 to -0.99 = Negative, less than -1.00 = Very Negative.
42 9.0 CENTRE BOUNDARY AND FRONTAGE DESIGNATIONS
Introduction
9.1 This section reviews the boundary designations and frontage policies in Marylebone High Street District Centre. An overview of Central Government guidance (PPS6) and current UDP policy is set out in Appendix K.
Defining Marylebone High Street District Centre’s Boundary and Frontages
9.2 Marylebone High Street consists of Core and Secondary Shopping Frontages. The majority of the centre is Core Frontage. Only peripheral shop premises on Marylebone Lane, Thayer Street, Weymouth Street and some small areas in the north of the centre are identified as Secondary Frontages.
9.3 The relevant issues that need to be considered in Marylebone High Street are:
Should the centre boundary by contracted to exclude parts of the Secondary Shopping Frontages?
Should the centre boundary be extended to include any nearby commercial uses?
Is the demarcation between the Core and Secondary Frontages correct?
Are the policy criteria for the Core and Secondary Frontages correct?
9.4 Dealing with these points in term, the current Secondary Frontages are contiguous with the Core Shopping Frontages. The land use survey indicates that these secondary frontages still retain a predominance of Class A1 to A5 uses and vacancy levels are low. However the short frontage on the east side of Marylebone Lane is currently vacant. If this frontage does not return to Class A uses then the frontage could be excluded from the Secondary Frontage designation and excluded from the centre boundary. We believe there are no reasons to exclude any other parts of the Secondary Frontages from the centre boundary.
Shopping Frontages
9.5 At present 63% of the Marylebone High Street District Centre is defined as Core Shopping Frontage, with quite a lot of the peripheral premises being defined as Secondary Frontages.
43 9.6 The Council’s UDP states that no more than 30% of Core Frontage will be allowed to be used for non-A1 usage in this centre. The current proportion of Core Frontage in non-A1 usage in Marylebone High Street is 28%, which is just within the Council’s threshold. The 30% threshold still appears to be relevant but there is limited flexibility for further changes of use in the Core Frontage.
9.7 The Council’s UDP states that no more than 45% of Secondary Frontage will be permitted to be used for non-A1 usage in this centre. The current proportion of Secondary Frontage in non-A1 usage in Marylebone High Street is 56%, which is above the Council’s maximum threshold, and the policy criteria for the Secondary Frontages have been breached.
9.8 Given that the proportional limits has been breached in the Secondary Frontages, strict interpretation of UDP Policy SS6 would effectively represent a ban on any further changes of use from Class A1 to non-A1 use in the Secondary Frontage, and there is limited potential for changes from Class A1 use in the Core Frontages. This approach may be difficult to defend because the maximum threshold in the Secondary Frontages has been significantly exceeded.
9.9 The adoption of maximum limits on non-A1 use also creates practical problems. The land use within the centre needs to be monitored on a regular basis. All applications for change of use would need to be assessed on up to date information, and the balance between A1 and non-A1 use may change frequently. An alternative approach could be considered.
9.10 We believe the Council should review its frontage policies, and the following options should be considered:
No change – keep the Core and Secondary frontages as they are and keep the current limits on non-A1 use (30% and 45%). This approach may be appropriate if the Council considers that no more Class A1 uses should be lost to non-A1 use anywhere in this centre. The Council must also be confident that this approach can be upheld at appeals.
Change the Non-A1 limit – keep the Core and Secondary Frontages as they are, but increase the current percentage limits on non-A1 use in the Secondary Frontages, so they become more meaningful say 60%.
Adopt a new approach – retain the existing Core Frontages but restrict all changes of use from A1 to non-A1 use. The policy would argue this is the ‘Core Retail Area’ which must be protected. In the remaining Secondary Frontages a more flexible approach to changes of use could be adopted. Rather than an overall 45% (or higher) limit it may be appropriate to prevent more than two consecutive non-A1 uses in any part of the Secondary Frontages, which would
44 be easier to monitor and implement in development control decisions. Alternatively no restrictions on changes of use within Class A uses could be introduced.
9.11 These options should be discussed by policy and development control officers at Westminster.
45 10.0 RETAIL CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Introduction
10.1 This section assesses the quantitative scope for new retail floorspace in Marylebone High Street in the period from 2006 to 2016. The methodology adopted is summarised in Appendix L.
Local Catchment Area
10.2 The local catchment area for Marylebone High Street District Centre is shown in figure 10.1 below. An explanation regarding the identification of this catchment area is set out at paragraph (ii) in Appendix L.
Figure 10.1: Marylebone High Street’s Local Catchment Area
46 Population and Spending
10.3 The local catchment area population and expenditure projections for 2006 to 2016 are set out in Table 10.1 below. Population within the catchment area is expected to remain relatively stable between 2006 and 2016 (see explanation at paragraph viii in Appendix L). Convenience expenditure is expected to increase by 12.6% between 2006 and 2016, and comparison expenditure is expected to increase by 49.1%(see explanation at paragraph (v) in Appendix L).
Table 10.1: Population and Expenditure
2006 2011 2016 Local catchment population 12,403 12,608 13,064
Convenience expenditure per capita (annual) £2,314 £2,370 £2,474
Total convenience expenditure (millions) £28.70 £29.88 £32.32 Comparison expenditure per capita (annual) £4,604 £5,521 £6,518
Total comparison expenditure (millions) £57.11 £69.61 £85.15
Existing Retail Floorspace
10.4 The breakdown of convenience and comparison retail sales floorspace in this centre is estimatedtobe2,300sqm net for convenience shops (including Waitrose) and 7,200 sqm net for comparison shops (see table 2.1).
Existing Spending Patterns 2006
10.5 The results of the household shopper questionnaire survey undertaken by NEMS in October 2006 have been used to estimate analyse shopping patterns. Based on these survey results we estimate that Marylebone High Street District Centre’s market penetration (or market share) within the local catchment area is as follows:
Comparison expenditure -10% and
Convenience expenditure - 58%.
10.6 These figures indicate that the majority of comparison expenditure within the local catchment area of Marylebone High Street is not spent within Marylebone High Street District Centre. This is due to the close proximity of the West End/Oxford Street, which attracts a significant amount of shopping trips. For convenience shopping Marylebone High Street has a reasonably high market share in the local catchment area due to its Waitrose store.
47 10.7 These market share estimates have been used to estimate the amount of expenditure attracted to Marylebone High Street District Centre as shown in Tables 10.2 and 10.3 below. The inflow of expenditure from beyond the catchment area has been estimated based on the in-street survey results (see Appendix G). The inflow estimate for Marylebone High Street District Centre is 50% for convenience shops and 85% for comparison shops.
Table 10.2: Convenience Floorspace Capacity 2006 to 2011 in Marylebone High Street District Centre
2006 2011 2016
A - Total expenditure attracted to £40.25 £36.93 £39.78 Marylebone High St. Centre £M
B - Convenience floorspace sq m net 2,300 2,300 2,300
C - Turnover density £ per sq m £17,502 £10,000 £10,000
D - Expected turnover £M of existing £40.25 £23.00 £23.00 convenience floorspace
E - Surplus/deficit expenditure £M n/a £13.93 £16.78
F - Additional sales floorspace n/a 1,393 1,678 capacity sq m net
G - Additional gross floorspace n/a 1,990 2,397 sq m gross
A - Total expenditure from Tables 1 and 3 in Appendix L B - Total sales floorspace sq m net estimated from the NLP land use survey November 2006 C - 2006 sales density equals available expenditure divided by floorspace Future sales density assumed at £10,000 per sq m net D - Expected benchmark turnover equals floorspace multiplied by expected sales density E - Difference between available expenditure and expected benchmark turnover F – Floorspace requirement – expenditure surplus divided by projected turnover density. G – Gross Floorspace based on 70% net to gross
10.8 These tables project available expenditure on the basis that Marylebone High Street District Centre can maintain its existing 2006 market share of expenditure. However, in reality major retail development elsewhere outside Westminster may result in a decrease in this District Centre’s market share. The comparison projections could be viewed as a maximum figure in view of the likely increase in competition.
48 Table 10.3: Comparison Floorspace Capacity 2006 to 2011 in Marylebone High Street District Centre
2006 2011 2016
A - Total expenditure attracted to £41.80 £50.57 £58.84 Marylebone High St. Centre £M
B - Comparison floorspace sq m net 7,200 7,200 7,200
C - Turnover density £ per sq m £5,806 £6,255 £6,738
D - Expected turnover £M of existing £41.80 £45.03 £48.51 convenience floorspace
E - Surplus/deficit expenditure £M n/a £5.54 £10.33
F - Additional sales floorspace n/a 885 1,533 capacity sq m net
G - Additional gross floorspace n/a 1,264 2,189 sq m gross
A - Total expenditure from Tables 1 and 3 in Appendix L B - Total sales floorspace sq m net estimated from the NLP land use survey November 2006 C - 2006 sales density equals available expenditure divided by floorspace Future sales density assumed to grow at 1.5% per annum D - Expected benchmark turnover equals floorspace multiplied by expected sales density E - Difference between available expenditure and expected benchmark turnover F – Floorspace requirement – expenditure surplus divided by projected turnover density. G – Gross Floorspace based on 70% net to gross
10.9 Projected available expenditure at 2011 and 2016 is compared with the expected turnover of existing retail floorspace within the centre to provide an estimate of surplus expenditure at 2011 and 2016. This surplus expenditure is converted into an additional floorspace requirement based on the existing sales density (annual turnover per sqm) projected to grow at 0.3% per annum for convenience floorspace and 1.5% per annum for comparison floorspace. The results are shown in Tables 10.2 and 10.3 below.
10.10 The figures in Table 10.2 indicate that in 2006 the average sales density for convenience sales floorspace in Marylebone High Street was £17,502 per sqm net. This is the highest figure within the 7 District Centres, and to a large extent reflects the company average turnover density of Waitrose, which accounts for a large amount of convenience sales floorspace within the centre. Notwithstanding the Waitrose store this turnover density is relatively high and suggests there may be
49 latent capacity for additional convenience sales floorspace within this centre. The projections in Table 10.2 assume that the average sales density in Marylebone High Street will reduce to £10,000 per sqm net in the future.
10.11 Surplus convenience expenditure is expected to be insignificant in 2011 and 2016, due to the relatively low predicted population growth and the lower anticipated growth in expenditure per capita. There is limited quantitative need for additional convenience sales floorspace in Marylebone High Street District Centre, based on the maintenance of existing market shares.
10.12 Surplus convenience goods expenditure in this centre is expected to be £13.93 million by 2011 and £16.78 million by 2016. The quantitative floorspace capacity is 1,990 sqm gross by 2011, or 2,397 sqm gross by 2016 in Marylebone High Street.
10.13 The figures in Table 10.3 below indicate that in 2006 the average sales density for comparison sales floorspace was £5,806 per sqm net in Marylebone High Street District Centre. This figure is within the range we would expect for high street comparison shops and is third highest in relation to Westminster’s other District Centres.
10.14 Surplus comparison expenditure in this centre is expected to be £5.54 million by 2011 and £10.33 million by 2016. As indicated above these estimates could be viewed as maximum figures bearing in mind the proposed development at White City, Shepherd’s Bush. The quantitative floorspace capacity is 1,264 sqm gross by 2011, or 2,189 sqm gross by 2016 in Marylebone High Street District Centre.
Operator Demand for Space
10.15 The results of a canvas of national operators is shown in the questionnaire in Appendix M asking about their requirements in Westminster. In total only 13 companies indicated that they do have a requirement in the near future in Westminster. The most popular location in which respondents wished to open a new unit was Marylebone High Street, with four identifying it specifically. Queensway/Westbourne Grove and St John’s Wood District Centres were the next most popular locations with three respondents identifying each as a location for a prospective new unit. Church Street/Edgware Road and Praed Street were 3rd most popular with 2 respondents identifying them in particular as a location for a new unit. Warwick Way/Tachbrook Street and Harrow Road were the least popular locations
50 identified by respondents for a new unit, with only one specifically identifying each centre.
Development Opportunities
10.16 In terms of available sites there are limited opportunities for major development within or adjacent to Marylebone High Street District Centre. It is surrounded by residential streets and there is limited room for expansion. There are no identified vacant or underused sites near this District Centre identified in the UDP.
10.17 The additional A1 retail floorspace potential shown in this section may only be achieved by one or a combination of the following:
the occupation of vacant units by Class A1 use (only 1,500 sqm in vacant units available);
redevelopment of existing commercial floorspace to provide higher density development; and
the change of use of non-retail uses to retail floorspace.
10.18 The absence of development sites and the projected need for A1 retail floorspace suggests that the Council should continue to control and prevent the loss of existing Class A1 floorspace in this centre.
10.19 This centre is ranked top out of all of Westminster’s District Shopping Centres. It was found to have a good range of shops and services of high quality. There is demand for development within this centre, with four national retailers stating they were interested in moving into this centre in 2006.
10.20 Westminster’s UDP policies state that new retail development should primarily be located within the existing hierarchy of defined shopping centres inside the CAZ, District and Local Shopping centres.
10.21 The current successful balance of retail mix in Marylebone High Street should be preserved as the centre is currently performing well. Due to the close proximity of this centre to the West End and wider CAZ, residents of this catchment area have the opportunity to meet their additional convenience shopping needs in Oxford Street and the rest of the West End. 9% of residents indicated that they use these other centres at least once a month.
51 10.22 Although there may be a threat to Westminster’s shopping centres once the White City development in Shepherds Bush comes online in 2008, it is likely that the new development would attract different customers to those visiting Westminster’s District Shopping Centres. The latter serve their local catchment areas and cater for the passing trade of workers and visitors. Although car ownership in this centre’s catchment area is relatively high, 81% of visitors actually walk to this centre, indicating that the residential population do not use their cars for shopping trips, and may not be prepared to drive a long distance to meet their shopping needs. Visitors arriving by public transport, in particular by tube, may be willing to travel out to the White City development. A quarter of all visitors to this centre were found to have arrived by train or tube. Despite this, Marylebone High Street is likely to be less affected by the White City development than some other centres as it is currently performing well. It also has an important local shopping role, attracting more of its local residents than any of the other District Centres. The household survey suggested that 80% of residents in the catchment area used the shops and services in Marylebone High Street District Centre. With Oxford Street and the West End within 5 minutes walk of this centre, it is unlikely that a significant amount of expenditure from the Marylebone High Street catchment area will be lost to Shepherds Bush.
10.23 As the overlap between District Centre catchment areas in Westminster is quite large, the relatively small amount of expenditure lost from Marylebone High Street District Centre is still likely to be spent within Westminster, mainly in the West End and central area. Westminster does not contain self-contained independent town-centres as you would expect elsewhere, particularly outside of London.
10.24 In terms of required floorspace, it should be noted that the retail capacity estimates cited in this report may generally be under-estimates as they are based on a capped population estimate as used by the Greater London Authority (GLA). They are also calculated using catchment areas based on postcode boundaries from where the District Centre is expected to derive most of its trade which may not represent the whole catchment area of each centre, and on population expenditure which is in part based on in-street survey responses. These figures combined may not represent actual expenditure within this centre and from its catchment area, therefore the demand levels detailed are somewhat subjective. In Marylebone High Street for example, demand for additional floorspace is shown to be high as this takes into account the high levels of expenditure within the District Centre based around figures
52 for the affluent catchment area population. This does not necessarily show that more retail floorspace is required to meet their needs, but rather indicates the quality of outlets that would be desirable. Due to Westminster’s nature, many of the District Centre catchment areas are also likely to overlap making actual demand for floorspace within any one District Centre difficult to estimate.
53 11 SUMMARY OF THE DISTRICT CENTRE’S STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
In terms of its vitality and viability this centre is still considered to be “healthy” and this has not changed since the 2002 health check.
Strengths
Marylebone High Street is a reasonably large centre and has a good range of shops and services. Particularly in terms of comparison shopping, the centre boasts a number of high quality retailers which will attract visitors. The centre has a good mix of national multiples and a good range of specialist and independent retailers.
There is a Waitrose store within Marylebone High Street District Centre which is the anchor for the centre, serving predominantly local needs owing to its size.
In addition to retail facilities, Marylebone High Street has a large number of other non-retail services, including places to eat and drink. In particular the use of patios for dining adds to the vitality and viability of the centre.
A key strength of Marylebone High Street District Centre is the quality of the built environment. The fascias and upper parts of buildings are well-maintained, which contributes to the vitality of the District Centre. In addition the centre is clean and tidy and therefore is a pleasant destination for visitors.
Marylebone High Street has a number of pedestrian crossings, giving pedestrians priority over cars and thereby improving pedestrian circulation and ensuring pedestrian safety.
The vacancy rate here is significantly lower than the national average suggesting that demand for premises is reasonably strong. The vacancy rate has fallen since 2002, suggesting a growth in demand for premises; a trend which is mirrored by the growth in rental levels in this centre, growth of which has been strong and steady over the last decade.
Marylebone High Street is a busy centre during the day, but also has a reasonably buoyant evening economy
Personal safety was rated highly within the centre by visitors, residents and occupiers.
The shopping environment in this centre is rated very highly by visitors, residents and businesses.
Weaknesses
The public transport links to Marylebone High Street are relatively poor with the underground stations and bus stations in walking distance of the town centre but not within the centre itself. This is reflected in the low level of public transport usage of visitors to the centre.
54 Marylebone High Street is a linear centre and the distance from one end to the other may deter visitors from visiting all parts of the centre. As a result pedestrian flows are much lower in the peripheral parts of the centre than they are in the heart.
The availability and price of car parking were generally ranked as poor in the Marylebone High Street District Centre, and these were major factors cited by businesses as constraints they face. Visitors and residents also had relatively negative views about car parking.
Traffic congestion could be reduced in the centre. In this respect the centre is underperforming relative to the other District Centres in Westminster.
Opportunities
High trading levels and growth in expenditure within Marylebone High Street could support additional shops and services.
Threats
Marylebone High Street District Centre has a vibrant evening economy and demand for restaurant/bar uses is strong. The balance of uses will need to be controlled in order to ensure that the District Centre’s shopping role is maintained.
There are limited sites available to expand Marylebone High Street District Centre. However, policy changes could be made in accordance with section 9 above to help protect the existing A1 retail units.
Marylebone High Street District Centre may come under pressure from the development of the White City Shopping Centre development in Shepherd’s Bush.
55 Appendix A
Methodology Diversity of main town centre uses
i. Information relating to existing shopping facilities have been collected, based on the Council’s District Centre land use survey 2005, updated where necessary. The total ground floor retail floorspace has been analysed and broken down into use classes/key categories e.g. A1, A2, A3/A4/A5 and vacant shop units. The floorspace figures exclude uses such as B1 office uses and residential units which do not attract visiting members of the public. The definitions of A1 comparison and A1 convenience and other uses are set out at the end of this methodology statement.
ii. EGI’s Retailer Requirements provide published floorspace requirements for multiple operators. This has been used to assess the level of demand for floorspace in each of Westminster’s District Centres, and includes details of existing retailers who may wish to change. This has been supported by data from the postal survey of occupiers in each District Centre. A canvas of over 300 national multiple operators was also undertaken.
Vacancy Rate iii. The proportion of vacant street level property has been calculated from the land use survey 2006, and comparisons between each centre and the GOAD national vacancy rate have been undertaken.
Pedestrian Footfall iv. Pedestrian Market Research Services Ltd. (PMRS) were commissioned to undertake pedestrian flow count surveys in each District Centre. Flow measurements were recorded in the afternoon (3 pm to 5 pm) and night time (9 pm to 11 pm) in each centre. Flow counts were undertaken at each point for 5 minutes per hour and the counts have been factored up to provide an hourly estimate.
Accessibility v. Accessibility is a key issue addressed in PPS6 and is an essential criterion in ensuring the vitality and viability of centres. The Health Check analysis reviews transport services (bus, rail and underground) serving each District Centre. The location, quality, quantity and price of car parking and the pedestrian linkages in each centre has been assessed. vi. Data from the attitudinal surveys, including anecdotal views from business occupiers, visitors and local residents in relation to public transport, car parking, congestion and other factors affecting accessibility have been undertaken.
Attitudinal Surveys
vii. Attitudinal surveys have been used to feed into the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis of each centre, focusing on a wide range of issues. The following survey analysis has been undertaken:
o household telephone survey of local residents;
o on-street visitor survey;
o business occupier survey; and
o canvas of multiple operators. viii. Household Survey: This survey was undertaken by NEMS Market Research and the results have been used to model existing shopping patterns of the local catchment area surrounding each District Centre. The aim of this survey was to capture the views of local residents who regularly visit each District Centre and also residents who do not necessarily shop or visit their nearest centre. On average at least 100 interviews have been completed within each catchment area (657 completed interviews in total – conducted between 13th October and 4th November 2006). The household surveys have been used to assess how residents use their local District Centre, or otherwise, and to obtain their views on the strengths and weakness of their centre, and other destinations visited for shopping.
ix. On-Street Visitor Surveys: NEMS has undertaken on-street visitor surveys in the 7 District Centres. These surveys help to establish the views of customers. A survey of at least 100 customers (completed interviews) has been undertaken within each centre (776 in total). The surveys were conducted during 11th and 20th October 2006. The breakdown of interviews for each day of the week is as follows:
Day Queensway/ Church Harrow Marylebone Warwick Praed St John’s Westbourne Street/ Road High Street Way/ Street Wood Grove Edgware Tachbrook Monday 2-23 32 -- - Tuesday ----25 23 - Wednesday 24 43 44 38 23 23 23 Thursday - 43 23 - 23 23 23 Friday 75 0 23 30 18 21 23 Saturday - 23 --27 23 45 Total 101 109 113 100 116 113 114 x. Business Occupier Survey: a postal questionnaire was sent to 1,206 retail/leisure/service occupiers within the 7 District Centres. The number sent in each centre varied depending on the size of the centre. In total 177 questionnaires were completed and returned (a response rate of 15%).
xi. Canvas of Multiple Operators: a questionnaire was sent to approximately 300 retail/leisure/restaurant multiple operators, who might reasonably be expected to be located within the District Centres. The survey will also include some multiple operators currently represented in the District Centres who may have plans to expand. The questionnaire examined: operators’ perceptions of the centres; potential space requirements; the availability and need for premises and sites; and changes that would be required to make the centres more attractive to them. In total 34 completed questionnaires were returned, a response rate of about 10%.
Perception of Safety and Occurrence of Crime
xii. Data from the attitudinal surveys highlighted above have been supported by NLP’s own assessments, comparable with the approach adopted in previous studies including daytime and night-time perceptions of crime/safety. The following elements of security were evaluated: evidence of vandalism and graffiti; evidence of drunkenness, anti-social behaviour, rowdiness; presence of rough sleepers; presence of beggars; evidence of on-street drinking; evidence of touting and illegal street traders, and effectiveness of deterrent measures e.g. CCTV.
Environmental quality xiii. NLP has re-examined the amenity scores provided in the 2002 Health Check Reports. The analysis criterion include: air pollution, noise, clutter, litter and graffiti, landscaping and open space. The analysis has been compared with the 2002 Health Check Survey and 1997 Health Check Surveys, and is based on fieldwork by NLP. The state of the environmental quality in each centre has been supplemented by the attitudinal surveys of visitors, occupiers and residents. District Centre Boundaries and Frontage Designations xiv. A review of the defined District Centre boundaries was undertaken. Where necessary changes to the boundaries have been recommended.
Retail Capacity Assessment xv. As indicated above, the business survey, EGI’s retailer requirements, and canvas of operators provides valuable input into the potential operator demand for space within each of the centres. In addition a retail capacity assessment has been undertaken for each centre based on the household and visitor survey results. For each centre a primary catchment area has been defined based on postcode areas, taking into account the proximity of other competing centres. These local catchment areas (approximately 1km around each District Centre) represent the area within which each centre is expected to attract most of its trade. Population and expenditure data has been obtained for each catchment area. xvi. The household survey results have been used to estimate each centre’s market share of expenditure within their primary catchment area (including the outflow of expenditure to other centres). Expenditure inflow is estimated from the visitor survey results. The amount of expenditure attracted to each District Centre (comparison goods and convenience goods) is compared with the amount of retail floorspace in centre (derived from the Geographical Information System (GIS electronic mapping system) database) and the sales density achieved has been calculated to assess the strength of trading in each centre. Available expenditure has been projected into the future to assess the potential scope for new retail floorspace in each centre.
Health Check Outputs xvii. The analysis of each District Centre has involved site visits by the NLP team, desk research, and analysis of the survey results. The analysis provides a comprehensive SWOT analysis into the strengths and weaknesses of each centre. Appendix B
PPS6 – Measures of Vitality and Viability diversity of main town centre uses (by number, type and amount of floorspace): the amount of space in use for different functions – such as offices; shopping; leisure, cultural and entertainment activities; pubs, cafes and restaurants; and, hotels; the amount of retail, leisure and office floorspace in edge-of-centre and out- of-centre locations; the potential capacity for growth or change of centres in the network: opportunities for centres to expand or consolidate, typically measured in the amount of land available for new or more intensive forms of town centre development; retailer representation and intentions to change representation: existence and changes in representation of types of retailer, including street markets, and the demand of retailers wanting to come into the centre, or to change their representation in the centre, or to reduce or close their representation; shopping rents: pattern of movement in Zone A rents within primary shopping areas (i.e. the rental value for the first 6 metres depth of floorspace in retail units from the shop window); proportion of vacant street level property: vacancies can arise even in the strongest town centres, and this indicator must be used with care. Vacancies in secondary frontages and changes to other uses will also be useful indicators; commercial yields on non-domestic property (i.e. the capital value in relation to the expected market rental): demonstrates the confidence of investors in the long-term profitability of the centre for retail, office and other commercial developments. This indicator should be used with care; pedestrian flows (footfall): a key indicator of the vitality of shopping streets, measured by the numbers and movement of people on the streets, in different parts of the centre at different times of the day and evening, who are available for businesses to attract into shops, restaurants or other facilities; accessibility: ease and convenience of access by a choice of means of travel, including – the quality, quantity and type of car parking; the frequency and quality of public transport services and the range of customer origins served; and, the quality of provision for pedestrians, cyclists and disabled people and the ease of access from main arrival points to the main attractions; customer and residents’ views and behaviour: regular surveys will help authorities in monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of town centre improvements and in setting further priorities. Interviews in the town centre and at home can be used to establish views of both users and non-users of the centre, including the views of residents living in or close to the centre. This information could also establish the degree of linked trips; perception of safety and occurrence of crime: should include views and information on safety and security, and where appropriate, information for monitoring the evening and night-time economy; and state of the town centre environmental quality: should include information on problems (such as air pollution, noise, clutter, litter and graffiti) and positive factors (such as trees, landscaping and open spaces). Appendix C
NLP’s Attractions Appraisal NLP's Attractions Appraisal
Marylebone High St. Edgware R/Church St Praed Street Harrow Road St John's Wood Queensway/Westbourne Warwick Way/Tachbrook Attractions 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 Retail Provision
Prominence of multiple retailers 1 2 0 0 000011 2 2 0 1
Prominence of independent shops 2 2 2 2 222211 2 2 2 2
Availability of food shopping 1 2 2 1 202222 1 2 2 1
Prominence of specialist shops 1 2 2 1 012222 1 1 1 1
Quality of market (frequency, variety etc) - - 2 2 ------1 1
Quality of retail environment 2 2 0 1 120022 1 1 1 1
Art/Culture
Quality of restaurants (availability/number etc) 2 2 1 1 220022 2 2 2 1 Quality of pub/club/bars 2 2 1 1 110011 1 1 1 1 Range of cultural/community events (theatres, concerts) 0 0 1 0 000000 1 1 0 0 Availability of sports and leisure facilities 0 0 0 0 001100 2 2 0 0 Service Provision
Local services (information, library etc) 1 0 1 1 000022 2 1 1 1
Employment/office space 1 1 0 0 111011 1 2 1 1
Bank/building society provision 2 2 0 0 110011 1 1 0 0
Total 15 17 12 10 10 10 8715 15 17 18 12 11
Percentage 57.7 65.4 46.2 38.5 38.5 38.5 30.8 26.9 57.7 57.7 65.4 69.2 46.2 42.3 Rank 24 5621 4 Appendix D
NLP’s Day-Time Amenity Appraisal NLP's Day Time Amenity Appraisal Marylebone High St. St John's Wood Warwick/Tachbrook Queensway/Westbourne Praed Street Harrow Road Edgware/Church St. 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 Environment Issues
Presence of litter 2 2 220 2 1 1 22010 1 Presence of refuse bags on the street 2 2 121 2 2 1 22000 1 Evidence of street fouling 1 2 222 2 1 2 22010 2 Presence of glass/glasses/other debris incl. food and food containers 2 2 221 2 1 1 11010 2 Condition 2 2 220 1 1 1 11110 1 Quality of buildings 2 2 221 1 1 1 11110 0 Special features (pedestrianisation, street furniture etc) 1 1 111 1 1 1 00101 1 Impact of vacant sites 1 2 220 2 1 1 01110 1 Safety and Security Issues Evidence of vandalism and graffiti (incl. on street furniture) 2 2 221 2 1 2 11010 1 Security during shopping hours (availability, access, security etc( 2 2 111 1 2 2 01111 1 Ease of passage for pedestrians (inc. presence of obstacles e.g. illegally parked vehicles 0 2 111 1 1 1 01112 1 Evidence of drunkenness, anti-social, behaviour, rowdiness 2 2 221 2 2 2 12221 0 Presence of rough sleepers 2 2 222 2 2 2 21222 0 Presence of beggars 2 2 222 2 1 1 02220 1 Presence of street drinkers 2 2 222 2 2 2 22120 1 Evidence of touting (e.g. mini cabs, rickshaws, prostitution, drug dealing etc) 2 2 222 2 2 1 22222 2 Presence of illegal street traders, e.g. counterfeit goods, hot dogs, peanuts etc 2 2 222 2 2 2 22121 1 Effectiveness of any deterrent measure (CCTV, police patrols, door security etc) 1 1 111 1 2 2 11112 1 Quality of street lighting 2 1 121 1 1 1 11111 1 Safety perception in shopping hours 2 2 221 1 1 1 12010 0 Identity of town centre
Features which identify the centre (e.g. flagship stores, buildings etc) 2 1 111 0 2 2 11002 0 Promotion/street events 0 0 000 1 0 0 00001 1 Feel good factor of town centre' 2 2 221 1 1 1 11000 0 Total 38 40 37 39 25 34 31 31 24 30 18 24 16 20
Percentage 82.6 87.0 80.4 84.8 54.3 73.9 67.4 67.4 52.2 65.2 39.1 52.2 34.8 43.5 Rank 1 1 2 2 4 3 3 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 Appendix E
NLP’s Night-Time Amenity Appraisal NLP's Night Time Appraisal Marylebone High St. St John's Wood Warwick/Tachbrook Queensway/Westbourne Praed Street Edgware/Church St. Harrow Road 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 2002 2006 Environmental Issues Presence of litter 1 1 22 0 1 1 1 110111 Presence of refuse bags on the street 1 1 10 1 0 2 0 100111 Evidence of street fouling 2 2 22 2 2 1 2 111112
Presence of glass/glasses/other debris incl. 2 2 22 1 1 1 1 111111 food and food containers/wrapping Security and Crime Issues Feeling of security 2 2 22 1 1 1 2 110100 Evidence of Vandalism and Graffiti 2 2 22 1 2 1 2 110100 (incl. on street furniture) Ease of passage for pedestrians (incl. presence 2 2 22 2 2 1 1 222222 of obstacles eg illegally parked vehicles) Evidence of drunkenness, anti-social 2 2 22 1 2 1 2 220112 Behaviour, rowdiness Presence of rough sleepers 2 2 22 2 2 1 2 121222 Presence of beggars 2 2 22 2 2 1 2 222222 Presence of street drinkers 2 2 22 1 2 1 2 120112 Presence of illegal street traders 2 2 22 2 2 1 2 222212 e.g counterfeit goods, hot dogs, peanuts etc. Evidence of touting (e.g. mini cabs, rickshaws, 2 2 22 2 2 1 2 222222 Prostitution, drug dealing etc.) Effectiveness of any deterrent measures 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 111111 (CCTV, police patrols, door security etc) Quality of street lighting 2 2 12 1 1 1 1 111111 Safety perception out of shopping hours 2 2 22 1 1 1 1 110000
Identity of town centre Features which identify the centre 2 2 11 1 1 2 2 111100 (e.g. quality of food and drink premises, building etc) Promotion/ Street events 1 0 11 1 1 1 0 100000 ‘Feel good’ factor of centre at night 2 2 22 1 1 1 1 110100 Total 34 33 33 33 24 27 21 27 24 24 14 22 17 21
Percentage 89.5% 86.8% 86.8% 86.8% 63.2% 71.1% 55.3% 71.1% 63.2% 63.2% 36.8% 57.9% 44.7% 55.3%
Rank 1 (=)1 2 (=)1 (=)3 (=)3 5 (=)3 (=)3 5 7 6 6 7 Appendix F
PMRS Pedestrian Flowcounts October 2006 Table F.1: PMRS Day-time Pedestrian Flow Counts
Average Pedestrian Flow Location Index 3pm - 5pm 1 Queensway 2033 253% 2 Edgware Road 1821 226% 3 Marylebone High Street 1478 184% 4 Praed Street 1150 143% 5 Warwick Way 876 109% 6 St Johns Wood 733 91% 7 Harrow Road 710 88% Average 805 100
Average Average number of pedestrians passing each count point in both directions Pedestrian Flow
Index Percentage of average flow all centres
Table F.2: PMRS Night-time Pedestrian Flow Counts
Average Pedestrian Flow Location Index 9pm - 11pm
1 Harrow Road 344 55%
2 Praed Street 810 129%
3 Edgware Road 1237 198%
4 Warwick Way 537 86%
5 Queensway 645 103%
6 St Johns Wood 178 28%
7 Marylebone High Street 633 101%
Average 626 100
Average Pedestrian Flow Average number of pedestrians passing each count point in both directions
Index Percentage of average flow all centres Table F.3: Marylebone High Street District Centre Day and Night-Time Pedestrian Flows
3pm - 5pm 9pm - 11pm OCCUPIER STREET & ADDRESS Note Count Index Count Index THE CONRAN SHOP 55-57 Marylebone High Street 960 65 180 28 ODINS REST 27 Devonshire Street 630 43 210 33 NEW YORK NAIL CO SALON 38 Marylebone High Street 1,890 128 270 43 ODDBINS OFF LICENCE 32 Marylebone High Street 2,190 148 570 90 TERRE D'OC GIFTS 26 Marylebone High Street 2,640 179 360 57 VODAFONE 9 Marylebone High Street 2,100 142 300 47 THE BACK SHOP FURN 14-16 New Cavenish Street 900 61 120 19 NEW CAVENDISH JWLLR 2 Marylebone High Street 2,190 148 1,170 185 RYMAN STATIONER 24-27 Thayler Street 1,410 95 1,020 161 MARTIN BARNET FURN 68-72 Marylebone Lane 990 67 120 19 JOHN BELL & CROYDEN CHEMIST 50-54 Wigmore Street 1,140 77 330 52 MARGARET HOWELL CLOTHING 32-34 Wigmore Street 930 63 210 33 SIX 13 BAR & REST 19 Wigmore Street 960 65 210 33 BULTHAUP FURN 37 Wigmore Street 1,140 77 120 19 ALEXANDER FURNISHINGS FURN 51-61 Wigmore Street 1,500 101 570 90 WHISTLES L/WR 12 St Christopher Place T 1,920 130 1,110 175 JOY CLOTHING 28-32 St Christopher Place T 2,370 160 1,230 194 DUE PASSI SHOES 27 James Street 1,380 93 1,050 166 TUXEDO EXPRESS D/C 56 James Street 1,500 101 840 133 GEORGI L/WR 91 Wigmore Street 1,350 91 780 123 ARGO TRAVEL 100 Wigmore Street 930 63 840 133 THE MANDEVILLE HOTEL 8-14 Mandeville Place 1,290 87 870 137 LADBROKES BET OFF 11 Thayer Street 1,530 104 720 114 WHISTLES L/WR 1 Thayer Street 1,650 112 690 109 TESCO EXPRESS 112-114 Marylebone High Street 2,370 160 1,380 218 BOOTS 102-103 Marylebone High Street 1,710 116 780 123 DE JAC L/WR 87 Marylebone High Street 1,800 122 990 156 PUBLIC IMAGE HAIR 63 Paddington Street 1,140 77 450 71 ALL BAR ONE BAR & REST 7-9 Paddington Street 990 67 900 142 THOMPSONS MARYLEBONE GALLERIES 76 Marylebone High Street 840 57 600 95 AVERAGE 1,478 100 633 100 Figure F.1: Marylebone High Street District Centre Day and Night-Time Pedestrian Flow comparison
MARYLEBONE HIGH STREET - OCTOBER 2006
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000 INDEXED PEDESTRIAN FLOW
500
0 12345678910 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
COUNT POINTS
3pm - 5pm 9pm - 11pm Figure F.2: Marylebone High Street District Centre Day and Night-Time Pedestrian Flow Thermal Map
Appendix G
In-Street Visitor Survey Results Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 63 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
Q01 What is the main purpose of your visit to Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street?
Shopping for food only 27.0% 27 19.6% 9 33.3% 18 45.0% 9 20.9% 9 24.3% 9 28.0% 23 25.0% 4 Shopping for non-food goods 13.0% 13 15.2% 7 11.1% 6 5.0% 1 16.3% 7 13.5% 5 12.2% 10 6.3% 1 only Shopping for both food & 12.0% 12 6.5% 3 16.7% 9 0.0% 0 11.6% 5 18.9% 7 12.2% 10 12.5% 2 non-food items Shopping for specialist foods 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 / goods / items specific to centre Window shopping 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 5.6% 3 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 0.0% 0 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 To visit the Market 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 To visit a restaurant / café / 10.0% 10 8.7% 4 11.1% 6 15.0% 3 7.0% 3 10.8% 4 12.2% 10 0.0% 0 public house To have a walk / stroll 8.0% 8 8.7% 4 7.4% 4 10.0% 2 0.0% 0 16.2% 6 8.5% 7 6.3% 1 around To use services e.g. bank, 9.0% 9 8.7% 4 9.3% 5 10.0% 2 9.3% 4 8.1% 3 7.3% 6 18.8% 3 post office, hairdresser Work / business purposes 15.0% 15 21.7% 10 9.3% 5 20.0% 4 18.6% 8 8.1% 3 15.9% 13 12.5% 2 Healthcare e.g. doctor, 5.0% 5 4.3% 2 5.6% 3 0.0% 0 11.6% 5 0.0% 0 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 dentist, optician Social / leisure reason e.g. 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 meeting friends, going to gym Tourism, e.g. holiday, day 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 trip Other 3.0% 3 6.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 5.4% 2 1.2% 1 12.5% 2 Going to school / college 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Live here 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Going to the hospital 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Going home 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (None) 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Q02 Do you intend to do any shopping in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway- Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street today ? Those who did not mention shopping for food, non food or both food and non food at Q01
Yes 41.7% 20 37.0% 10 47.6% 10 40.0% 4 45.5% 10 37.5% 6 46.2% 18 22.2% 2 No 58.3% 28 63.0% 17 52.4% 11 60.0% 6 54.5% 12 62.5% 10 53.8% 21 77.8% 7 Base: 482721102216399
Q03 What do you intend to buy in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway- Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street today ? Those who intend to shop in the centre at Q01
Food and groceries 68.1% 49 58.6% 17 74.4% 32 71.4% 10 67.7% 21 66.7% 18 63.9% 39 88.9% 8 Newspapers / Magazines 2.8% 2 3.4% 1 2.3% 1 7.1% 1 0.0% 0 3.7% 1 0.0% 0 22.2% 2 Confectionery / Tobacco 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Clothing / Footwear 12.5% 9 10.3% 3 14.0% 6 21.4% 3 12.9% 4 7.4% 2 8.2% 5 22.2% 2 Furniture / Carpets / Soft 2.8% 2 3.4% 1 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 6.5% 2 0.0% 0 3.3% 2 0.0% 0 furnishings Domestic electrical goods 1.4% 1 3.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.7% 1 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 Other electrical goods (TV, 1.4% 1 3.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 Hi-fi etc) DIY / Hardware / Gardening 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 7.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 Other household goods 4.2% 3 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 11.1% 3 4.9% 3 0.0% 0 Gifts / Jewellery / China and 1.4% 1 3.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 Glass Books / CD’s / DVDs / Toys 13.9% 10 17.2% 5 11.6% 5 0.0% 0 16.1% 5 18.5% 5 9.8% 6 22.2% 2 /Hobbies Health / Beauty / Chemist 20.8% 15 17.2% 5 23.3% 10 0.0% 0 32.3% 10 18.5% 5 24.6% 15 0.0% 0 items Specialist foods / goods / 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 items specific to that centre Other 4.2% 3 6.9% 2 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 3.2% 1 7.4% 2 3.3% 2 11.1% 1 Flowers 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 2.8% 2 6.9% 2 0.0% 0 14.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.3% 2 0.0% 0 Base: 722943143127619
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 64 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
Q04 Approximately how much will you spend in total on each of the following during your visit to Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street? Those who intend to shop in the centre at Q01
Food & Grocery
Nothing 12.5% 9 20.7% 6 7.0% 3 7.1% 1 9.7% 3 18.5% 5 14.8% 9 0.0% 0 Less than £5.00 19.4% 14 10.3% 3 25.6% 11 50.0% 7 16.1% 5 7.4% 2 18.0% 11 33.3% 3 £5.01-£10.00 23.6% 17 34.5% 10 16.3% 7 7.1% 1 35.5% 11 18.5% 5 21.3% 13 22.2% 2 £10.01-£20.00 13.9% 10 10.3% 3 16.3% 7 7.1% 1 12.9% 4 18.5% 5 11.5% 7 33.3% 3 £20.01-£30.00 1.4% 1 3.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 £30.01-£40.00 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 3.2% 1 3.7% 1 3.3% 2 0.0% 0 £40.01-£50.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 £50.01-£75.00 4.2% 3 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 11.1% 3 4.9% 3 0.0% 0 £75.01-£100.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 £100.01-£150.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 More than £150.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 22.2% 16 20.7% 6 23.3% 10 28.6% 4 19.4% 6 22.2% 6 24.6% 15 11.1% 1 Mean: 10.6 6.6 13.4 4.0 8.6 16.2 11.1 8.4 Base: 722943143127619
Non-food
Nothing 12.5% 9 17.2% 5 9.3% 4 7.1% 1 22.6% 7 3.7% 1 13.1% 8 11.1% 1 Less than £5.00 18.1% 13 20.7% 6 16.3% 7 7.1% 1 9.7% 3 33.3% 9 18.0% 11 22.2% 2 £5.01-£10.00 5.6% 4 0.0% 0 9.3% 4 0.0% 0 12.9% 4 0.0% 0 6.6% 4 0.0% 0 £10.01-£20.00 8.3% 6 10.3% 3 7.0% 3 0.0% 0 9.7% 3 11.1% 3 9.8% 6 0.0% 0 £20.01-£30.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 £30.01-£40.00 5.6% 4 6.9% 2 4.7% 2 14.3% 2 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 3.3% 2 22.2% 2 £40.01-£50.00 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 0.0% 0 22.2% 2 £50.01-£75.00 6.9% 5 0.0% 0 11.6% 5 0.0% 0 6.5% 2 11.1% 3 8.2% 5 0.0% 0 £75.01-£100.00 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 7.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 £100.01-£150.00 6.9% 5 6.9% 2 7.0% 3 0.0% 0 9.7% 3 7.4% 2 8.2% 5 0.0% 0 More than £150.00 5.6% 4 13.8% 4 0.0% 0 7.1% 1 9.7% 3 0.0% 0 3.3% 2 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 26.4% 19 24.1% 7 27.9% 12 57.1% 8 19.4% 6 18.5% 5 27.9% 17 22.2% 2 Mean: 39.8 49.1 33.2 55.8 44.3 30.2 36.2 23.6 Base: 722943143127619
Eating / drinking out
Nothing 30.6% 22 24.1% 7 34.9% 15 35.7% 5 29.0% 9 29.6% 8 31.1% 19 33.3% 3 Less than £5.00 12.5% 9 10.3% 3 14.0% 6 0.0% 0 19.4% 6 11.1% 3 14.8% 9 0.0% 0 £5.01-£10.00 6.9% 5 17.2% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.5% 2 11.1% 3 4.9% 3 0.0% 0 £10.01-£20.00 1.4% 1 3.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.7% 1 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 £20.01-£30.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 £30.01-£40.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 £40.01-£50.00 1.4% 1 3.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 £50.01-£75.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 £75.01-£100.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 £100.01-£150.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 More than £150.00 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 47.2% 34 41.4% 12 51.2% 22 64.3% 9 41.9% 13 44.4% 12 45.9% 28 66.7% 6 Mean: 3.16 6.18 0.71 0.00 4.17 3.00 3.18 0.00 Base: 722943143127619
Q05 Do you intend to visit any leisure / entertainment facilities or eat / drink in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street today?
Yes 31.0% 31 41.3% 19 22.2% 12 25.0% 5 41.9% 18 21.6% 8 32.9% 27 12.5% 2 No 69.0% 69 58.7% 27 77.8% 42 75.0% 15 58.1% 25 78.4% 29 67.1% 55 87.5% 14 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 65 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
Q06 And what type of facilities do you intend to visit today? Those who said Yes at Q05
Sports facilities 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Pubs / bars 6.5% 2 10.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 11.1% 2 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 0.0% 0 Restaurants 29.0% 9 26.3% 5 33.3% 4 40.0% 2 27.8% 5 25.0% 2 33.3% 9 0.0% 0 Takeaway food 6.5% 2 10.5% 2 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 0.0% 0 Walk about / look around 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Cafes / Coffee Shops 45.2% 14 52.6% 10 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 61.1% 11 37.5% 3 37.0% 10 100.0% 2 Theatre / cinema 3.2% 1 5.3% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.7% 1 0.0% 0 Other 6.5% 2 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 11.1% 2 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 0.0% 0 Library 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 9.7% 3 5.3% 1 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 37.5% 3 11.1% 3 0.0% 0 Base: 3119125188272
Q07 How did you travel to Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street today ?
Car-driver 6.0% 6 8.7% 4 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 9.3% 4 5.4% 2 7.3% 6 0.0% 0 Car-passenger 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 10.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 Bus / coach 7.0% 7 6.5% 3 7.4% 4 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 10.8% 4 6.1% 5 12.5% 2 Train / Tube 26.0% 26 28.3% 13 24.1% 13 25.0% 5 34.9% 15 16.2% 6 26.8% 22 12.5% 2 Taxi 3.0% 3 6.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 2.7% 1 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 Walked 51.0% 51 43.5% 20 57.4% 31 60.0% 12 34.9% 15 64.9% 24 52.4% 43 50.0% 8 Bicycle 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Other 3.0% 3 6.5% 3 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 12.5% 2 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Q08 Where did you park your car in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway- Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street today ? Those who said car-driver at Q07
Supermarket car park 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Work car park 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Masterpark / NCP car park 16.7% 1 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 16.7% 1 0.0% 0 Off street public car park 16.7% 1 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 16.7% 1 0.0% 0 On-street / car park meter 50.0% 3 50.0% 2 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 75.0% 3 0.0% 0 50.0% 3 0.0% 0 Other 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Residential parking 16.7% 1 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 16.7% 1 0.0% 0 Base: 64204260
Q09 Was this your first choice place to park ? Those who said car-driver at Q07
Yes 100.0% 6 100.0% 4 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 4 100.0% 2 100.0% 6 0.0% 0 No 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Base: 64204260
Q10 How long was your journey time to reach Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street today ? Those who said car-driver / passenger at Q07
0-5 minutes 12.5% 1 0.0% 0 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 16.7% 1 0.0% 0 6-10 minutes 12.5% 1 0.0% 0 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 16.7% 1 0.0% 0 11-15 minutes 12.5% 1 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 16.7% 1 0.0% 0 16-30 minutes 25.0% 2 50.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 25.0% 1 50.0% 1 33.3% 2 0.0% 0 30 minutes or more 37.5% 3 25.0% 1 50.0% 2 100.0% 2 25.0% 1 0.0% 0 16.7% 1 100.0% 2 Base: 84424262
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 66 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
Q11 Which other shopping centres or towns do you use regularly, i.e. at least once a month ?
No other centre 3.0% 3 4.3% 2 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 2.7% 1 2.4% 2 6.3% 1 Ashcroft Kings Mall 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Baker Street 5.0% 5 6.5% 3 3.7% 2 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 10.8% 4 3.7% 3 12.5% 2 Bayswater 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Bluewater 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 10.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Brent Cross 5.0% 5 4.3% 2 5.6% 3 5.0% 1 9.3% 4 0.0% 0 4.9% 4 6.3% 1 Broadway Shopping Mall 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Brompton Road 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Camden Town 4.0% 4 2.2% 1 5.6% 3 15.0% 3 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 Church Street – Edgware 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road North Covent Garden 2.0% 2 2.2% 1 1.9% 1 10.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Edgware Road (south of 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 Harrow Road Flyover) Hammersmith 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 Harrow Road 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 Kensington High Street 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Kings Road 8.0% 8 10.9% 5 5.6% 3 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 18.9% 7 9.8% 8 0.0% 0 Knightsbridge 9.0% 9 4.3% 2 13.0% 7 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 16.2% 6 11.0% 9 0.0% 0 Ladbroke Grove 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 Marylebone High Street 25.0% 25 19.6% 9 29.6% 16 10.0% 2 20.9% 9 37.8% 14 25.6% 21 12.5% 2 Oxford Street / West End / 47.0% 47 43.5% 20 50.0% 27 50.0% 10 46.5% 20 45.9% 17 51.2% 42 31.3% 5 Regent Street / Bond Street Praed Street 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Queensway / Westbourne 4.0% 4 4.3% 2 3.7% 2 10.0% 2 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Grove Shepherd’s Bush W12 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 St Johns Wood 3.0% 3 4.3% 2 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 5.4% 2 1.2% 1 12.5% 2 Tottenham Court Road 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Vauxhall Bridge Road 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Warwick Way / Tachbrook 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Street Waterloo 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Other 43.0% 43 45.7% 21 40.7% 22 50.0% 10 48.8% 21 32.4% 12 42.7% 35 37.5% 6 Ealing 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Finchley 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Islington 3.0% 3 4.3% 2 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 Kilburn 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Lakeside 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Primrose Hill 3.0% 3 6.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 5.4% 2 1.2% 1 12.5% 2 Swiss Cottage 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Victoria Street 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Watford 4.0% 4 4.3% 2 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 9.3% 4 0.0% 0 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Q12 Approximately how much time will you spend in the shopping area in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street today?
0-15 minutes 18.0% 18 19.6% 9 16.7% 9 5.0% 1 20.9% 9 21.6% 8 17.1% 14 25.0% 4 16-30 minutes 27.0% 27 34.8% 16 20.4% 11 35.0% 7 25.6% 11 24.3% 9 26.8% 22 31.3% 5 31 minutes – under 1 hour 25.0% 25 13.0% 6 35.2% 19 40.0% 8 20.9% 9 21.6% 8 26.8% 22 18.8% 3 1–1½hours 17.0% 17 10.9% 5 22.2% 12 20.0% 4 14.0% 6 18.9% 7 15.9% 13 25.0% 4 Over 1 ½ - 2 hours 7.0% 7 8.7% 4 5.6% 3 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 10.8% 4 6.1% 5 0.0% 0 Over 2-3 hours 5.0% 5 10.9% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 9.3% 4 2.7% 1 6.1% 5 0.0% 0 Over 3 hours 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Q13 How often do you shop in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway- Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street?
Everyday 30.0% 30 17.4% 8 40.7% 22 45.0% 9 20.9% 9 32.4% 12 31.7% 26 25.0% 4 2-3 times a week 25.0% 25 26.1% 12 24.1% 13 10.0% 2 34.9% 15 21.6% 8 30.5% 25 0.0% 0 Once a week 7.0% 7 6.5% 3 7.4% 4 10.0% 2 2.3% 1 10.8% 4 3.7% 3 25.0% 4 Once a fortnight 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Once a month 9.0% 9 19.6% 9 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 14.0% 6 5.4% 2 3.7% 3 25.0% 4 Less than once a month 24.0% 24 23.9% 11 24.1% 13 30.0% 6 18.6% 8 27.0% 10 24.4% 20 25.0% 4 Never 5.0% 5 6.5% 3 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 9.3% 4 2.7% 1 6.1% 5 0.0% 0 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 67 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
Mean Score - Very good=5, Quite good=4, Neither good nor poor=3, Quite poor=2, Very poor=1
Q14 Please rate Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street in respect of the following factors?
Availability of parking
Very good 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Quite good 5.0% 5 4.3% 2 5.6% 3 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 5.4% 2 3.7% 3 12.5% 2 Neither good nor poor 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 7.4% 4 5.0% 1 7.0% 3 0.0% 0 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 Quite poor 7.0% 7 8.7% 4 5.6% 3 5.0% 1 11.6% 5 2.7% 1 7.3% 6 6.3% 1 Very poor 18.0% 18 23.9% 11 13.0% 7 15.0% 3 11.6% 5 27.0% 10 17.1% 14 25.0% 4 (Don’t know) 64.0% 64 63.0% 29 64.8% 35 75.0% 15 62.8% 27 59.5% 22 64.6% 53 56.3% 9 Mean: 2.06 1.59 2.47 1.60 2.25 2.00 2.07 2.00 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Parking charges
Very good 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Quite good 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Neither good nor poor 6.0% 6 6.5% 3 5.6% 3 5.0% 1 7.0% 3 5.4% 2 7.3% 6 0.0% 0 Quite poor 4.0% 4 6.5% 3 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 9.3% 4 0.0% 0 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 Very poor 22.0% 22 28.3% 13 16.7% 9 20.0% 4 20.9% 9 24.3% 9 18.3% 15 43.8% 7 (Don’t know) 64.0% 64 58.7% 27 68.5% 37 75.0% 15 58.1% 25 64.9% 24 64.6% 53 56.3% 9 Mean: 1.83 1.47 2.24 1.40 2.00 1.77 2.03 1.00 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Traffic congestion
Very good 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 16.0% 16 15.2% 7 16.7% 9 5.0% 1 11.6% 5 27.0% 10 19.5% 16 0.0% 0 Neither good nor poor 33.0% 33 19.6% 9 44.4% 24 55.0% 11 34.9% 15 18.9% 7 32.9% 27 37.5% 6 Quite poor 16.0% 16 21.7% 10 11.1% 6 10.0% 2 20.9% 9 13.5% 5 14.6% 12 25.0% 4 Very poor 10.0% 10 10.9% 5 9.3% 5 0.0% 0 11.6% 5 13.5% 5 9.8% 8 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 24.0% 24 30.4% 14 18.5% 10 30.0% 6 20.9% 9 24.3% 9 22.0% 18 37.5% 6 Mean: 2.76 2.66 2.84 2.93 2.59 2.89 2.84 2.60 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Bus service
Very good 4.0% 4 4.3% 2 3.7% 2 10.0% 2 2.3% 1 2.7% 1 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 Quite good 14.0% 14 6.5% 3 20.4% 11 5.0% 1 14.0% 6 18.9% 7 11.0% 9 18.8% 3 Neither good nor poor 4.0% 4 8.7% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 10.8% 4 2.4% 2 12.5% 2 Quite poor 5.0% 5 6.5% 3 3.7% 2 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 5.4% 2 6.1% 5 0.0% 0 Very poor 13.0% 13 4.3% 2 20.4% 11 15.0% 3 7.0% 3 18.9% 7 13.4% 11 12.5% 2 (Don’t know) 60.0% 60 69.6% 32 51.9% 28 65.0% 13 72.1% 31 43.2% 16 62.2% 51 56.3% 9 Mean: 2.78 3.00 2.65 2.71 3.00 2.67 2.68 2.86 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Personal safety
Very good 36.0% 36 54.3% 25 20.4% 11 40.0% 8 32.6% 14 37.8% 14 36.6% 30 25.0% 4 Quite good 57.0% 57 39.1% 18 72.2% 39 60.0% 12 62.8% 27 48.6% 18 56.1% 46 68.8% 11 Neither good nor poor 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Quite poor 3.0% 3 2.2% 1 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.1% 3 2.4% 2 6.3% 1 Very poor 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Mean: 4.22 4.46 4.02 4.40 4.28 4.05 4.22 4.13 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 68 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
Range of shops and services available
Very good 61.0% 61 58.7% 27 63.0% 34 40.0% 8 67.4% 29 64.9% 24 59.8% 49 62.5% 10 Quite good 35.0% 35 39.1% 18 31.5% 17 50.0% 10 32.6% 14 29.7% 11 36.6% 30 31.3% 5 Neither good nor poor 2.0% 2 2.2% 1 1.9% 1 10.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 6.3% 1 Quite poor 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Very poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Mean: 4.55 4.57 4.54 4.30 4.67 4.54 4.54 4.56 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Quality of shops and services available
Very good 67.0% 67 65.2% 30 68.5% 37 65.0% 13 76.7% 33 56.8% 21 67.1% 55 62.5% 10 Quite good 31.0% 31 34.8% 16 27.8% 15 35.0% 7 23.3% 10 37.8% 14 30.5% 25 37.5% 6 Neither good nor poor 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Quite poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Very poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Mean: 4.65 4.65 4.65 4.65 4.77 4.51 4.65 4.63 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Daytime entertainment and leisure facilities
Very good 13.0% 13 13.0% 6 13.0% 7 0.0% 0 11.6% 5 21.6% 8 9.8% 8 18.8% 3 Quite good 20.0% 20 17.4% 8 22.2% 12 30.0% 6 25.6% 11 8.1% 3 22.0% 18 12.5% 2 Neither good nor poor 13.0% 13 17.4% 8 9.3% 5 15.0% 3 16.3% 7 8.1% 3 15.9% 13 0.0% 0 Quite poor 8.0% 8 15.2% 7 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 13.5% 5 6.1% 5 18.8% 3 Very poor 7.0% 7 0.0% 0 13.0% 7 15.0% 3 0.0% 0 10.8% 4 7.3% 6 6.3% 1 (Don’t know) 39.0% 39 37.0% 17 40.7% 22 35.0% 7 41.9% 18 37.8% 14 39.0% 32 43.8% 7 Mean: 3.39 3.45 3.34 2.92 3.76 3.26 3.34 3.33 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Evening entertainment and leisure facilities
Very good 11.0% 11 8.7% 4 13.0% 7 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 21.6% 8 12.2% 10 6.3% 1 Quite good 26.0% 26 17.4% 8 33.3% 18 35.0% 7 32.6% 14 13.5% 5 31.7% 26 0.0% 0 Neither good nor poor 9.0% 9 19.6% 9 0.0% 0 30.0% 6 7.0% 3 0.0% 0 11.0% 9 0.0% 0 Quite poor 5.0% 5 8.7% 4 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 13.5% 5 2.4% 2 18.8% 3 Very poor 7.0% 7 0.0% 0 13.0% 7 15.0% 3 0.0% 0 10.8% 4 7.3% 6 6.3% 1 (Don’t know) 42.0% 42 45.7% 21 38.9% 21 20.0% 4 53.5% 23 40.5% 15 35.4% 29 68.8% 11 Mean: 3.50 3.48 3.52 3.06 4.00 3.36 3.60 2.40 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Town Centre events
Very good 11.0% 11 4.3% 2 16.7% 9 5.0% 1 16.3% 7 8.1% 3 12.2% 10 6.3% 1 Quite good 13.0% 13 8.7% 4 16.7% 9 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 27.0% 10 9.8% 8 31.3% 5 Neither good nor poor 4.0% 4 4.3% 2 3.7% 2 10.0% 2 2.3% 1 2.7% 1 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 Quite poor 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 5.6% 3 5.0% 1 2.3% 1 2.7% 1 2.4% 2 6.3% 1 Very poor 8.0% 8 4.3% 2 11.1% 6 15.0% 3 0.0% 0 13.5% 5 8.5% 7 6.3% 1 (Don’t know) 61.0% 61 78.3% 36 46.3% 25 60.0% 12 74.4% 32 45.9% 17 62.2% 51 50.0% 8 Mean: 3.41 3.40 3.41 2.50 4.36 3.25 3.39 3.50 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Liveliness / street life / character
Very good 51.0% 51 37.0% 17 63.0% 34 25.0% 5 65.1% 28 48.6% 18 52.4% 43 50.0% 8 Quite good 41.0% 41 54.3% 25 29.6% 16 70.0% 14 30.2% 13 37.8% 14 40.2% 33 50.0% 8 Neither good nor poor 3.0% 3 6.5% 3 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Very poor 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 7.4% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 10.8% 4 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Mean: 4.36 4.31 4.41 4.20 4.60 4.17 4.37 4.50 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 69 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
The market
Very good 23.0% 23 15.2% 7 29.6% 16 0.0% 0 14.0% 6 45.9% 17 22.0% 18 31.3% 5 Quite good 13.0% 13 15.2% 7 11.1% 6 20.0% 4 11.6% 5 10.8% 4 15.9% 13 0.0% 0 Neither good nor poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Quite poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Very poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 64.0% 64 69.6% 32 59.3% 32 80.0% 16 74.4% 32 43.2% 16 62.2% 51 68.8% 11 Mean: 4.64 4.50 4.73 4.00 4.55 4.81 4.58 5.00 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Quality / number of places to eat-drink
Very good 61.0% 61 58.7% 27 63.0% 34 65.0% 13 62.8% 27 56.8% 21 64.6% 53 50.0% 8 Quite good 31.0% 31 34.8% 16 27.8% 15 25.0% 5 32.6% 14 32.4% 12 29.3% 24 31.3% 5 Neither good nor poor 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 3.0% 3 2.2% 1 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.1% 3 2.4% 2 6.3% 1 Very poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 4.0% 4 2.2% 1 5.6% 3 10.0% 2 2.3% 1 2.7% 1 2.4% 2 12.5% 2 Mean: 4.56 4.53 4.59 4.72 4.62 4.42 4.60 4.43 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
General shopping environment
Very good 45.0% 45 34.8% 16 53.7% 29 30.0% 6 53.5% 23 43.2% 16 50.0% 41 25.0% 4 Quite good 45.0% 45 58.7% 27 33.3% 18 55.0% 11 37.2% 16 48.6% 18 41.5% 34 56.3% 9 Neither good nor poor 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 9.3% 5 15.0% 3 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 18.8% 3 Quite poor 4.0% 4 4.3% 2 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 5.4% 2 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 Very poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Mean: 4.32 4.27 4.37 4.15 4.40 4.33 4.38 4.06 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Layout of centre
Very good 32.0% 32 26.1% 12 37.0% 20 40.0% 8 25.6% 11 35.1% 13 31.7% 26 37.5% 6 Quite good 51.0% 51 54.3% 25 48.1% 26 40.0% 8 58.1% 25 48.6% 18 50.0% 41 50.0% 8 Neither good nor poor 13.0% 13 10.9% 5 14.8% 8 20.0% 4 11.6% 5 10.8% 4 13.4% 11 12.5% 2 Quite poor 3.0% 3 6.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 2.7% 1 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 Very poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Mean: 4.13 4.02 4.22 4.20 4.05 4.19 4.11 4.25 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Size / quality of supermarket(s)
Very good 29.0% 29 17.4% 8 38.9% 21 25.0% 5 18.6% 8 43.2% 16 29.3% 24 31.3% 5 Quite good 48.0% 48 58.7% 27 38.9% 21 40.0% 8 46.5% 20 54.1% 20 48.8% 40 50.0% 8 Neither good nor poor 5.0% 5 4.3% 2 5.6% 3 5.0% 1 9.3% 4 0.0% 0 6.1% 5 0.0% 0 Quite poor 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 10.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 6.3% 1 Very poor 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 15.0% 15 19.6% 9 11.1% 6 15.0% 3 25.6% 11 2.7% 1 13.4% 11 12.5% 2 Mean: 4.20 4.16 4.23 3.82 4.13 4.44 4.20 4.21 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 70 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
Q15 What improvement would you like to see made to Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street?
Nothing in particular 30.0% 30 30.4% 14 29.6% 16 40.0% 8 32.6% 14 21.6% 8 31.7% 26 25.0% 4 Increase the range of national 4.0% 4 2.2% 1 5.6% 3 10.0% 2 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 / multiple chain stores Increase the range of local / 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 speciality retailers Improve quality of shops and 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 services Improve the appearance of 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 the town centre Improve the market 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Make the centre safer (more 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 5.6% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.1% 3 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 CCTV, policing, better lighting etc) Remove / reduce traffic 7.0% 7 6.5% 3 7.4% 4 15.0% 3 4.7% 2 5.4% 2 8.5% 7 0.0% 0 congestion Provide more housing in the 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 town-centre Improve frequency of public 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 transport Improve car parking 10.0% 10 17.4% 8 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 14.0% 6 10.8% 4 9.8% 8 12.5% 2 availability / reduce parking charges Provide better entertainment 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 /leisure Improve quality and range of 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 cafes and restaurants Improve pedestrian links and 3.0% 3 2.2% 1 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 2.7% 1 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 facilities in the town centre Improve food store 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Other 18.0% 18 13.0% 6 22.2% 12 10.0% 2 16.3% 7 24.3% 9 15.9% 13 31.3% 5 Acinema 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Make it cleaner 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 A Marks and Spencers 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 A supermarket 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 More food outlets 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 More shops in general 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Lower the prices 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 More independent shops 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 20.0% 20 19.6% 9 20.4% 11 20.0% 4 18.6% 8 21.6% 8 18.3% 15 31.3% 5 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Q16 Do you or other members of your household ever come to Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street in the evenings?
Yes 41.0% 41 32.6% 15 48.1% 26 40.0% 8 37.2% 16 45.9% 17 45.1% 37 25.0% 4 No 59.0% 59 67.4% 31 51.9% 28 60.0% 12 62.8% 27 54.1% 20 54.9% 45 75.0% 12 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Q17 What do you or other members of your household do in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street in the evening? Those who said Yes at Q16
Sports facilities 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 3.8% 1 12.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 0.0% 0 Pubs / bars 34.1% 14 26.7% 4 38.5% 10 75.0% 6 31.3% 5 17.6% 3 37.8% 14 0.0% 0 Restaurants 95.1% 39 86.7% 13 100.0% 26 100.0% 8 100.0% 16 88.2% 15 94.6% 35 100.0% 4 Cafes / coffee shops 9.8% 4 0.0% 0 15.4% 4 12.5% 1 18.8% 3 0.0% 0 10.8% 4 0.0% 0 Services (eg. cash tills) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Takeaway food 9.8% 4 13.3% 2 7.7% 2 37.5% 3 0.0% 0 5.9% 1 10.8% 4 0.0% 0 Walk about / look around 9.8% 4 0.0% 0 15.4% 4 25.0% 2 0.0% 0 11.8% 2 10.8% 4 0.0% 0 Cinema 4.9% 2 6.7% 1 3.8% 1 25.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 0.0% 0 Theatre 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Nightclubs 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Other 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Shopping 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Base: 41 15 26 8 16 17 37 4
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 71 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
Q18 What do you like about visiting the leisure / pubs and bars / restaurant facilities in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street?
Nothing in particular 9.0% 9 8.7% 4 9.3% 5 10.0% 2 2.3% 1 16.2% 6 8.5% 7 12.5% 2 Closetohome /easytoget 11.0% 11 8.7% 4 13.0% 7 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 21.6% 8 9.8% 8 18.8% 3 to Good theatre 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Good choice of restaurants 20.0% 20 19.6% 9 20.4% 11 15.0% 3 18.6% 8 24.3% 9 22.0% 18 12.5% 2 Good quality of restaurants 29.0% 29 26.1% 12 31.5% 17 30.0% 6 27.9% 12 29.7% 11 30.5% 25 25.0% 4 Good quality of pubs / bars 9.0% 9 8.7% 4 9.3% 5 15.0% 3 11.6% 5 2.7% 1 11.0% 9 0.0% 0 Good choice of pubs / bars 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Good health / fitness 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 facilities Other 9.0% 9 13.0% 6 5.6% 3 20.0% 4 2.3% 1 10.8% 4 8.5% 7 12.5% 2 Atmosphere 10.0% 10 4.3% 2 14.8% 8 10.0% 2 16.3% 7 2.7% 1 12.2% 10 0.0% 0 Convenient 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Friendly 3.0% 3 2.2% 1 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 5.4% 2 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 34.0% 34 39.1% 18 29.6% 16 30.0% 6 44.2% 19 24.3% 9 30.5% 25 43.8% 7 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Q19 What do you dislike about visiting the leisure / pubs and bars / restaurant facilities in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John’s Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street?
Nothing in particular 44.0% 44 45.7% 21 42.6% 23 25.0% 5 46.5% 20 51.4% 19 42.7% 35 56.3% 9 Poor choice of facilities 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 5.6% 3 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 5.4% 2 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 Too expensive 10.0% 10 8.7% 4 11.1% 6 35.0% 7 0.0% 0 8.1% 3 12.2% 10 0.0% 0 Unsafe / poor security / 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 dangerous Lack of car parking 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Car parking charges 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Lack of public transport 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Other 6.0% 6 2.2% 1 9.3% 5 5.0% 1 7.0% 3 5.4% 2 7.3% 6 0.0% 0 It needs cleaning 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Poor quality facilities 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Too smokey 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Too busy 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Close too early 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know) 34.0% 34 41.3% 19 27.8% 15 30.0% 6 39.5% 17 29.7% 11 30.5% 25 43.8% 7 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
SEX Sex:
Male 46.0% 46 100.0% 46 0.0% 0 45.0% 9 44.2% 19 48.6% 18 42.7% 35 56.3% 9 Female 54.0% 54 0.0% 0 100.0% 54 55.0% 11 55.8% 24 51.4% 19 57.3% 47 43.8% 7 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
AGE Age Group:
18 - 24 years 8.0% 8 6.5% 3 9.3% 5 40.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 7.3% 6 12.5% 2 25 - 34 years 12.0% 12 13.0% 6 11.1% 6 60.0% 12 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 13.4% 11 6.3% 1 35 - 44 years 26.0% 26 21.7% 10 29.6% 16 0.0% 0 60.5% 26 0.0% 0 29.3% 24 12.5% 2 45 - 54 years 17.0% 17 19.6% 9 14.8% 8 0.0% 0 39.5% 17 0.0% 0 15.9% 13 12.5% 2 55 - 64 years 20.0% 20 17.4% 8 22.2% 12 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 54.1% 20 18.3% 15 31.3% 5 65+ years 17.0% 17 21.7% 10 13.0% 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 45.9% 17 15.9% 13 25.0% 4 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
SEG Socio-economic group
AB 37.0% 37 39.1% 18 35.2% 19 20.0% 4 44.2% 19 37.8% 14 45.1% 37 0.0% 0 C1 45.0% 45 37.0% 17 51.9% 28 65.0% 13 41.9% 18 37.8% 14 54.9% 45 0.0% 0 C2 6.0% 6 10.9% 5 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 9.3% 4 2.7% 1 0.0% 0 37.5% 6 DE 10.0% 10 8.7% 4 11.1% 6 10.0% 2 0.0% 0 21.6% 8 0.0% 0 62.5% 10 (Refused) 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 72 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
INC Approximate income of main wage earner:
Less than £15,000 4.0% 4 6.5% 3 1.9% 1 15.0% 3 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 4.9% 4 0.0% 0 £16,000-£25,000 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 £26,000-£35,000 14.0% 14 23.9% 11 5.6% 3 25.0% 5 18.6% 8 2.7% 1 11.0% 9 18.8% 3 £36,000-£50,000 11.0% 11 8.7% 4 13.0% 7 35.0% 7 9.3% 4 0.0% 0 13.4% 11 0.0% 0 £50,000 + 25.0% 25 28.3% 13 22.2% 12 5.0% 1 30.2% 13 29.7% 11 30.5% 25 0.0% 0 (Refused) 44.0% 44 32.6% 15 53.7% 29 15.0% 3 41.9% 18 62.2% 23 40.2% 33 68.8% 11 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
ETH Ethnicity:
White - British 78.0% 78 84.8% 39 72.2% 39 75.0% 15 69.8% 30 89.2% 33 75.6% 62 87.5% 14 White - Irish 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Any other White background 5.0% 5 6.5% 3 3.7% 2 5.0% 1 9.3% 4 0.0% 0 3.7% 3 12.5% 2 White and Black Caribbean 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 White and black African 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 White and Asian 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Any other mixed background 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Indian 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Pakistani 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Bangladeshi 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Any other Asian background 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Caribbean 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 African 3.0% 3 4.3% 2 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 2.7% 1 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 Any other black background 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Chinese 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Chinese other 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Other ethnic group 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Australian 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 Canadian 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Danish 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 French 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 5.6% 3 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 Greek 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Italian 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Polish 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Spanish 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Swedish 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 5.6% 3 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 Turkish 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 USA 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Iranian 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Iraq 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Lebanon 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
ADU Number of adults (incl. respondent):
One 24.0% 24 23.9% 11 24.1% 13 20.0% 4 18.6% 8 32.4% 12 20.7% 17 43.8% 7 Two 59.0% 59 71.7% 33 48.1% 26 45.0% 9 65.1% 28 59.5% 22 61.0% 50 43.8% 7 Three 11.0% 11 4.3% 2 16.7% 9 15.0% 3 11.6% 5 8.1% 3 13.4% 11 0.0% 0 Four or more 6.0% 6 0.0% 0 11.1% 6 20.0% 4 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.9% 4 12.5% 2 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
CHI No. of children 15 years and under:
None 81.0% 81 82.6% 38 79.6% 43 90.0% 18 62.8% 27 97.3% 36 79.3% 65 87.5% 14 One 11.0% 11 13.0% 6 9.3% 5 5.0% 1 23.3% 10 0.0% 0 11.0% 9 12.5% 2 Two 8.0% 8 4.3% 2 11.1% 6 5.0% 1 14.0% 6 2.7% 1 9.8% 8 0.0% 0 Three 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Four or more 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
CAR Number of cars in household:
None 29.0% 29 30.4% 14 27.8% 15 25.0% 5 18.6% 8 43.2% 16 26.8% 22 43.8% 7 One 43.0% 43 41.3% 19 44.4% 24 50.0% 10 48.8% 21 32.4% 12 41.5% 34 43.8% 7 Two 19.0% 19 19.6% 9 18.5% 10 15.0% 3 20.9% 9 18.9% 7 23.2% 19 0.0% 0 Three 6.0% 6 6.5% 3 5.6% 3 0.0% 0 9.3% 4 5.4% 2 7.3% 6 0.0% 0 Four or more 3.0% 3 2.2% 1 3.7% 2 10.0% 2 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 12.5% 2 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 73 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
DAY Day of Interview:
Monday 32.0% 32 21.7% 10 40.7% 22 45.0% 9 41.9% 18 13.5% 5 35.4% 29 18.8% 3 Tuesday 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Wednesday 38.0% 38 43.5% 20 33.3% 18 25.0% 5 41.9% 18 40.5% 15 37.8% 31 31.3% 5 Thursday 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Friday 30.0% 30 34.8% 16 25.9% 14 30.0% 6 16.3% 7 45.9% 17 26.8% 22 50.0% 8 Saturday 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
LOC Location:
Church Street-Edgware Road 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Harrow Road 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marylebone High Street 100.0% 100 100.0% 46 100.0% 54 100.0% 20 100.0% 43 100.0% 37 100.0% 82 100.0% 16 Praed Street 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Queensway-Westbourne 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Grove St John’s Wood 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Warwick Way-Tachbrook 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Street Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 74 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
PC
B1 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 BD18 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 BH6 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 BN2 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 BR2 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 BS32 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Blank 6.0% 6 4.3% 2 7.4% 4 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 8.1% 3 7.3% 6 0.0% 0 CB3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 CO16 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 CR0 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 CR3 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 DA14 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 DB6 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E1 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E10 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 E10 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 E10 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E12 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E13 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E13 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E14 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E15 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E15 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E17 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 E17 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E17 9 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 E18 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E2 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E5 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E5 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E7 9 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 E8 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 E9 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 EN7 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 EN9 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 EX4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 GU16 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 GU2 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 GU26 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 GU35 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HA0 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 HA0 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HA3 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HA3 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HA4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HA4 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HA4 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HA7 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HU17 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 HU8 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 IG1 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 IG11 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 JI46 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 LU2 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 LU5 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 M13 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 M25 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 ME17 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 MW8 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N1 3.0% 3 6.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 0.0% 0 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 N1 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 N1 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N10 3 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 N11 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N12 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N13 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 N13 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 N15 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N15 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N16 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 75 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
N17 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N20 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N29 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N4 3 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 N7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N7 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 N8 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 ND3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 ND3 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 NN8 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NN8 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NP14 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 NP14 4 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 NW1 6.0% 6 6.5% 3 5.6% 3 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 13.5% 5 3.7% 3 18.8% 3 NW1 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW1 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW1 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 NW1 5 2.0% 2 2.2% 1 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 NW1 6 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 NW1 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW1 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW10 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW10 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW10 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW10 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW10 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW11 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW11 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW2 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW2 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW2 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW3 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW4 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW5 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW5 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW6 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW6 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW6 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW6 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW6 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW6 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW6 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW8 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 NW8 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW8 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW8 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW8 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW8 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW8 7 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 NW8 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 NW8 9 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 NW9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 OX2 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 OX4 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 PR2 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RH10 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RH19 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM1 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM10 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM13 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM18 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM6 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM6 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM6 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM8 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM8 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RM9 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 RU19 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 S23 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE1 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 76 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
SE11 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE11 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE15 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE15 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE16 4 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SE19 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SE2 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE28 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE3 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE5 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE5 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE5 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE5 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SE6 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SG8 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SL2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SL3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 SL3 7 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 SM4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SM4 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SN11 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SO31 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SP11 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SP11 6 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SS15 6 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SS4 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SW1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW10 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW10 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW11 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW11 5 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SW11 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW12 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW13 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW13 0 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW14 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW15 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SW15 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW15 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 SW15 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW16 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW17 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW18 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW19 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 SW19 2 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 SW19 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW19 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1P 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1P 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1P 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1P 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1S 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1U 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1U 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1U 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1V 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1V 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1V 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1V 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1V 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW1X 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW3 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 SW3 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW3 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW4 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW6 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW6 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW6 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW6 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 77 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
SW7 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW8 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW8 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW8 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 SW9 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 TI5 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 TN2 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 TW11 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 TW11 8 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 TW11 9 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 TW4 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 TW9 2 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 UB6 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 UB6 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W1 4 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 W1 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W10 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W10 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W10 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W10 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W10 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W10 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W11 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W12 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W12 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W12 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W12 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W12 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W13 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W14 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W14 5 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W1A 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W1G 7 2.0% 2 2.2% 1 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 W1G 9 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W1K 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W1K 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W1N 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W1P 7 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W1U 3.0% 3 4.3% 2 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 3 0.0% 0 W1U 3 2.0% 2 2.2% 1 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 4.7% 2 0.0% 0 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 W1V 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W2 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W2 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W2 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 5.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W2 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W2 5 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W2 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W21 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W3 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W4 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W4 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W5 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 W5 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W5 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W6 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W6 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W7 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W7 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W8 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W9 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W9 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 W9 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WD23 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WD2H 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WD6 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 WD6 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WD6 5 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Marylebone High Street Westminster In Street Survey Page 78 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 18 - 34 35 - 54 55 + ABC1 C2DE
WIG 2.0% 2 2.2% 1 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 WIG 6 2.0% 2 4.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 WIG 8 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 3.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.4% 2 2.4% 2 0.0% 0 WIG 9 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 WIU 5 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 1 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 WW1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WW1 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WW10 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WW2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WW2 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 WW8 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 YO24 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 YO24 1 1.0% 1 2.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 1 0.0% 0 Base: 100 46 54 20 43 37 82 16
Column %ges. 061006 NEMS market research Appendix H
Household Residents Survey Results Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 1 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q01 Where do you normally shop for non-food (comparison) goods i.e. clothes, footwear, books etc ?
Oxford Street / West End 45.8% 301 42.1% 107 48.1% 194 67.7% 21 53.5% 38 43.4% 111 42.0% 47 35.3% 6 47.5% 218 41.3% 64 44.0% 166 Kensington High Street 7.6% 50 8.3% 21 7.2% 29 9.7% 3 11.3% 88.6%225.4%60.0% 08.7% 40 5.8% 9 8.0% 30 Victoria Street, Westminster 3.0% 20 3.2% 8 3.0% 12 0.0% 0 1.4% 14.3%110.9%10.0% 02.8% 13 2.6% 4 3.4% 13 Queensway / Westbourne 2.4% 16 2.8% 7 2.2% 9 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 2.7% 7 1.8% 2 5.9% 11.7% 83.2%52.4%9 Grove Edgware Road 2.4% 16 3.2% 8 2.0% 8 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.3% 65.8%90.8%3 Kings Road 2.1% 14 1.6% 4 2.5% 10 3.2% 1 4.2% 3 2.3% 6 2.7% 3 5.9% 12.6% 12 0.6% 1 3.4% 13 Marylebone High Street 1.5% 10 2.0% 5 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 7 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.7% 81.3%22.4%9 Brent Cross 1.5% 10 2.0% 5 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.0% 5 3.6% 4 0.0% 01.7% 81.3%22.4%9 Mail order / delivered / 1.5% 10 1.6% 4 1.5% 6 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.0% 5 0.0% 0 5.9% 11.5% 71.9%31.6%6 internet Abroad (unspecified 1.1% 7 1.2% 3 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 4.2% 3 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.3% 60.0%01.1%4 location) Kilburn 1.1% 7 0.0% 0 1.7% 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.1% 50.6%11.1%4 Marble Arch 0.9% 6 0.8% 2 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 5.9% 10.9% 40.6%10.5%2 Whiteley's Shopping Centre 0.9% 6 1.2% 3 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.1% 50.6%11.1%4 Harrow Road 0.9% 6 0.8% 2 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 22.6%40.5%2 Market, Portobello Road 0.9% 6 2.0% 5 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 11.8% 20.9% 40.6%10.3%1 Market, Church Street 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 21.9%30.5%2 St Johns Wood 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.8%3 Regent Street 0.6% 4 1.2% 3 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%01.1%4 Notting Hill 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.8%3 Portobello Road 0.6% 4 1.2% 3 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Bond Street, London 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.5%2 Tesco, Church Street, St 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 01.3%20.5%2 Johns Wood Warwick Way / Tachbrook 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.4% 20.6%10.5%2 Street Bayswater 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.3%1 Hammersmith 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 11.3%20.5%2 German Street, Westminster 0.5% 3 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.3%1 Knightsbridge 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 Central London 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 5.9% 10.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Baker Street 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.0%0 Covent Garden 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 O2 Centre, Finchley Road 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Praed Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Ladbroke Grove 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Camden Town 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Primark (unspecified 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 location) Sainsbury's, Crommel Road, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Barnet Wembley 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Westminster 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 2 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Park Road, London 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Bromley 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Cardinal Junction 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Shepherd's Bush W12 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Church Street, Kent 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Clapham 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Cricklewood 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Finchley Road, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Goldbourne Road, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Kensington Hampstead 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Harrow 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Hyde Park 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Keble Road, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Market, Litchfield 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Market (unspecified 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 location) Mayfair 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Marks & Spencer, Marble 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Arch Market, Brixton 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Osterley Lane, Ealing 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Oxbridge 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Coburn Mews 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Sainsbury's, O2 Centre, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Finchley Road Sloanes Court 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Waitrose, Twyford 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Stanmore 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 (Don't know / varies) 13.2% 87 13.8% 35 12.9% 52 0.0% 0 5.6% 4 11.7% 30 19.6% 22 5.9% 1 12.6% 58 15.5% 24 13.5% 51 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 3 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q02 At which store do you normally do most of your food and grocery (convenience) shopping ?
Waitrose, High Street, 8.2% 54 6.3% 16 9.4% 38 6.5% 2 1.4% 1 10.5% 27 8.0% 9 5.9% 1 10.2% 47 2.6% 4 9.8% 37 Marylebone Tesco, Church Street, St 7.2% 47 7.9% 20 6.7% 27 19.4% 6 11.3% 85.9%156.3%75.9% 14.1% 19 14.2% 22 3.4% 13 Johns Wood Sainsbury's, Wilton Road, 5.9% 39 7.1% 18 5.2% 21 6.5% 2 5.6% 47.4%193.6%45.9% 16.1% 28 5.8% 9 5.8% 22 Victoria Sainsbury’s, Ladbroke 5.0% 33 3.5% 9 6.0% 24 3.2% 1 4.2% 34.3%118.0%95.9% 14.4% 20 7.7% 12 5.6% 21 Grove, Chelsea Somerfield, Edgware Road, 3.8% 25 5.9% 15 2.5% 10 3.2% 1 5.6% 4 3.1% 8 5.4% 6 5.9% 13.9% 18 3.9% 6 2.4% 9 London Sainsbury’s, O2 Centre, 3.5% 23 2.0% 5 4.5% 18 6.5% 2 4.2% 34.3%111.8%20.0% 04.1% 19 1.9% 3 5.6% 21 Finchley Road, London Mail order / internet / 3.3% 22 0.8% 2 5.0% 20 0.0% 0 9.9% 75.1%130.0%00.0% 03.9% 18 2.6% 4 4.2% 16 delivered Somerfield, Harrow Road 3.0% 20 3.2% 8 3.0% 12 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 2.7% 7 1.8% 2 0.0% 02.4% 11 5.2% 8 2.1% 8 Waitrose, Finchley Road, 2.7% 18 2.8% 7 2.7% 11 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 7 2.7% 3 0.0% 02.8% 13 2.6% 4 2.7% 10 London Tesco, Portobello Road, 2.4% 16 3.9% 10 1.5% 6 0.0% 0 8.5% 6 2.3% 6 0.9% 1 0.0% 02.2% 10 2.6% 4 1.9% 7 London Tesco, Warwick Way, 2.0% 13 3.2% 8 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.6% 4 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.3% 62.6%41.3%5 Victoria Waitrose, Swiss Cottage, 2.0% 13 1.2% 3 2.5% 10 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 5 2.7% 3 0.0% 02.0% 9 1.3% 2 3.2% 12 London Marks & Spencer, Edgware 1.7% 11 1.2% 3 2.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 5 2.7% 3 0.0% 02.0% 91.3%20.5%2 Road, London Tesco, Brent Cross 1.5% 10 1.6% 4 1.5% 6 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 3.6% 4 0.0% 01.5% 71.3%21.6%6 Marks & Spencer, Oxford 1.4% 9 1.6% 4 1.2% 5 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 2.0% 5 0.0% 0 5.9% 11.5% 70.6%11.6%6 Street Ladbroke Grove 1.4% 9 0.8% 2 1.7% 7 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 5.9% 11.3% 61.9%31.1%4 Iceland, Harrow Road, 1.1% 7 0.0% 0 1.7% 7 9.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 13.2%50.3%1 London Tesco, Cromwell Road, 1.1% 7 1.6% 4 0.7% 3 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 41.3%21.1%4 Kensington Market, Portobello Road, 1.1% 7 1.6% 4 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.8% 2 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.5% 70.0%01.1%4 London Marks & Spencer, Marble 1.1% 7 0.8% 2 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.1% 51.3%21.1%4 Arch Sainsbury’s, Edgware Road, 1.1% 7 2.4% 6 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 1.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.1% 50.6%10.8%3 London Waitrose, High Street, 0.9% 6 0.8% 2 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.7% 31.3%21.1%4 Kensington Sainsbury’s, Kilburn High 0.9% 6 0.8% 2 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 31.9%31.1%4 Road Marks & Spencer, Whiteleys 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 2.7% 3 0.0% 00.9% 40.6%11.1%4 of Bayswater, Queensway
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 4 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Marks & Spencer Simply 0.8% 5 0.8% 2 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 5.9% 11.1% 50.0%00.8%3 Food, Marylebone Station Tesco, Notting Hill Gate 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.1% 50.0%00.8%3 Sainsbury Local, Allington 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.6%10.8%3 Street, Victoria Sainsbury’s, Swiss Cottage, 0.6% 4 1.2% 3 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%01.1%4 London Asda, Park Royal 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.8%3 Sainsbury’s, Wilton Road, 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%01.1%4 Victoria Sainsbury's, Kingsgate 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.8% 2 5.9% 10.4% 20.0%00.0%0 Parade, Victoria Street Marks & Spencer, 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.8%3 Queensway Tesco, Meadville 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury’s, Westbourne 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Grove, London Sainsbury Local, 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Westbourne Grove Sainsbury's, Vauxhall 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Asda, Clapham Junction 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 11.3%20.5%2 Tesco, Baker Street, London 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Fresh & Wild, Westbourne 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.3%1 Grove, London Sainsbury Local, Paddington 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 Station Sainsbury’s, Cromwell Road, 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 Kensington Tesco, Edgware Road 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 11.3%20.3%1 Tesco Express, Praed Street 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Marks & Spencer Simply 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.0%0 Food, Paddington Station Tesco, Hammersmith 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Sainsbury’s, Camden Town 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.0%0 Sainsbury's, Kingsmall, 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Hammersmith Sainsbury’s, Harrow Road, 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 London Tesco, High Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Marylebone Waitrose, Kings Road 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.2% 10.0%00.5%2 Market, Warwick Way, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Westminster Morrisons, Camden Town 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Marks & Spencer, Camden 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Town Marks & Spencer, High 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 5 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Street, Kensington Co-Op, Heathfield 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Tesco, Circus Road 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury’s, Pimlico 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.5%2 Whiteley's Shopping Centre 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Tesco, Bayswater 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.0%0 Sainsbury's, Oxford Street 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Waitrose, Motcomb Street 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Budgens, Queensway 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Marks & Spencer, Victoria 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Cardinal Place Kilburn High Road, London 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Safeway, Edgware Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 London Planet Organic, Westbourne 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Grove Portobello Whole Foods, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Portobello Green Local shops, Vincent Street, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 London Oxford Street, London 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Asda, Colindale 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Sainsbury Local, Waterloo 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury’s, High Gate 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury Local, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Southampton Street, Covent Garden Fresh & Wild, Camden 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Sainsbury Local, Brompton 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road Budgens, Tottenham Court 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Road Sainsbury’s, Queenstown 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Road, Lambeth Market, Borough Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 London Bridge Supersave, Praed Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Sainsbury’s, Westminster 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury’s, Alperton 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Marks & Spencer, Victoria 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Station Tesco Metro, Regent Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Green Valley, Barclay Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 London Sainsbury’s, Gloucester 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road, London Tesco, Camden Town 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 6 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Marks & Spencer, Kings 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road, Chelsea Sainsbury's, Hammersmith 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Marks & Spencer, Notting 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Hill Gate Tesco, Englands Lane, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Belsize Park Local shops, Victoria, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 London Tesco, Kings Cross 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Asda, Connaught Hall 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Approach, Westminster Tesco, Monk Street, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Budgens, Porchester Road, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 London Tesco, Perivale 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.3%1 Crispen’s, Oxford Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Tesco, Praed Street, London 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Tesco, Queensway, London 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Tesco, Shepherds Bush 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Tesco, Tottenham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Iceland, Meadville 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Waitrose, Gloucester Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 London Local shops, Edgware Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.0% 00.6%10.0%0 London Local shops, Notting Hill 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Waitrose, Temple Fortune 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Parade Waitrose, Twyford 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Westbourne Grove, London 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Farmers market (unspecified 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 location) Market, Strutton Ground, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Westminster Market, Tebworth 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Tesco Express, Charing 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Cross Somerfield, Camden Town 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Tesco (unspecified location) 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Sainsbury's, Islington 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Marks & Spencer, Finchley 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road, Golders Green Tesco, Gold Street, Kent 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Tesco, Clifton Road, London 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Local shops, Kings Cross 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 (Don’t know / varies) 12.6% 83 15.0% 38 11.2% 45 6.5% 2 5.6% 4 12.5% 32 18.8% 21 23.5% 4 11.8% 54 14.8% 23 12.7% 48
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 7 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
Q03 What is the main reason why you choose do your main food and grocery shopping at (STORE MENTIONED AT Q02) ?
Convenience to home 45.2% 297 49.2% 125 42.7% 172 67.7% 21 56.3% 40 48.4% 124 30.4% 34 58.8% 10 45.1% 207 46.5% 72 41.9% 158 Quality of shops and services 9.3% 61 10.2% 26 8.7% 35 6.5% 2 4.2% 3 10.2% 26 10.7% 12 11.8% 2 10.5% 48 6.5% 10 10.6% 40 Value for money 7.6% 50 7.9% 20 7.4% 30 12.9% 4 4.2% 3 7.0% 18 11.6% 13 0.0% 07.0% 32 9.7% 15 8.0% 30 Preference for retailer 5.3% 35 3.5% 9 6.5% 26 0.0% 0 4.2% 3 4.3% 11 11.6% 13 11.8% 25.7% 26 4.5% 7 4.5% 17 Good or cheap car parking 4.1% 27 3.9% 10 4.2% 17 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 3.5% 9 8.0% 9 0.0% 05.0% 23 2.6% 4 7.2% 27 Range of shops and services 4.0% 26 5.5% 14 3.0% 12 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 7 5.4% 6 5.9% 14.1% 19 2.6% 4 4.5% 17 available Good quality produce 2.6% 17 2.0% 5 3.0% 12 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.3% 6 3.6% 4 0.0% 02.6% 12 1.9% 3 3.2% 12 Easy to get to 2.3% 15 2.4% 6 2.2% 9 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 0.8% 2 3.6% 4 5.9% 12.6% 12 1.3% 2 2.9% 11 Large store 2.1% 14 2.0% 5 2.2% 9 6.5% 2 4.2% 3 2.7% 7 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.7% 82.6%42.4%9 Good service / friendly 2.0% 13 2.0% 5 2.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.9% 1 5.9% 11.5% 73.9%61.6%6 Range of goods 2.0% 13 1.2% 3 2.5% 10 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 2.7% 7 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.7% 82.6%41.9%7 No other shops locally 1.5% 10 0.8% 2 2.0% 8 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.6% 4 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.9% 42.6%41.1%4 Provide a delivery service 1.5% 10 0.0% 0 2.5% 10 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.3% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.5% 71.9%32.1%8 Habit / always uses it 1.5% 10 2.8% 7 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.3% 61.3%21.1%4 Convenience to work 1.1% 7 1.2% 3 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.3% 60.0%00.5%2 They sell organic produce 0.9% 6 1.2% 3 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 41.3%20.8%3 I prefer their goods 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 3 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.3%1 Generally convenient 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.8%3 Good customer service 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 Other shops and services 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.0%0 nearby It is a small / quiet store 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 I dislike supermarkets 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.3%1 Reward scheme / discounts 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Congestion charges are in 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 place near to other stores I have young children 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 To support local businesses 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.0%0 If I am passing through 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Longer opening hours 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Igowithafamilymember / 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 friend (Don’t know / no reason in 2.1% 14 2.4% 6 2.0% 8 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.3% 6 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.1% 54.5%71.3%5 particular) Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 8 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q04 At which store or local centre do you do most of your top-up food and grocery shopping such as bread and milk ?
Tesco, Church Street, St 8.7% 57 10.2% 26 7.7% 31 6.5% 2 11.3% 87.8%209.8%115.9% 16.1% 28 16.1% 25 6.6% 25 Johns Wood Waitrose, Marylebone High 4.0% 26 3.2% 8 4.5% 18 6.5% 2 2.8% 24.3%113.6%45.9% 15.2% 24 0.6% 1 5.0% 19 Street Sainsbury, Wilton Road, 4.0% 26 4.3% 11 3.7% 15 0.0% 0 7.0% 56.6%171.8%20.0% 04.1% 19 3.2% 5 4.5% 17 Victoria Somerfield, Edgware Road, 3.3% 22 4.3% 11 2.7% 11 0.0% 0 4.2% 3 3.5% 9 5.4% 6 5.9% 13.1% 14 4.5% 7 2.4% 9 London Somerfield, Harrow Road 2.9% 19 2.8% 7 3.0% 12 3.2% 1 5.6% 4 2.7% 7 1.8% 2 0.0% 02.2% 10 5.2% 8 2.7% 10 Tesco Metro, Portobello 2.6% 17 3.5% 9 2.0% 8 0.0% 0 7.0% 5 0.4% 1 3.6% 4 11.8% 22.2% 10 3.2% 5 2.4% 9 Road, London Tesco, Circus Road 2.0% 13 1.2% 3 2.5% 10 9.7% 3 2.8% 2 2.0% 5 1.8% 2 0.0% 02.4% 11 0.6% 1 2.4% 9 Tesco, Warwick Way, 1.7% 11 2.0% 5 1.5% 6 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 1.6% 4 2.7% 3 0.0% 01.1% 52.6%41.3%5 Victoria Local shops, St Johns Wood 1.5% 10 2.0% 5 1.2% 5 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 3.6% 4 0.0% 02.0% 90.6%12.4%9 Marks & Spencer, Edgware 1.5% 10 1.6% 4 1.5% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 5 0.0% 0 5.9% 11.7% 81.3%20.5%2 Road Marks & Spencer Simply 1.4% 9 0.0% 0 2.2% 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.5% 71.3%21.6%6 Food, Notting Hill Iceland, Harrow Road, 1.2% 8 0.8% 2 1.5% 6 6.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 14.5%70.5%2 London Marks & Spencer Simply 1.2% 8 2.0% 5 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.3% 60.6%10.8%3 Food, Marylebone Station Marks & Spencer, Oxford 1.2% 8 2.0% 5 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.5% 70.6%11.6%6 Street Local shops (unspecified 1.2% 8 1.2% 3 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.3% 61.3%21.3%5 location) Tesco, Edgware Road 0.9% 6 0.4% 1 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 31.9%30.3%1 Local shops, Abbey Road, 0.9% 6 0.8% 2 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 5.9% 11.1% 50.0%01.6%6 London Tesco Express, Praed Street 0.9% 6 0.8% 2 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 41.3%20.5%2 Tesco, Notting Hill Gate 0.9% 6 0.4% 1 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.6%10.3%1 Sainsbury’s, Kilburn High 0.9% 6 1.2% 3 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 5.9% 11.1% 50.6%11.1%4 Road, Brent Local shops, Lupus Street, 0.8% 5 1.6% 4 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 21.9%30.5%2 Westminster Sainsbury’s, Ladbroke 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 31.3%20.8%3 Grove, London Sainsbury, Oxford Street 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 31.3%20.5%2 Bestbuy, Ladbroke Grove 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.3%1 Costcutter, Golborne Road, 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 02.6%40.3%1 Kensington Local shops, Kendal Street, 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%01.1%4 High Park Waitrose, Swiss Cottage 0.6% 4 1.2% 3 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.8%3
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 9 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Marks & Spencer, High 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.8%3 Street, Kensington Tesco Express, Meadville 0.6% 4 1.2% 3 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%01.1%4 Marks & Spencer, Whiteleys 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 3 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.5%2 of Bayswater, Queensway Local shops, Edgware Road, 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 21.3%20.8%3 Westminster Local shops, Harrow Road, 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 21.3%20.3%1 London Market, Portobello 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.9% 40.0%00.8%3 Waitrose, Finchley Road 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.8%3 Tesco, Baker Street, London 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.5%2 Whiteley's Shopping Centre 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.3%1 Fresh & Wild, Westbourne 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Grove Mail order / internet / 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.2% 10.6%10.3%1 delivered Sainsbury, Kingsgate Parade, 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 5.9% 10.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Victoria Street Sainsbury Local, Paddington 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 Station Marks & Spencer, Marble 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 Arch Tesco (unspecified location) 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Local shops, Lisson Grove, 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Marylebone Market, Church Street, 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.3%1 London Ladbroke Grove 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 Tesco, Great Peter Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 London Tesco, Malcom Court 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Tesco, High Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Marylebone Local shops, Boundary 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Road, London Tesco Express, Praed Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Paddington Sainsbury Local, 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Westbourne Grove Tesco, Bayswater 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.0%0 Portland Stores, Marylebone 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Local shops, Victoria 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 01.3%20.3%1 Costcutters (unspecified 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.0%0 location) Sainsbury Local, Allington 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Street, Victoria
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 10 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Marks & Spencer Simply 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Food, Finchley Road, London Marks & Spencer, Victoria 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Cardinal Place Marks & Spencer, Swiss 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Cottage Local shops, Church Street, 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.3%1 London Costcutter, Lupus Street, 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.0%0 Westminster Crispen’s, Oxford Street 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Tesco, Shurland Avenue, 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 London Iceland, Meadville 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Tesco, Meadville 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Local shops, Warwick Way, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Westminster Local shops, Portobello 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Road, London Tesco Express, Monk Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 London Notting Hill Gate 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Marks & Spencer Simply 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Food, Paddington Station Tesco, Brent Cross 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury’s, Marble Arch 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury’s, Wilton Road, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Barnet Tesco Metro, Regent Street 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Waitrose, Motcomb Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Local shops, Pimlico 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Local shops, Newgate Close, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.3%1 London Sainsbury, Vauxhall 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Tesco Express, Charing 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Cross Marks & Spencer, Victoria 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Station Dart Street, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Sainsbury’s, Finchley Road, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Hampstead Sainsbury’s, Gloucester 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road, London Local shops, Great Portland 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Street Local shops, Mozart Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 11 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Paddington Local shops, Claremont 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Close, London Sainsbury’s, O2 Centre, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Finchley Road, London Marks & Spencer, Kilburn 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury’s, Victoria Street, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 London Sainsbury’s, Westbourne 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road, Notting Hill Gate Local shops, Chepstow 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road, London Marks & Spencer Simply 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Food, Notting Hill Gate Local shops, Praed Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Paddington Chipstow Stores, Chipstow 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road, London Morrisons, Camden Town 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Planet Organic, Westbourne 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.3%1 Grove Portobello Whole Foods, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Portobello Green Local shops, Sutherland 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Avenue, London Tesco Metro, Marsham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Street, Westminster Embassy News, Embassy 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Road, Notting Hill Gate Tesco Metro, St Johns Wood 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Somerfield, Harrow Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.3%1 London Somerfield, High Street, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Camden Town John Lewis, Oxford Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Sainsbury’s, Queenstown 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Road, Lambeth Local shops, Barlby Gardens 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Local shops, Blenheim 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Terrace, Paddington Sainsbury’s, Westminster 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Tesco, Melcombe Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 London Local shops, Cherrett Close, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 London Sainsbury Local, Waterloo 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Tesco, Whiteleys of 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 12 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Bayswater, Queensway The Ginger Pig, High Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Marylebone Crispin’s, Kendal Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 London Local shops, Great Western 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Road, Paddington Safeway, Edgware Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 London Local shops, High Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Marylebone Paddington Street, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Marylebone Fruit Garden, Malcolm Street 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Local shops, Alguin Court, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Stanmore Local shops, Mackennal 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.3%1 Street, London Local shops, Moscow Road, 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 London Market (unspecified 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 location) Fairhazel Gardens, Camden 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Town Sainsbury's (unspecified 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 location) Sainsbury's, Keble Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 London Suffolk 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Local shops, Regency Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Westminster Local shops, Regents Park 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road Local shops, Shirland Mews, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Paddington TheLisboaDeli,Golborne 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Road, West Ham Market, Marylebone 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Tesco Metro, Holland Park 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Avenue, London Local shops, Vincent Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Westminster Selfridges, Oxford Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 (Don’t know / varies) 14.6% 96 15.4% 39 14.1% 57 9.7% 3 7.0% 5 17.2% 44 18.8% 21 23.5% 4 15.0% 69 14.2% 22 15.9% 60 (Don't do top-up shopping) 10.2% 67 11.4% 29 9.4% 38 16.1% 5 8.5% 6 5.1% 13 13.4% 15 11.8% 28.7% 40 11.6% 18 7.7% 29 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 13 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q05 Have you shopped or used services at Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street during the last three months ?
Yes 70.5% 463 73.2% 186 68.7% 277 77.4% 24 70.4% 50 75.4% 193 70.5% 79 58.8% 10 70.2% 322 69.0% 107 70.3% 265 No 29.5% 194 26.8% 68 31.3% 126 22.6% 7 29.6% 21 24.6% 63 29.5% 33 41.2% 7 29.8% 137 31.0% 48 29.7% 112 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 14 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q06 What are the main reasons why you have not recently shopped in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street ? Those who have not shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
Too far away 16.0% 31 17.6% 12 15.1% 19 14.3% 1 4.8% 1 20.6% 13 9.1% 3 0.0% 0 19.0% 26 10.4% 5 15.2% 17 Poor range of shops / 11.3% 22 11.8% 8 11.1% 14 14.3% 1 14.3% 3 11.1% 7 15.2% 5 14.3% 1 13.9% 19 6.3% 3 14.3% 16 services Poor car parking 9.3% 18 7.4% 5 10.3% 13 0.0% 0 9.5% 2 9.5% 6 12.1% 4 14.3% 1 11.7% 16 4.2% 2 16.1% 18 Poor environment / rundown 9.3% 18 7.4% 5 10.3% 13 0.0% 0 4.8% 1 11.1% 7 15.2% 5 28.6% 2 10.9% 15 4.2% 2 12.5% 14 Ihavenoneedtogothere 8.8% 17 7.4% 5 9.5% 12 14.3% 1 9.5% 2 6.3% 4 3.0% 1 14.3% 17.3% 10 12.5% 6 7.1% 8 Generally inconvenient 5.2% 10 2.9% 2 6.3% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 4 12.1% 4 0.0% 02.9% 4 10.4% 5 5.4% 6 Poor quality shops / services 5.2% 10 4.4% 3 5.6% 7 14.3% 1 4.8% 1 3.2% 2 12.1% 4 14.3% 15.8% 84.2%25.4%6 Prefer to shop at larger 4.6% 9 5.9% 4 4.0% 5 0.0% 0 9.5% 2 4.8% 3 6.1% 2 0.0% 05.1% 72.1%15.4%6 centres No local centre near to home 4.6% 9 7.4% 5 3.2% 4 0.0% 0 9.5% 2 7.9% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 04.4% 66.3%36.3%7 or work Poor public transport / hard 4.1% 8 2.9% 2 4.8% 6 0.0% 0 4.8% 1 1.6% 1 9.1% 3 0.0% 03.7% 56.3%32.7%3 to travel there Another larger centre is 4.1% 8 2.9% 2 4.8% 6 0.0% 0 9.5% 2 4.8% 3 3.0% 1 0.0% 03.7% 54.2%23.6%4 easier to get to There are a better choice of 2.6% 5 2.9% 2 2.4% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.2% 2 6.1% 2 0.0% 03.7% 50.0%02.7%3 shops locally Prefer to shop at large food 2.6% 5 0.0% 0 4.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 6.1% 2 0.0% 02.2% 32.1%12.7%3 store I don't know where it is 2.1% 4 1.5% 1 2.4% 3 0.0% 0 14.3% 3 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.5% 24.2%21.8%2 Too expensive 2.1% 4 4.4% 3 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 4.8% 1 0.0% 0 3.0% 1 0.0% 02.2% 32.1%11.8%2 Unsafe 1.0% 2 1.5% 1 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.1% 2 0.0% 00.7% 12.1%10.0%0 Only shop in West End / 1.0% 2 1.5% 1 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 1 0.0% 01.5% 20.0%00.0%0 largecentrecitycentre I am not able to leave the 1.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.6% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 12.1%10.0%0 house I don't know the area very 1.0% 2 2.9% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.2% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.5% 20.0%00.0%0 well Too busy 1.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.6% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.5% 20.0%01.8%2 There is nothing appealing 1.0% 2 1.5% 1 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 4.8% 1 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.5% 20.0%01.8%2 there Because of the language 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 02.1%10.0%0 barrier It depends where I am at the 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 02.1%10.9%1 time I justdon'tgotothatarea 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 1 0.0% 00.7% 10.0%00.9%1 I don't trust some of the 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 10.0%00.0%0 market traders They don't have enough 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 10.0%00.0%0 household shops I only go for electrical goods 0.5% 1 1.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 02.1%10.9%1 When the weather is good I 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 10.0%00.9%1
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 15 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
prefer to go elsewhere I work during shop opening 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 02.1%10.9%1 times I don't have the time 0.5% 1 1.5% 1 0.0% 0 14.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 10.0%00.9%1 (Don’t know / no reason in 17.5% 34 17.6% 12 17.5% 22 42.9% 3 14.3% 3 17.5% 11 9.1% 3 42.9% 3 15.3% 21 20.8% 10 17.0% 19 particular) Base: 194 68 126 7 21 63 33 7 137 48 112
Mean Score: [Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good nor poor=0, Quite Poor=-1, Very poor=-2]
Q07 How would you rate Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street out of 1 to 5 where 5 is very good and 1 is very poor for the following ? Those who have shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
Availability and price of parking
Very good 3.7% 17 3.8% 7 3.6% 10 4.2% 1 2.0% 1 4.1% 8 1.3% 1 10.0% 13.4% 11 3.7% 4 3.8% 10 Quite good 5.8% 27 4.3% 8 6.9% 19 25.0% 6 4.0% 2 4.7% 9 2.5% 2 10.0% 13.1% 10 11.2% 12 5.3% 14 Neither good nor poor 9.7% 45 9.7% 18 9.7% 27 16.7% 4 12.0% 6 10.4% 20 11.4% 9 0.0% 0 10.2% 33 8.4% 9 11.3% 30 Quite Poor 13.0% 60 11.8% 22 13.7% 38 20.8% 5 18.0% 9 13.0% 25 11.4% 9 0.0% 0 14.6% 47 10.3% 11 17.0% 45 Very poor 25.7% 119 28.0% 52 24.2% 67 8.3% 2 22.0% 11 26.4% 51 29.1% 23 10.0% 1 24.8% 80 29.9% 32 32.1% 85 Don’t know 42.1% 195 42.5% 79 41.9% 116 25.0% 6 42.0% 21 41.5% 80 44.3% 35 70.0% 7 43.8% 141 36.4% 39 30.6% 81 Mean: -0.88 -0.97 -0.83 -0.06 -0.93 -0.90 -1.16 0.33 -0.97 -0.81 -0.98 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Range of shops and services
Very good 15.3% 71 11.8% 22 17.7% 49 16.7% 4 10.0% 5 11.9% 23 17.7% 14 30.0% 3 15.2% 49 13.1% 14 14.7% 39 Quite good 21.4% 99 22.6% 42 20.6% 57 25.0% 6 18.0% 9 22.8% 44 17.7% 14 30.0% 3 18.9% 61 30.8% 33 16.6% 44 Neither good nor poor 31.5% 146 37.6% 70 27.4% 76 37.5% 9 50.0% 25 34.7% 67 22.8% 18 20.0% 2 34.5% 111 22.4% 24 34.0% 90 Quite Poor 19.7% 91 18.3% 34 20.6% 57 20.8% 5 18.0% 9 20.2% 39 26.6% 21 20.0% 2 21.1% 68 17.8% 19 21.9% 58 Very poor 8.0% 37 7.0% 13 8.7% 24 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 8.8% 17 11.4% 9 0.0% 06.8% 22 12.2% 13 9.4% 25 Don’t know 4.1% 19 2.7% 5 5.1% 14 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 1.6% 3 3.8% 3 0.0% 03.4% 11 3.7% 4 3.4% 9 Mean: 0.17 0.14 0.19 0.38 0.16 0.09 0.04 0.70 0.15 0.16 0.05 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 16 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Quality of shops and services
Very good 16.0% 74 14.0% 26 17.3% 48 20.8% 5 6.0% 3 14.5% 28 12.7% 10 30.0% 3 14.9% 48 15.9% 17 17.0% 45 Quite good 26.6% 123 25.3% 47 27.4% 76 29.2% 7 28.0% 14 29.0% 56 24.1% 19 50.0% 5 28.0% 90 24.3% 26 23.8% 63 Neither good nor poor 31.1% 144 37.1% 69 27.1% 75 41.7% 10 40.0% 20 30.6% 59 30.4% 24 10.0% 1 31.4% 101 29.9% 32 30.6% 81 Quite Poor 13.8% 64 12.9% 24 14.4% 40 4.2% 1 20.0% 10 15.0% 29 15.2% 12 10.0% 1 13.7% 44 16.8% 18 16.2% 43 Very poor 8.0% 37 5.4% 10 9.7% 27 4.2% 1 4.0% 2 10.4% 20 7.6% 6 0.0% 07.5% 24 9.3% 10 8.7% 23 Don’t know 4.5% 21 5.4% 10 4.0% 11 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 0.5% 1 10.1% 8 0.0% 04.7% 15 3.7% 4 3.8% 10 Mean: 0.30 0.31 0.29 0.58 0.12 0.22 0.21 1.00 0.31 0.21 0.25 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Prices
Very good 7.3% 34 8.1% 15 6.9% 19 4.2% 1 4.0% 27.3%146.3%510.0% 18.1% 26 6.5% 7 7.2% 19 Quite good 24.4% 113 23.1% 43 25.3% 70 54.2% 13 24.0% 12 21.8% 42 22.8% 18 20.0% 2 23.0% 74 26.2% 28 21.9% 58 Neither good nor poor 36.1% 167 41.4% 77 32.5% 90 29.2% 7 48.0% 24 38.3% 74 31.6% 25 40.0% 4 36.0% 116 39.3% 42 32.1% 85 Quite Poor 17.3% 80 13.4% 25 19.9% 55 12.5% 3 18.0% 9 19.7% 38 20.3% 16 10.0% 1 19.9% 64 12.2% 13 23.8% 63 Very poor 9.7% 45 8.6% 16 10.5% 29 0.0% 0 4.0% 2 10.9% 21 11.4% 9 0.0% 08.7% 28 9.3% 10 10.6% 28 Don’t know 5.2% 24 5.4% 10 5.1% 14 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 2.1% 4 7.6% 6 20.0% 24.3% 14 6.5% 7 4.5% 12 Mean: 0.03 0.09 -0.02 0.50 0.06 -0.05 -0.08 0.38 0.02 0.09 -0.09 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Quality / and range of places to eat / drink
Very good 18.8% 87 18.8% 35 18.8% 52 12.5% 3 18.0% 9 18.1% 35 22.8% 18 30.0% 3 18.0% 58 21.5% 23 19.6% 52 Quite good 24.8% 115 25.8% 48 24.2% 67 20.8% 5 32.0% 16 29.0% 56 17.7% 14 10.0% 1 28.9% 93 16.8% 18 26.8% 71 Neither good nor poor 19.4% 90 23.7% 44 16.6% 46 8.3% 2 20.0% 10 23.3% 45 17.7% 14 30.0% 3 19.3% 62 18.7% 20 19.2% 51 Quite Poor 13.4% 62 11.8% 22 14.4% 40 41.7% 10 18.0% 9 12.4% 24 12.7% 10 10.0% 1 14.6% 47 11.2% 12 15.1% 40 Very poor 7.3% 34 8.1% 15 6.9% 19 12.5% 3 6.0% 37.8%156.3%50.0% 07.5% 24 6.5% 7 8.3% 22 Don’t know 16.2% 75 11.8% 22 19.1% 53 4.2% 1 6.0% 3 9.3% 18 22.8% 18 20.0% 2 11.8% 38 25.2% 27 10.9% 29 Mean: 0.41 0.40 0.42 -0.22 0.40 0.41 0.49 0.75 0.40 0.48 0.39 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
General shopping environment
Very good 17.5% 81 14.5% 27 19.5% 54 16.7% 4 8.0% 4 18.1% 35 19.0% 15 10.0% 1 18.0% 58 15.9% 17 17.0% 45 Quite good 26.6% 123 25.3% 47 27.4% 76 29.2% 7 46.0% 23 23.3% 45 16.5% 13 20.0% 2 26.4% 85 27.1% 29 24.5% 65 Neither good nor poor 25.1% 116 24.7% 46 25.3% 70 33.3% 8 18.0% 9 29.0% 56 27.8% 22 20.0% 2 24.8% 80 26.2% 28 27.5% 73 Quite Poor 16.0% 74 21.0% 39 12.6% 35 20.8% 5 18.0% 9 17.1% 33 19.0% 15 30.0% 3 16.1% 52 15.9% 17 15.5% 41 Very poor 11.4% 53 10.8% 20 11.9% 33 0.0% 0 6.0% 3 11.9% 23 15.2% 12 10.0% 1 11.8% 38 10.3% 11 12.5% 33 Don’t know 3.5% 16 3.8% 7 3.2% 9 0.0% 0 4.0% 2 0.5% 1 2.5% 2 10.0% 12.8% 94.7%53.0%8 Mean: 0.23 0.12 0.31 0.42 0.33 0.19 0.05 -0.11 0.23 0.24 0.19 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 17 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Safety / security
Very good 22.9% 106 19.4% 36 25.3% 70 45.8% 11 16.0% 8 20.2% 39 31.6% 25 10.0% 1 25.5% 82 15.0% 16 23.8% 63 Quite good 31.5% 146 32.8% 61 30.7% 85 12.5% 3 36.0% 18 33.7% 65 22.8% 18 10.0% 1 32.9% 106 32.7% 35 30.9% 82 Neither good nor poor 23.5% 109 21.5% 40 24.9% 69 20.8% 5 34.0% 17 24.4% 47 16.5% 13 30.0% 3 21.7% 70 28.0% 30 23.4% 62 Quite Poor 10.2% 47 15.1% 28 6.9% 19 12.5% 3 6.0% 3 11.4% 22 19.0% 15 10.0% 19.9% 32 10.3% 11 9.8% 26 Very poor 7.3% 34 7.0% 13 7.6% 21 4.2% 1 6.0% 38.8%176.3%520.0% 26.8% 22 6.5% 7 8.3% 22 Don’t know 4.5% 21 4.3% 8 4.7% 13 4.2% 1 2.0% 1 1.6% 3 3.8% 3 20.0% 23.1% 10 7.5% 8 3.8% 10 Mean: 0.55 0.44 0.62 0.87 0.51 0.46 0.57 -0.25 0.62 0.42 0.54 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Access by public transport
Very good 33.0% 153 29.6% 55 35.4% 98 33.3% 8 24.0% 12 37.3% 72 34.2% 27 10.0% 1 31.7% 102 39.3% 42 31.3% 83 Quite good 32.0% 148 33.3% 62 31.0% 86 54.2% 13 46.0% 23 30.6% 59 27.8% 22 40.0% 4 32.0% 103 30.8% 33 30.2% 80 Neither good nor poor 10.6% 49 14.5% 27 7.9% 22 0.0% 0 12.0% 6 12.4% 24 6.3% 5 20.0% 29.6% 31 13.1% 14 11.3% 30 Quite Poor 3.5% 16 4.3% 8 2.9% 8 4.2% 1 4.0% 2 1.6% 3 5.1% 4 20.0% 22.8% 9 2.8% 3 4.5% 12 Very poor 4.1% 19 2.2% 4 5.4% 15 4.2% 1 4.0% 2 3.1% 6 2.5% 2 0.0% 04.3% 14 1.9% 2 3.4% 9 Don’t know 16.8% 78 16.1% 30 17.3% 48 4.2% 1 10.0% 5 15.0% 29 24.1% 19 10.0% 1 19.6% 63 12.2% 13 19.2% 51 Mean: 1.04 1.00 1.07 1.13 0.91 1.15 1.13 0.44 1.04 1.17 1.01 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Level of street cleaning
Very good 25.5% 118 24.2% 45 26.4% 73 29.2% 7 18.0% 9 23.8% 46 22.8% 18 10.0% 1 25.8% 83 27.1% 29 25.7% 68 Quite good 39.1% 181 39.2% 73 39.0% 108 37.5% 9 40.0% 20 39.9% 77 46.8% 37 60.0% 6 41.6% 134 33.6% 36 40.8% 108 Neither good nor poor 20.1% 93 20.4% 38 19.9% 55 16.7% 4 24.0% 12 22.8% 44 19.0% 15 10.0% 1 18.6% 60 21.5% 23 18.9% 50 Quite Poor 7.1% 33 10.2% 19 5.1% 14 8.3% 2 12.0% 67.3%143.8%30.0% 07.1% 23 6.5% 7 7.9% 21 Very poor 4.1% 19 2.2% 4 5.4% 15 8.3% 2 4.0% 2 3.1% 6 3.8% 3 20.0% 23.1% 10 5.6% 6 2.6% 7 Don’t know 4.1% 19 3.8% 7 4.3% 12 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 3.1% 6 3.8% 3 0.0% 03.7% 12 5.6% 6 4.2% 11 Mean: 0.78 0.76 0.79 0.71 0.57 0.76 0.84 0.40 0.83 0.74 0.82 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Liveliness / street character
Very good 19.9% 92 15.6% 29 22.7% 63 33.3% 8 12.0% 6 19.7% 38 20.3% 16 10.0% 1 22.4% 72 12.2% 13 20.8% 55 Quite good 31.5% 146 38.2% 71 27.1% 75 16.7% 4 38.0% 19 31.6% 61 30.4% 24 40.0% 4 32.0% 103 32.7% 35 27.9% 74 Neither good nor poor 26.4% 122 24.7% 46 27.4% 76 25.0% 6 38.0% 19 28.5% 55 20.3% 16 30.0% 3 26.4% 85 23.4% 25 27.2% 72 Quite Poor 10.6% 49 9.1% 17 11.6% 32 25.0% 6 10.0% 5 8.8% 17 17.7% 14 0.0% 0 10.2% 33 13.1% 14 14.0% 37 Very poor 5.8% 27 4.8% 9 6.5% 18 0.0% 0 0.0% 06.7%136.3%50.0% 04.3% 14 9.3% 10 6.0% 16 Don’t know 5.8% 27 7.5% 14 4.7% 13 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 4.7% 9 5.1% 4 20.0% 24.7% 15 9.3% 10 4.2% 11 Mean: 0.52 0.55 0.50 0.58 0.53 0.51 0.43 0.75 0.61 0.28 0.45 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 18 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Amount of traffic
Very good 5.0% 23 5.9% 11 4.3% 12 8.3% 2 2.0% 16.2%122.5%20.0% 04.0% 13 6.5% 7 4.2% 11 Quite good 15.1% 70 17.2% 32 13.7% 38 25.0% 6 22.0% 11 11.9% 23 15.2% 12 20.0% 2 13.4% 43 19.6% 21 14.0% 37 Neither good nor poor 28.3% 131 28.5% 53 28.2% 78 37.5% 9 36.0% 18 32.1% 62 21.5% 17 10.0% 1 29.5% 95 26.2% 28 29.8% 79 Quite Poor 21.6% 100 23.7% 44 20.2% 56 12.5% 3 24.0% 12 20.7% 40 27.8% 22 30.0% 3 26.1% 84 7.5% 8 24.2% 64 Very poor 26.8% 124 21.5% 40 30.3% 84 16.7% 4 14.0% 7 27.5% 53 29.1% 23 40.0% 4 24.2% 78 35.5% 38 24.9% 66 Don’t know 3.2% 15 3.2% 6 3.2% 9 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 1.6% 3 3.8% 3 0.0% 02.8% 94.7%53.0%8 Mean: -0.52 -0.39 -0.60 -0.04 -0.27 -0.52 -0.68 -0.90 -0.55 -0.48 -0.53 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Evening / night-time facilities / activities
Very good 6.7% 31 6.5% 12 6.9% 19 8.3% 2 2.0% 18.3%168.9%70.0% 05.3% 17 10.3% 11 7.5% 20 Quite good 19.4% 90 24.7% 46 15.9% 44 12.5% 3 26.0% 13 21.2% 41 19.0% 15 20.0% 2 22.1% 71 14.0% 15 19.6% 52 Neither good nor poor 21.8% 101 22.0% 41 21.7% 60 25.0% 6 30.0% 15 26.9% 52 8.9% 7 20.0% 2 23.0% 74 18.7% 20 24.5% 65 Quite Poor 14.0% 65 14.0% 26 14.1% 39 29.2% 7 20.0% 10 17.1% 33 13.9% 11 10.0% 1 15.8% 51 10.3% 11 16.2% 43 Very poor 11.0% 51 9.7% 18 11.9% 33 25.0% 6 14.0% 7 11.9% 23 10.1% 8 0.0% 0 11.5% 37 9.3% 10 11.7% 31 Don’t know 27.0% 125 23.1% 43 29.6% 82 0.0% 0 8.0% 4 14.5% 28 39.2% 31 50.0% 5 22.4% 72 37.4% 40 20.4% 54 Mean: -0.04 0.06 -0.12 -0.50 -0.20 -0.04 0.04 0.20 -0.08 0.09 -0.06 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Size / quality of supermarkets
Very good 14.0% 65 11.8% 22 15.5% 43 16.7% 4 6.0% 3 11.4% 22 17.7% 14 0.0% 0 13.7% 44 15.0% 16 12.1% 32 Quite good 20.7% 96 24.7% 46 18.1% 50 25.0% 6 16.0% 8 22.3% 43 12.7% 10 40.0% 4 18.0% 58 27.1% 29 19.2% 51 Neither good nor poor 22.7% 105 22.6% 42 22.7% 63 29.2% 7 28.0% 14 24.4% 47 19.0% 15 30.0% 3 24.2% 78 15.9% 17 22.6% 60 Quite Poor 25.1% 116 28.0% 52 23.1% 64 25.0% 6 36.0% 18 25.9% 50 27.8% 22 0.0% 0 27.6% 89 22.4% 24 27.5% 73 Very poor 11.7% 54 7.0% 13 14.8% 41 4.2% 1 12.0% 6 13.0% 25 13.9% 11 10.0% 1 11.8% 38 13.1% 14 12.5% 33 Don’t know 5.8% 27 5.9% 11 5.8% 16 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 3.1% 6 8.9% 7 20.0% 24.7% 15 6.5% 7 6.0% 16 Mean: 0.00 0.07 -0.04 0.25 -0.33 -0.07 -0.08 0.25 -0.06 0.09 -0.10 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 19 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q08 What mode of transport do you normally use to get to Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street ? Those who have shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
Car - driver 7.8% 36 4.8% 9 9.7% 27 8.3% 2 8.0% 47.3%145.1%40.0% 09.0% 29 1.9% 2 13.6% 36 Car - passenger 0.9% 4 0.0% 0 1.4% 4 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 0.5% 1 2.5% 2 0.0% 00.9% 30.9%11.5%4 Walk 75.2% 348 76.3% 142 74.4% 206 75.0% 18 82.0% 41 77.2% 149 81.0% 64 70.0% 7 76.1% 245 75.7% 81 71.3% 189 Bus 9.7% 45 10.8% 20 9.0% 25 8.3% 2 4.0% 26.2%128.9%720.0% 27.5% 24 13.1% 14 6.0% 16 Motorbike / scooter 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Taxi 0.2% 1 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.3% 10.0%00.0%0 Underground 1.1% 5 2.2% 4 0.4% 1 8.3% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.6% 50.0%00.8%2 Bicycle 1.7% 8 1.1% 2 2.2% 6 0.0% 0 4.0% 2 2.1% 4 1.3% 1 0.0% 01.9% 61.9%22.6%7 Other 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Don’t know / varies) 3.5% 16 4.3% 8 2.9% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 05.7%111.3%110.0% 12.8% 9 6.5% 7 4.2% 11 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
Q09 On average, how often do you use shops or services at Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street ? Those who have shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
2 / 3 times a week or more 62.2% 288 65.6% 122 59.9% 166 58.3% 14 58.0% 29 62.2% 120 65.8% 52 40.0% 4 59.3% 191 72.0% 77 61.1% 162 often Weekly 17.1% 79 16.1% 30 17.7% 49 29.2% 7 20.0% 10 19.2% 37 12.7% 10 10.0% 1 18.3% 59 12.2% 13 16.6% 44 Fortnightly 8.0% 37 7.0% 13 8.7% 24 8.3% 2 12.0% 67.8%156.3%520.0% 29.6% 31 4.7% 5 10.2% 27 Monthly 6.0% 28 4.3% 8 7.2% 20 0.0% 0 6.0% 35.2%108.9%720.0% 26.2% 20 5.6% 6 5.7% 15 Less than once a month 5.2% 24 5.4% 10 5.1% 14 4.2% 1 4.0% 25.2%105.1%40.0% 05.9% 19 3.7% 4 6.0% 16 (Varies / don’t know) 1.5% 7 1.6% 3 1.4% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.5% 1 1.3% 1 10.0% 10.6% 21.9%20.4%1 Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 20 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q10 Why do you choose to shop at this centre ? Those who have shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
Convenient to home 78.0% 361 83.9% 156 74.0% 205 87.5% 21 74.0% 37 81.9% 158 77.2% 61 60.0% 6 77.0% 248 81.3% 87 76.2% 202 Range of shops and services 15.8% 73 12.9% 24 17.7% 49 4.2% 1 14.0% 7 14.0% 27 19.0% 15 20.0% 2 18.0% 58 8.4% 9 17.0% 45 Like the shop / centre 5.0% 23 4.3% 8 5.4% 15 4.2% 1 8.0% 4 4.7% 9 8.9% 7 0.0% 05.6% 18 3.7% 4 4.5% 12 Pleasant environment 3.5% 16 2.2% 4 4.3% 12 4.2% 1 0.0% 0 3.1% 6 7.6% 6 0.0% 04.0% 13 2.8% 3 3.8% 10 Low price / good value 3.5% 16 2.7% 5 4.0% 11 4.2% 1 2.0% 1 3.6% 7 5.1% 4 0.0% 02.2% 76.5%73.4%9 Convenient to work 1.7% 8 1.1% 2 2.2% 6 4.2% 1 4.0% 2 1.6% 3 1.3% 1 0.0% 01.6% 51.9%20.8%2 Quality of the shopping 1.7% 8 1.6% 3 1.8% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 3 3.8% 3 0.0% 02.5% 80.0%02.3%6 environment Friendly atmosphere 1.1% 5 1.6% 3 0.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.5% 1 2.5% 2 0.0% 00.9% 31.9%20.4%1 To support local businesses 0.9% 4 2.2% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.0% 3 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.2% 40.0%01.1%3 Best choice locally 0.6% 3 0.0% 0 1.1% 3 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.6% 20.9%10.8%2 For specific items 0.6% 3 0.5% 1 0.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.3% 1 10.0% 10.9% 30.0%00.8%2 If I am passing through 0.6% 3 0.5% 1 0.7% 2 0.0% 0 4.0% 2 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.3% 10.9%10.8%2 Good public transport 0.4% 2 0.5% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.6% 20.0%00.0%0 It is somewhere different to 0.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.5% 1 1.3% 1 0.0% 00.3% 10.9%10.4%1 shop Quiet / not very busy 0.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.7% 2 4.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.6% 20.0%00.4%1 Late night shopping 0.4% 2 0.5% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.5% 1 1.3% 1 0.0% 00.3% 10.0%00.4%1 No other choice locally 0.4% 2 0.5% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.3% 10.9%10.8%2 For emergency shopping 0.4% 2 0.5% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.3% 10.9%10.4%1 Good range of products 0.4% 2 0.5% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.6% 20.0%00.4%1 Good parking 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.3% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.9%10.4%1 If I have an appointment 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.3% 10.0%00.0%0 locally Biggest centre locally 0.2% 1 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.3% 10.0%00.0%0 Friends / family live close by 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.3% 10.0%00.4%1 (Don’t know / no particular 2.6% 12 1.6% 3 3.2% 9 4.2% 1 2.0% 1 1.0% 2 1.3% 1 10.0% 12.2% 73.7%43.4%9 reason) Base: 463 186 277 24 50 193 79 10 322 107 265
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 21 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q11 Which other shopping centre do you use once a month or more often ?
Oxford Street / West End 23.0% 151 20.1% 51 24.8% 100 22.6% 7 26.8% 19 27.0% 69 17.0% 19 35.3% 6 25.1% 115 16.8% 26 23.9% 90 Marylebone High Street 7.2% 47 7.9% 20 6.7% 27 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 8.2% 21 11.6% 13 17.6% 38.9% 41 3.9% 6 9.0% 34 Kensington High Street 6.1% 40 3.5% 9 7.7% 31 0.0% 0 4.2% 38.2%216.3%711.8% 27.0% 32 5.2% 8 6.4% 24 Brent Cross 5.6% 37 3.9% 10 6.7% 27 6.5% 2 5.6% 46.3%166.3%711.8% 25.7% 26 5.2% 8 8.0% 30 Edgware Road 3.2% 21 4.7% 12 2.2% 9 0.0% 0 4.2% 34.3%111.8%20.0% 03.1% 14 3.2% 5 1.6% 6 Kings Road 2.7% 18 2.0% 5 3.2% 13 9.7% 3 1.4% 14.3%111.8%25.9% 13.1% 14 1.9% 3 2.9% 11 Warwick Way / Tachbrook 2.7% 18 3.2% 8 2.5% 10 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.7% 7 2.7% 3 0.0% 02.4% 11 2.6% 4 3.2% 12 Street Knightsbridge 2.6% 17 0.4% 1 4.0% 16 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 7 5.4% 6 0.0% 03.1% 14 1.3% 2 3.7% 14 Victoria Street, Westminster 2.4% 16 1.6% 4 3.0% 12 3.2% 1 5.6% 4 2.0% 5 2.7% 3 0.0% 02.4% 11 2.6% 4 2.4% 9 Kilburn 2.3% 15 2.4% 6 2.2% 9 6.5% 2 1.4% 1 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 0.0% 02.0% 93.2%51.3%5 Queensway / Westbourne 2.3% 15 2.0% 5 2.5% 10 3.2% 1 4.2% 3 2.0% 5 1.8% 2 0.0% 02.2% 10 3.2% 5 2.9% 11 Grove Notting Hill 2.1% 14 1.6% 4 2.5% 10 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 6 3.6% 4 0.0% 02.8% 13 0.6% 1 2.1% 8 O2 Centre, Finchley Road 1.8% 12 2.0% 5 1.7% 7 0.0% 0 4.2% 3 2.7% 7 0.9% 1 0.0% 02.0% 91.3%22.4%9 Ladbroke Grove, London 1.4% 9 1.2% 3 1.5% 6 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.3% 61.9%31.1%4 Finchley Road, London 1.4% 9 0.8% 2 1.7% 7 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.6% 4 2.7% 3 5.9% 11.3% 60.0%01.3%5 Whiteley's Shopping Centre 1.4% 9 1.6% 4 1.2% 5 3.2% 1 4.2% 3 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.1% 51.3%20.8%3 Bayswater 1.4% 9 0.4% 1 2.0% 8 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 2.3% 6 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.1% 52.6%41.6%6 Market, Portobello Road 1.4% 9 1.6% 4 1.2% 5 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 0.8% 2 3.6% 4 0.0% 01.7% 80.6%11.9%7 Hammersmith 1.1% 7 0.4% 1 1.5% 6 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 5.9% 11.1% 50.6%11.1%4 Harrow Road 1.1% 7 1.6% 4 0.7% 3 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 31.9%31.3%5 Holloway Road, Camden 0.9% 6 1.2% 3 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.1% 50.6%11.1%4 Town Marble Arch 0.9% 6 0.4% 1 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.9% 41.3%20.5%2 Covent Garden 0.9% 6 0.8% 2 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 2.7% 3 0.0% 01.3% 60.0%00.8%3 Camden Town 0.8% 5 1.2% 3 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.4% 21.9%30.8%3 Brompton Road 0.8% 5 0.8% 2 0.7% 3 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 40.6%11.1%4 St Johns Wood 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.5%2 Baker Street 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%01.1%4 Cromwell Road 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 2.7% 3 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%01.1%4 Sloane Square 0.6% 4 1.2% 3 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 21.3%20.5%2 Waterloo 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Praed Street 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 11.3%20.0%0 Cardinal Place, Victoria 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Regent Street 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.3%1 Church Street, Kent 0.5% 3 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.3%1 Bond Street, London 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Piccadilly 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Swiss Cottage 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.5%2 Shepherd's Bush W12 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.3%1 Clapham Junction 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Ashcroft Kings Mall 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Park Royal 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 Earlscourt 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 22 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Chelsea 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Vauxhall Bridge Road 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Gloucester 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Portobello Road 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Tottenham Court Road 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Acton 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Maida Vale 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Ashford 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Elton 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Croydon Shopping Centre 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Borough Market, Borough 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Bromley 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Butterfly Walk, Surrey 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Denby Street, Queensbury 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Ealing, Broadway 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Hampstead 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Kew Shopping Park, Malt 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Lake Road Lewisham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Milton Keynes 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 North End Road, Fulham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 Bloomsbury 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Peckham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Sainsbury's (unspecified 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 location) Southall, London 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Suffolk 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Surrey 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Market, White Chapel 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Wilton Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Wimbledon 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Berwick St John 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Bethnal Green 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Market, Church Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 London Crawford Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Midfield 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Muswell Hill 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Orchid Street, Fulham 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Soho 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Stratford 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 (No other used) 27.7% 182 32.7% 83 24.6% 99 25.8% 8 28.2% 20 21.5% 55 25.9% 29 23.5% 4 24.8% 114 33.5% 52 22.3% 84 (Don't know / varies) 3.7% 24 3.5% 9 3.7% 15 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 3.1% 8 2.7% 3 11.8% 22.6% 12 5.8% 9 4.2% 16 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 23 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Q12 What, if anything would make you more likely to visit Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street ?
Nothing 37.7% 248 39.4% 100 36.7% 148 29.0% 9 22.5% 16 32.0% 82 33.9% 38 41.2% 7 35.7% 164 42.6% 66 32.4% 122 Better choice of shops in 20.5% 135 13.8% 35 24.8% 100 19.4% 6 31.0% 22 25.0% 64 18.8% 21 5.9% 1 21.8% 100 20.6% 32 25.2% 95 general Better choice of other non- 12.0% 79 9.8% 25 13.4% 54 19.4% 6 16.9% 12 12.5% 32 12.5% 14 11.8% 2 12.9% 59 11.6% 18 13.8% 52 food shops Better food and convenience 7.8% 51 6.7% 17 8.4% 34 9.7% 3 8.5% 67.0%189.8%115.9% 18.5% 39 7.1% 11 6.6% 25 shops Better maintenance / 7.6% 50 7.5% 19 7.7% 31 3.2% 1 11.3% 8 6.6% 17 13.4% 15 11.8% 28.5% 39 6.5% 10 8.0% 30 cleanliness More car parking 6.2% 41 5.5% 14 6.7% 27 9.7% 3 7.0% 56.3%167.1%85.9% 17.2% 33 3.9% 6 9.8% 37 More / improved 5.2% 34 6.7% 17 4.2% 17 3.2% 1 12.7% 95.5%142.7%35.9% 15.4% 25 5.8% 9 4.8% 18 supermarkets Better quality shops 4.6% 30 4.7% 12 4.5% 18 3.2% 1 11.3% 85.9%153.6%45.9% 15.9% 27 1.3% 2 4.8% 18 Better safety / security 4.0% 26 3.9% 10 4.0% 16 0.0% 0 5.6% 44.7%126.3%70.0% 04.1% 19 3.9% 6 4.5% 17 Made the area more 2.1% 14 1.6% 4 2.5% 10 3.2% 1 0.0% 03.9%100.9%10.0% 02.6% 12 0.0% 0 2.1% 8 pedestrian friendly Better public transport 2.1% 14 2.0% 5 2.2% 9 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.7% 7 2.7% 3 0.0% 01.7% 83.9%61.3%5 More or better restaurants 2.0% 13 1.2% 3 2.5% 10 3.2% 1 7.0% 5 1.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 02.8% 13 0.0% 0 1.9% 7 Better / cheaper car parking 2.0% 13 2.0% 5 2.0% 8 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 1.6% 4 4.5% 5 0.0% 01.3% 6 3.9% 6 3.2% 12 More large shops 2.0% 13 1.6% 4 2.2% 9 0.0% 0 4.2% 3 3.1% 8 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.7% 82.6%41.6%6 Choice of cheaper shops 1.8% 12 1.6% 4 2.0% 8 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.3% 61.9%31.6%6 Less traffic congestion 1.7% 11 2.0% 5 1.5% 6 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.3% 6 1.8% 2 0.0% 02.2% 10 0.6% 1 2.4% 9 New department store 1.1% 7 0.0% 0 1.7% 7 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.1% 51.3%21.1%4 More or better public 0.8% 5 0.8% 2 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.1% 50.0%01.3%5 services / community uses Better atmosphere 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.8%3 Less non-food shops 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.1% 50.0%01.3%5 Better entertainment 0.8% 5 0.4% 1 1.0% 4 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.1% 50.0%00.8%3 facilities More or better takeaways 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 4.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.5%2 If I were given more 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.8%3 information about the area Support given to independent 0.6% 4 1.2% 3 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.8%3 businesses If money were invested in 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.7% 30.6%10.8%3 the area Improved cinema 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 3.2% 1 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.5%2 Larger / improved market 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 30.0%00.8%3 More or better pharmacy 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 11.3%20.3%1 More or better public houses 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.5%2 Friendlier staff in stores / 0.5% 3 0.4% 1 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 restaurants Less food shops 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.3%1 Less foreign people in the 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.2% 11.3%20.5%2
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 24 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
area More houses built 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Better access for cyclists 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.0%0 If it were more convenient to 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 my home Occupying the vacant stores 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Reduced opening hours 0.3% 2 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 More or better health / dental 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 facilities Longer opening hours 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 No congestion charges 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Better access for disabled 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 10.0% 00.0%00.0%0 people Less change to the area 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 If it were more spread out 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quieter 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Improved roads 0.2% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 (Don't know) 5.0% 33 5.5% 14 4.7% 19 6.5% 2 8.5% 63.9%101.8%223.5% 43.9% 18 5.2% 8 3.7% 14 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
GEN Gender of respondent:
Male 38.7% 254 100.0% 254 0.0% 0 25.8% 8 33.8% 24 40.2% 103 38.4% 43 29.4% 5 38.6% 177 40.6% 63 36.1% 136 Female 61.3% 403 0.0% 0 100.0% 403 74.2% 23 66.2% 47 59.8% 153 61.6% 69 70.6% 12 61.4% 282 59.4% 92 63.9% 241 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
AGE Could I ask, which of the following age bands do you fall into ?
16-24 4.7% 31 3.2% 8 5.7% 23 100.0% 31 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 04.4% 20 3.2% 5 4.2% 16 25-34 10.8% 71 9.4% 24 11.7% 47 0.0% 0 100.0% 71 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 11.3% 52 8.4% 13 11.4% 43 35-59 39.0% 256 40.6% 103 38.0% 153 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 256 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.1% 184 41.9% 65 43.2% 163 60-64 17.0% 112 16.9% 43 17.1% 69 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 112 0.0% 0 18.5% 85 14.2% 22 18.6% 70 65+ 25.9% 170 28.0% 71 24.6% 99 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 24.4% 112 30.3% 47 21.0% 79 (Refused) 2.6% 17 2.0% 5 3.0% 12 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 17 1.3% 61.9%31.6%6 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 25 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
ETH For the purposes of this survey, could I ask you which ethnic group you belong to ?
White - British (Interviewer, 65.6% 431 72.8% 185 61.0% 246 35.5% 11 54.9% 39 63.3% 162 71.4% 80 52.9% 9 71.5% 328 56.1% 87 69.0% 260 this includes English, Scottish, Welsh) White European 4.0% 26 3.5% 9 4.2% 17 9.7% 3 11.3% 84.3%111.8%20.0% 04.4% 20 3.2% 5 4.0% 15 Indian 2.7% 18 3.5% 9 2.2% 9 6.5% 2 2.8% 2 3.1% 8 2.7% 3 0.0% 03.1% 14 2.6% 4 3.4% 13 White - Irish 2.3% 15 2.4% 6 2.2% 9 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 3.6% 4 0.0% 01.5% 74.5%71.1%4 Caribbean 1.8% 12 1.6% 4 2.0% 8 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.6% 4 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 35.2%80.8%3 White and Asian 1.5% 10 2.0% 5 1.2% 5 9.7% 3 4.2% 3 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.3% 61.9%31.1%4 White American 1.4% 9 1.2% 3 1.5% 6 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.3% 6 0.9% 1 0.0% 01.7% 80.6%11.9%7 White and black Caribbean 1.2% 8 0.4% 1 1.7% 7 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 1.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 01.1% 51.9%30.8%3 White (other) 0.9% 6 0.4% 1 1.2% 5 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 0.0% 01.1% 50.6%10.5%2 White and black African 0.9% 6 1.2% 3 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 1.8% 2 0.0% 00.7% 31.3%21.3%5 Mixed Race 0.9% 6 0.8% 2 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 4.2% 3 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.7% 31.9%30.3%1 Greek 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 1.2% 5 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 21.9%30.8%3 African 0.8% 5 1.2% 3 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.7% 31.3%21.3%5 Pakistani 0.8% 5 0.8% 2 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.6%11.1%4 White Australian 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.8%3 Iranian 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 1.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.9% 40.0%00.5%2 West Indian 0.6% 4 0.8% 2 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.7% 3 0.0% 00.0% 01.3%20.0%0 Spanish 0.6% 4 0.4% 1 0.7% 3 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 02.6%41.1%4 Jamaican 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.5%2 German 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 01.3%20.5%2 Chinese 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.5%2 Arabic 0.5% 3 0.8% 2 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.2% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 11.3%20.5%2 Albanian 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 11.3%20.3%1 Middle Eastern 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.7% 3 3.2% 1 2.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.6%10.5%2 Latin American 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.3%1 Polish 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.3%1 European 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Caucasian 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Black British 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Malian 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.3%1 Pilipino British 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.0% 01.3%20.0%0 White Croatian 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.4% 20.0%00.3%1 Bangladeshi 0.3% 2 0.4% 1 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1 Portuguese 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.6%10.3%1 European Mixed Race 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 American Indian 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Chinese American 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Egyptian 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.0%0 New Zealander 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Black (other) 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Swiss Portuguese 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 Danish 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Mewari 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.6%10.3%1
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 26 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
Dutch 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.3%1 Chinese West Indian 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.9% 1 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 White South African 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.2% 10.0%00.0%0 (Refused) 4.4% 29 2.8% 7 5.5% 22 0.0% 0 2.8% 2 2.7% 7 5.4% 6 47.1% 82.6% 12 1.3% 2 3.2% 12 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
SAL Which of the following categories does your combined income fall into?
£0-25,000 31.4% 206 31.1% 79 31.5% 127 29.0% 9 18.3% 13 27.0% 69 34.8% 39 5.9% 1 26.1% 120 51.0% 79 19.6% 74 £25,000 - 50,000 19.5% 128 22.4% 57 17.6% 71 22.6% 7 26.8% 19 21.1% 54 15.2% 17 11.8% 2 21.8% 100 16.8% 26 21.8% 82 £50,000 - 100,000 12.6% 83 14.6% 37 11.4% 46 9.7% 3 21.1% 15 18.0% 46 8.9% 10 5.9% 1 16.6% 76 3.9% 6 16.7% 63 £100,000 or more 13.2% 87 12.6% 32 13.6% 55 9.7% 3 14.1% 10 18.8% 48 16.1% 18 0.0% 0 17.2% 79 4.5% 7 19.9% 75 (Don't know / can't 7.2% 47 4.7% 12 8.7% 35 29.0% 9 5.6% 43.9%108.0%911.8% 23.9% 18 13.5% 21 6.6% 25 remember) (Refused) 16.1% 106 14.6% 37 17.1% 69 0.0% 0 14.1% 10 11.3% 29 17.0% 19 64.7% 11 14.4% 66 10.3% 16 15.4% 58 Mean: 22686 25118 21154 20806 30282 27568 19152 9559 26438 16242 26127 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
CAR Finally, how many cars are there normally available for use in the household ?
None 39.6% 260 44.5% 113 36.5% 147 41.9% 13 32.4% 23 35.5% 91 36.6% 41 35.3% 6 35.7% 164 53.5% 83 0.0% 0 1 42.0% 276 43.3% 110 41.2% 166 32.3% 10 46.5% 33 42.6% 109 42.9% 48 29.4% 5 46.4% 213 32.9% 51 73.2% 276 2 12.9% 85 8.7% 22 15.6% 63 12.9% 4 12.7% 9 18.4% 47 16.1% 18 5.9% 1 14.4% 66 11.0% 17 22.5% 85 3ormore 2.4% 16 1.6% 4 3.0% 12 6.5% 2 1.4% 1 2.7% 7 3.6% 4 0.0% 02.8% 13 0.6% 1 4.2% 16 (Don't know) 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.5% 2 6.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Refused) 2.7% 18 2.0% 5 3.2% 13 0.0% 0 7.0% 5 0.8% 2 0.9% 1 29.4% 50.7% 31.9%30.0%0 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
SEG Socioeconmic Grouping:
A2.0% 13 1.2% 3 2.5% 10 3.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.8% 2 3.6% 4 0.0% 02.8% 13 0.0% 0 2.7% 10 B 35.0% 230 37.0% 94 33.7% 136 25.8% 8 35.2% 25 38.7% 99 43.8% 49 17.6% 3 50.1% 230 0.0% 0 42.2% 159 C1 32.9% 216 31.5% 80 33.7% 136 35.5% 11 38.0% 27 32.4% 83 28.6% 32 17.6% 3 47.1% 216 0.0% 0 32.6% 123 C2 9.1% 60 11.4% 29 7.7% 31 6.5% 2 8.5% 6 12.9% 33 4.5% 5 11.8% 20.0% 0 38.7% 60 9.5% 36 D8.8% 58 8.7% 22 8.9% 36 6.5% 2 5.6% 4 5.9% 15 13.4% 15 5.9% 10.0% 0 37.4% 58 6.1% 23 E5.6% 37 4.7% 12 6.2% 25 3.2% 1 4.2% 36.6%171.8%20.0% 00.0% 0 23.9% 37 2.7% 10 (Refused) 6.5% 43 5.5% 14 7.2% 29 19.4% 6 8.5% 6 2.7% 7 4.5% 5 47.1% 80.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.2% 16 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
051006 NEMS market research Demographics Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 27 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Male Female 16to24 25to34 35to59 60to64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Carinhhold
ZONE Zone
Harrow Road 15.2% 100 12.2% 31 17.1% 69 22.6% 7 16.9% 12 15.6% 40 15.2% 17 5.9% 1 12.0% 55 25.2% 39 12.5% 47 St Johns Wood 15.2% 100 13.8% 35 16.1% 65 19.4% 6 15.5% 11 15.6% 40 17.0% 19 11.8% 2 17.0% 78 9.0% 14 20.2% 76 Warwick Way / Tachbrook 15.2% 100 16.1% 41 14.6% 59 12.9% 4 15.5% 11 15.6% 40 17.0% 19 17.6% 3 14.4% 66 16.1% 25 15.9% 60 Street Church Street / Edgeware 15.2% 100 17.7% 45 13.6% 55 19.4% 6 15.5% 11 15.6% 40 10.7% 12 17.6% 3 13.3% 61 20.0% 31 10.3% 39 Road Marylebone High Street 9.0% 59 8.3% 21 9.4% 38 3.2% 1 5.6% 4 10.2% 26 4.5% 5 0.0% 0 10.9% 50 5.8% 9 9.5% 36 Queensway / Westbourne 15.4% 101 16.5% 42 14.6% 59 3.2% 1 15.5% 11 15.6% 40 17.9% 20 23.5% 4 16.3% 75 12.3% 19 15.7% 59 Grove Praed Street 14.8% 97 15.4% 39 14.4% 58 19.4% 6 15.5% 11 11.7% 30 17.9% 20 23.5% 4 16.1% 74 11.6% 18 15.9% 60 Base: 657 254 403 31 71 256 112 17 459 155 377
051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 28 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Q01 Where do you normally shop for non-food (comparison) goods i.e. clothes, footwear, books etc ?
Oxford Street / West End 45.8% 301 29.0% 29 62.0% 62 25.0% 25 65.0% 65 61.0% 36 16.8% 17 69.1% 67 Kensington High Street 7.6% 50 16.0% 16 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 29.7% 30 2.1% 2 Victoria Street, Westminster 3.0% 20 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 20 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Queensway / Westbourne 2.4% 16 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 8.9% 9 0.0% 0 Grove Edgware Road 2.4% 16 6.0% 6 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.1% 4 Kings Road 2.1% 14 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.0% 12 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 Marylebone High Street 1.5% 10 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 6.8% 4 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 Brent Cross 1.5% 10 3.0% 3 7.0% 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Mail order / delivered / 1.5% 10 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 3.0% 3 1.7% 1 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 internet Abroad (unspecified 1.1% 7 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 location) Kilburn 1.1% 7 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marble Arch 0.9% 6 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Whiteley's Shopping Centre 0.9% 6 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 Harrow Road 0.9% 6 6.0% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Market, Portobello Road 0.9% 6 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 Market, Church Street 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 St Johns Wood 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Regent Street 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Notting Hill 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 Portobello Road 0.6% 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 Bond Street, London 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 Tesco, Church Street, St 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Johns Wood Warwick Way / Tachbrook 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Street Bayswater 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 Hammersmith 0.5% 3 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 German Street, Westminster 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Knightsbridge 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 Central London 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Baker Street 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Covent Garden 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 O2 Centre, Finchley Road 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Praed Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Ladbroke Grove 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Camden Town 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Primark (unspecified 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 location) Sainsbury's, Crommel Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Barnet Wembley 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Westminster 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Park Road, London 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Bromley 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Cardinal Junction 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Shepherd's Bush W12 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Church Street, Kent 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Clapham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Cricklewood 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Finchley Road, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Goldbourne Road, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Kensington Hampstead 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Harrow 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Hyde Park 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Keble Road, London 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Market, Litchfield 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Market (unspecified 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 location) Mayfair 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Marble 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Arch Market, Brixton 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Osterley Lane, Ealing 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Oxbridge 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Coburn Mews 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury's, O2 Centre, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Finchley Road Sloanes Court 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 29 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Waitrose, Twyford 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Stanmore 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don't know / varies) 13.2% 87 13.0% 13 11.0% 11 18.0% 18 9.0% 9 22.0% 13 12.9% 13 10.3% 10 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 30 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Q02 At which store do you normally do most of your food and grocery (convenience) shopping ?
Waitrose, High Street, 8.2% 54 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 14.0% 14 45.8% 27 1.0% 1 11.3% 11 Marylebone Tesco, Church Street, St 7.2% 47 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 38.0% 38 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 3.1% 3 Johns Wood Sainsbury's, Wilton Road, 5.9% 39 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 39.0% 39 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Victoria Sainsbury’s, Ladbroke 5.0% 33 21.0% 21 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 4.1% 4 Grove, Chelsea Somerfield, Edgware Road, 3.8% 25 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 19.6% 19 London Sainsbury’s, O2 Centre, 3.5% 23 0.0% 0 21.0% 21 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Finchley Road, London Mail order / internet / 3.3% 22 2.0% 2 8.0% 8 2.0% 2 2.0% 2 1.7% 1 5.9% 6 1.0% 1 delivered Somerfield, Harrow Road 3.0% 20 19.0% 19 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Waitrose, Finchley Road, 2.7% 18 3.0% 3 12.0% 12 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 London Tesco, Portobello Road, 2.4% 16 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.7% 1 8.9% 9 0.0% 0 London Tesco, Warwick Way, 2.0% 13 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.0% 12 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Victoria Waitrose, Swiss Cottage, 2.0% 13 0.0% 0 13.0% 13 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Marks & Spencer, Edgware 1.7% 11 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 4.1% 4 Road, London Tesco, Brent Cross 1.5% 10 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 6.0% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Oxford 1.4% 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 3.4% 2 1.0% 1 5.2% 5 Street Ladbroke Grove 1.4% 9 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 2.1% 2 Iceland, Harrow Road, 1.1% 7 7.0% 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Tesco, Cromwell Road, 1.1% 7 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 3.1% 3 Kensington Market, Portobello Road, 1.1% 7 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 6 0.0% 0 London Marks & Spencer, Marble 1.1% 7 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Arch Sainsbury’s, Edgware Road, 1.1% 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.1% 3 0.0% 0 4.1% 4 London Waitrose, High Street, 0.9% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 6 0.0% 0 Kensington Sainsbury’s, Kilburn High 0.9% 6 3.0% 3 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road Marks & Spencer, Whiteleys 0.8% 5 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 of Bayswater, Queensway Marks & Spencer Simply 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.1% 3 Food, Marylebone Station Tesco, Notting Hill Gate 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 Sainsbury Local, Allington 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Street, Victoria Sainsbury’s, Swiss Cottage, 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Asda, Park Royal 0.6% 4 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Wilton Road, 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Victoria Sainsbury's, Kingsgate 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Parade, Victoria Street Marks & Spencer, 0.5% 3 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Queensway Tesco, Meadville 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Westbourne 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Grove, London Sainsbury Local, 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Westbourne Grove Sainsbury's, Vauxhall 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Asda, Clapham Junction 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco, Baker Street, London 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Fresh & Wild, Westbourne 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 Grove, London Sainsbury Local, Paddington 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.1% 3 Station Sainsbury’s, Cromwell Road, 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 2.1% 2
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 31 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Kensington Tesco, Edgware Road 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco Express, Praed Street 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Marks & Spencer Simply 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Food, Paddington Station Tesco, Hammersmith 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Camden Town 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury's, Kingsmall, 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Hammersmith Sainsbury’s, Harrow Road, 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 London Tesco, High Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Marylebone Waitrose, Kings Road 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Market, Warwick Way, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Westminster Morrisons, Camden Town 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Camden 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Town Marks & Spencer, High 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Street, Kensington Co-Op, Heathfield 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco, Circus Road 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Pimlico 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Whiteley's Shopping Centre 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Tesco, Bayswater 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Sainsbury's, Oxford Street 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Waitrose, Motcomb Street 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Budgens, Queensway 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Victoria 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Cardinal Place Kilburn High Road, London 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Safeway, Edgware Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 London Planet Organic, Westbourne 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Grove Portobello Whole Foods, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Portobello Green Local shops, Vincent Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Oxford Street, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Asda, Colindale 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury Local, Waterloo 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, High Gate 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury Local, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Southampton Street, Covent Garden Fresh & Wild, Camden 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury Local, Brompton 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Road Budgens, Tottenham Court 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road Sainsbury’s, Queenstown 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, Lambeth Market, Borough Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Bridge Supersave, Praed Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Sainsbury’s, Westminster 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Alperton 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Victoria 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Station Tesco Metro, Regent Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Green Valley, Barclay Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 London Sainsbury’s, Gloucester 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, London Tesco, Camden Town 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Kings 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road, Chelsea Sainsbury's, Hammersmith 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Notting 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Hill Gate Tesco, Englands Lane, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Belsize Park
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 32 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Local shops, Victoria, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Tesco, Kings Cross 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Asda, Connaught Hall 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Approach, Westminster Tesco, Monk Street, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Budgens, Porchester Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 London Tesco, Perivale 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Crispen’s, Oxford Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Tesco, Praed Street, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Tesco, Queensway, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Tesco, Shepherds Bush 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Tesco, Tottenham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Iceland, Meadville 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Waitrose, Gloucester Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 London Local shops, Edgware Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 London Local shops, Notting Hill 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Waitrose, Temple Fortune 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Parade Waitrose, Twyford 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Westbourne Grove, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Farmers market (unspecified 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 location) Market, Strutton Ground, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Westminster Market, Tebworth 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco Express, Charing 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Cross Somerfield, Camden Town 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco (unspecified location) 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury's, Islington 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Marks & Spencer, Finchley 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road, Golders Green Tesco, Gold Street, Kent 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco, Clifton Road, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Kings Cross 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know / varies) 12.6% 83 14.0% 14 17.0% 17 6.0% 6 3.0% 3 20.3% 12 20.8% 21 10.3% 10 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 33 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Q03 What is the main reason why you choose do your main food and grocery shopping at (STORE MENTIONED AT Q02) ?
Convenience to home 45.2% 297 56.0% 56 32.0% 32 37.0% 37 46.0% 46 57.6% 34 49.5% 50 43.3% 42 Quality of shops and services 9.3% 61 3.0% 3 12.0% 12 6.0% 6 9.0% 9 15.3% 9 9.9% 10 12.4% 12 Value for money 7.6% 50 11.0% 11 6.0% 6 9.0% 9 7.0% 7 6.8% 4 5.9% 6 7.2% 7 Preference for retailer 5.3% 35 3.0% 3 1.0% 1 12.0% 12 5.0% 5 6.8% 4 3.0% 3 7.2% 7 Good or cheap car parking 4.1% 27 2.0% 2 12.0% 12 3.0% 3 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 6.2% 6 Range of shops and services 4.0% 26 2.0% 2 4.0% 4 3.0% 3 6.0% 6 6.8% 4 4.0% 4 3.1% 3 available Good quality produce 2.6% 17 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 6.9% 7 2.1% 2 Easy to get to 2.3% 15 3.0% 3 6.0% 6 1.0% 1 4.0% 4 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Large store 2.1% 14 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 7.0% 7 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Good service / friendly 2.0% 13 4.0% 4 3.0% 3 2.0% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 Range of goods 2.0% 13 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 1.0% 1 No other shops locally 1.5% 10 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 2.0% 2 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Provide a delivery service 1.5% 10 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 1.0% 1 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 Habit / always uses it 1.5% 10 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 2.1% 2 Convenience to work 1.1% 7 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 They sell organic produce 0.9% 6 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 1.0% 1 I prefer their goods 0.8% 5 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Generally convenient 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Good customer service 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 2.1% 2 Other shops and services 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 nearby It is a small / quiet store 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 I dislike supermarkets 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Reward scheme / discounts 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Congestion charges are in 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 place near to other stores I have young children 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 To support local businesses 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 If I am passing through 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Longer opening hours 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Igowithafamilymember / 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 friend (Don’t know / no reason in 2.1% 14 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 3.0% 3 1.7% 1 3.0% 3 2.1% 2 particular) Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 34 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Q04 At which store or local centre do you do most of your top-up food and grocery shopping such as bread and milk ?
Tesco, Church Street, St 8.7% 57 0.0% 0 26.0% 26 0.0% 0 29.0% 29 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Johns Wood Waitrose, Marylebone High 4.0% 26 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 5.0% 5 28.8% 17 0.0% 0 3.1% 3 Street Sainsbury, Wilton Road, 4.0% 26 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 24.0% 24 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Victoria Somerfield, Edgware Road, 3.3% 22 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 18.6% 18 London Somerfield, Harrow Road 2.9% 19 19.0% 19 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco Metro, Portobello 2.6% 17 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.9% 13 0.0% 0 Road, London Tesco, Circus Road 2.0% 13 0.0% 0 11.0% 11 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco, Warwick Way, 1.7% 11 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 10.0% 10 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Victoria Local shops, St Johns Wood 1.5% 10 0.0% 0 10.0% 10 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Edgware 1.5% 10 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.0% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.1% 3 Road Marks & Spencer Simply 1.4% 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 7.9% 8 0.0% 0 Food, Notting Hill Iceland, Harrow Road, 1.2% 8 8.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Marks & Spencer Simply 1.2% 8 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.0% 6 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Food, Marylebone Station Marks & Spencer, Oxford 1.2% 8 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.1% 3 1.0% 1 3.1% 3 Street Local shops (unspecified 1.2% 8 2.0% 2 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 location) Tesco, Edgware Road 0.9% 6 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Abbey Road, 0.9% 6 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 London Tesco Express, Praed Street 0.9% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 4.1% 4 Tesco, Notting Hill Gate 0.9% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.9% 6 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Kilburn High 0.9% 6 2.0% 2 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road, Brent Local shops, Lupus Street, 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Westminster Sainsbury’s, Ladbroke 0.8% 5 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Grove, London Sainsbury, Oxford Street 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Bestbuy, Ladbroke Grove 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 1.0% 1 Costcutter, Golborne Road, 0.6% 4 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Kensington Local shops, Kendal Street, 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.1% 4 High Park Waitrose, Swiss Cottage 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, High 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 Street, Kensington Tesco Express, Meadville 0.6% 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer, Whiteleys 0.6% 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 of Bayswater, Queensway Local shops, Edgware Road, 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Westminster Local shops, Harrow Road, 0.6% 4 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Market, Portobello 0.6% 4 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Waitrose, Finchley Road 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Tesco, Baker Street, London 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Whiteley's Shopping Centre 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 Fresh & Wild, Westbourne 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 Grove Mail order / internet / 0.5% 3 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 delivered Sainsbury, Kingsgate Parade, 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Victoria Street Sainsbury Local, Paddington 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.1% 3 Station Marks & Spencer, Marble 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Arch Tesco (unspecified location) 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Lisson Grove, 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marylebone Market, Church Street, 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 35 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove London Ladbroke Grove 0.5% 3 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Tesco, Great Peter Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Tesco, Malcom Court 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco, High Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marylebone Local shops, Boundary 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road, London Tesco Express, Praed Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Paddington Sainsbury Local, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Westbourne Grove Tesco, Bayswater 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Portland Stores, Marylebone 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Victoria 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Costcutters (unspecified 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 location) Sainsbury Local, Allington 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Street, Victoria Marks & Spencer Simply 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Food, Finchley Road, London Marks & Spencer, Victoria 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Cardinal Place Marks & Spencer, Swiss 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Cottage Local shops, Church Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Costcutter, Lupus Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Westminster Crispen’s, Oxford Street 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Tesco, Shurland Avenue, 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Iceland, Meadville 0.3% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco, Meadville 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Warwick Way, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Westminster Local shops, Portobello 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, London Tesco Express, Monk Street, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Notting Hill Gate 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Marks & Spencer Simply 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Food, Paddington Station Tesco, Brent Cross 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Marble Arch 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Sainsbury’s, Wilton Road, 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Barnet Tesco Metro, Regent Street 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Waitrose, Motcomb Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Pimlico 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Newgate Close, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Sainsbury, Vauxhall 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco Express, Charing 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Cross Marks & Spencer, Victoria 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Station Dart Street, London 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Finchley Road, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Hampstead Sainsbury’s, Gloucester 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Road, London Local shops, Great Portland 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Street Local shops, Mozart Street, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Paddington Local shops, Claremont 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Close, London Sainsbury’s, O2 Centre, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Finchley Road, London Marks & Spencer, Kilburn 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Victoria Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 36 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove London Sainsbury’s, Westbourne 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, Notting Hill Gate Local shops, Chepstow 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, London Marks & Spencer Simply 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Food, Notting Hill Gate Local shops, Praed Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Paddington Chipstow Stores, Chipstow 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, London Morrisons, Camden Town 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Planet Organic, Westbourne 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Grove Portobello Whole Foods, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Portobello Green Local shops, Sutherland 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Avenue, London Tesco Metro, Marsham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Street, Westminster Embassy News, Embassy 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, Notting Hill Gate Tesco Metro, St Johns Wood 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Somerfield, Harrow Road, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Somerfield, High Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Camden Town John Lewis, Oxford Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury’s, Queenstown 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, Lambeth Local shops, Barlby Gardens 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Blenheim 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Terrace, Paddington Sainsbury’s, Westminster 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco, Melcombe Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Local shops, Cherrett Close, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Sainsbury Local, Waterloo 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco, Whiteleys of 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Bayswater, Queensway The Ginger Pig, High Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marylebone Crispin’s, Kendal Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 London Local shops, Great Western 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Road, Paddington Safeway, Edgware Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 London Local shops, High Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Marylebone Paddington Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Marylebone Fruit Garden, Malcolm Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Local shops, Alguin Court, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Stanmore Local shops, Mackennal 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Street, London Local shops, Moscow Road, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 London Market (unspecified 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 location) Fairhazel Gardens, Camden 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Town Sainsbury's (unspecified 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 location) Sainsbury's, Keble Road, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Suffolk 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Local shops, Regency Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Westminster Local shops, Regents Park 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road Local shops, Shirland Mews, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 37 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Paddington TheLisboaDeli,Golborne 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road, West Ham Market, Marylebone 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tesco Metro, Holland Park 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Avenue, London Local shops, Vincent Street, 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Westminster Selfridges, Oxford Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know / varies) 14.6% 96 14.0% 14 11.0% 11 13.0% 13 8.0% 8 20.3% 12 20.8% 21 17.5% 17 (Don't do top-up shopping) 10.2% 67 8.0% 8 4.0% 4 14.0% 14 4.0% 4 16.9% 10 8.9% 9 18.6% 18 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Q05 Have you shopped or used services at Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street during the last three months ?
Yes 70.5% 463 79.0% 79 92.0% 92 73.0% 73 70.0% 70 79.7% 47 57.4% 58 45.4% 44 No 29.5% 194 21.0% 21 8.0% 8 27.0% 27 30.0% 30 20.3% 12 42.6% 43 54.6% 53 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 38 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Q06 What are the main reasons why you have not recently shopped in Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street ? Those who have not shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
Too far away 16.0% 31 0.0% 0 12.5% 1 7.4% 2 26.7% 8 25.0% 3 25.6% 11 11.3% 6 Poor range of shops / 11.3% 22 23.8% 5 25.0% 2 3.7% 1 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 2.3% 1 22.6% 12 services Poor car parking 9.3% 18 28.6% 6 12.5% 1 3.7% 1 6.7% 2 8.3% 1 14.0% 6 1.9% 1 Poor environment / rundown 9.3% 18 9.5% 2 0.0% 0 11.1% 3 6.7% 2 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 15.1% 8 Ihavenoneedtogothere 8.8% 17 9.5% 2 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 10.0% 3 0.0% 0 16.3% 7 5.7% 3 Generally inconvenient 5.2% 10 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 6.7% 2 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 5.7% 3 Poor quality shops / services 5.2% 10 14.3% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 11.3% 6 Prefer to shop at larger 4.6% 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 3.3% 1 8.3% 1 7.0% 3 3.8% 2 centres No local centre near to home 4.6% 9 14.3% 3 0.0% 0 11.1% 3 3.3% 1 8.3% 1 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 or work Poor public transport / hard 4.1% 8 4.8% 1 0.0% 0 7.4% 2 10.0% 3 8.3% 1 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 to travel there Another larger centre is 4.1% 8 0.0% 0 12.5% 1 0.0% 0 6.7% 2 8.3% 1 4.7% 2 3.8% 2 easier to get to There are a better choice of 2.6% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.3% 1 0.0% 0 7.0% 3 1.9% 1 shops locally Prefer to shop at large food 2.6% 5 0.0% 0 12.5% 1 11.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 store I don't know where it is 2.1% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 11.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 Too expensive 2.1% 4 0.0% 0 25.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 1.9% 1 Unsafe 1.0% 2 4.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 Only shop in West End / 1.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.3% 1 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 largecentrecitycentre I am not able to leave the 1.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.7% 1 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 house I don't know the area very 1.0% 2 4.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 well Too busy 1.0% 2 0.0% 0 12.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 There is nothing appealing 1.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.8% 2 there Because of the language 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 barrier It depends where I am at the 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 time I justdon'tgotothatarea 0.5% 1 4.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 I don't trust some of the 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 market traders They don't have enough 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 household shops I only go for electrical goods 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 When the weather is good I 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 0.0% 0 prefer to go elsewhere I work during shop opening 0.5% 1 4.8% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 times I don't have the time 0.5% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.9% 1 (Don’t know / no reason in 17.5% 34 23.8% 5 0.0% 0 14.8% 4 16.7% 5 16.7% 2 14.0% 6 22.6% 12 particular) Base: 1942182730124353
Mean Score: [Very good=2, Quite good=1, Neither good nor poor=0, Quite Poor=-1, Very poor=-2]
Q07 How would you rate Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street out of 1 to 5 where 5 is very good and 1 is very poor for the following ? Those who have shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
Availability and price of parking
Very good 3.7% 17 7.6% 6 0.0% 0 4.1% 3 4.3% 3 6.4% 3 1.7% 1 2.3% 1 Quite good 5.8% 27 11.4% 9 2.2% 2 5.5% 4 5.7% 4 2.1% 1 6.9% 4 6.8% 3 Neither good nor poor 9.7% 45 11.4% 9 15.2% 14 2.7% 2 7.1% 5 12.8% 6 13.8% 8 2.3% 1 Quite Poor 13.0% 60 8.9% 7 21.7% 20 12.3% 9 11.4% 8 19.1% 9 6.9% 4 6.8% 3 Very poor 25.7% 119 32.9% 26 20.7% 19 21.9% 16 27.1% 19 17.0% 8 22.4% 13 40.9% 18 Don’t know 42.1% 195 27.8% 22 40.2% 37 53.4% 39 44.3% 31 42.6% 20 48.3% 28 40.9% 18 Mean: -0.88 -0.67 -1.02 -0.91 -0.92 -0.67 -0.80 -1.31 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 39 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Range of shops and services
Very good 15.3% 71 13.9% 11 14.1% 13 9.6% 7 8.6% 6 42.6% 20 19.0% 11 6.8% 3 Quite good 21.4% 99 13.9% 11 15.2% 14 19.2% 14 30.0% 21 25.5% 12 36.2% 21 13.6% 6 Neither good nor poor 31.5% 146 30.4% 24 38.0% 35 37.0% 27 31.4% 22 19.1% 9 27.6% 16 29.5% 13 Quite Poor 19.7% 91 22.8% 18 26.1% 24 20.5% 15 21.4% 15 6.4% 3 6.9% 4 27.3% 12 Very poor 8.0% 37 13.9% 11 5.4% 5 9.6% 7 5.7% 4 0.0% 0 5.2% 3 15.9% 7 Don’t know 4.1% 19 5.1% 4 1.1% 1 4.1% 3 2.9% 2 6.4% 3 5.2% 3 6.8% 3 Mean: 0.17 -0.09 0.07 -0.01 0.15 1.11 0.60 -0.34 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Quality of shops and services
Very good 16.0% 74 12.7% 10 20.7% 19 9.6% 7 7.1% 5 44.7% 21 13.8% 8 9.1% 4 Quite good 26.6% 123 20.3% 16 35.9% 33 16.4% 12 21.4% 15 42.6% 20 37.9% 22 11.4% 5 Neither good nor poor 31.1% 144 27.8% 22 32.6% 30 47.9% 35 38.6% 27 4.3% 2 25.9% 15 29.5% 13 Quite Poor 13.8% 64 16.5% 13 6.5% 6 17.8% 13 21.4% 15 2.1% 1 12.1% 7 20.5% 9 Very poor 8.0% 37 19.0% 15 2.2% 2 4.1% 3 8.6% 6 0.0% 0 5.2% 3 18.2% 8 Don’t know 4.5% 21 3.8% 3 2.2% 2 4.1% 3 2.9% 2 6.4% 3 5.2% 3 11.4% 5 Mean: 0.30 -0.09 0.68 0.10 -0.03 1.39 0.45 -0.31 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Prices
Very good 7.3% 34 7.6% 6 3.3% 3 9.6% 7 12.9% 9 8.5% 4 3.4% 2 6.8% 3 Quite good 24.4% 113 26.6% 21 10.9% 10 26.0% 19 34.3% 24 21.3% 10 32.8% 19 22.7% 10 Neither good nor poor 36.1% 167 40.5% 32 27.2% 25 39.7% 29 41.4% 29 34.0% 16 32.8% 19 38.6% 17 Quite Poor 17.3% 80 7.6% 6 38.0% 35 13.7% 10 2.9% 2 23.4% 11 20.7% 12 9.1% 4 Very poor 9.7% 45 11.4% 9 19.6% 18 4.1% 3 2.9% 2 8.5% 4 6.9% 4 11.4% 5 Don’t know 5.2% 24 6.3% 5 1.1% 1 6.8% 5 5.7% 4 4.3% 2 3.4% 2 11.4% 5 Mean: 0.03 0.12 -0.60 0.25 0.55 -0.02 0.05 0.05 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Quality / and range of places to eat / drink
Very good 18.8% 87 7.6% 6 19.6% 18 15.1% 11 12.9% 9 46.8% 22 29.3% 17 9.1% 4 Quite good 24.8% 115 7.6% 6 41.3% 38 28.8% 21 15.7% 11 34.0% 16 24.1% 14 20.5% 9 Neither good nor poor 19.4% 90 13.9% 11 22.8% 21 20.5% 15 21.4% 15 12.8% 6 24.1% 14 18.2% 8 Quite Poor 13.4% 62 20.3% 16 10.9% 10 15.1% 11 15.7% 11 0.0% 0 10.3% 6 18.2% 8 Very poor 7.3% 34 20.3% 16 2.2% 2 1.4% 1 11.4% 8 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 11.4% 5 Don’t know 16.2% 75 30.4% 24 3.3% 3 19.2% 14 22.9% 16 6.4% 3 8.6% 5 22.7% 10 Mean: 0.41 -0.55 0.67 0.51 0.04 1.36 0.72 -0.03 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
General shopping environment
Very good 17.5% 81 8.9% 7 18.5% 17 13.7% 10 11.4% 8 59.6% 28 15.5% 9 4.5% 2 Quite good 26.6% 123 17.7% 14 34.8% 32 27.4% 20 24.3% 17 29.8% 14 32.8% 19 15.9% 7 Neither good nor poor 25.1% 116 31.6% 25 32.6% 30 26.0% 19 20.0% 14 4.3% 2 29.3% 17 20.5% 9 Quite Poor 16.0% 74 16.5% 13 6.5% 6 24.7% 18 24.3% 17 6.4% 3 10.3% 6 25.0% 11 Very poor 11.4% 53 21.5% 17 5.4% 5 6.8% 5 14.3% 10 0.0% 0 8.6% 5 25.0% 11 Don’t know 3.5% 16 3.8% 3 2.2% 2 1.4% 1 5.7% 4 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 9.1% 4 Mean: 0.23 -0.25 0.56 0.17 -0.06 1.43 0.38 -0.55 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Safety / security
Very good 22.9% 106 16.5% 13 31.5% 29 23.3% 17 11.4% 8 48.9% 23 17.2% 10 13.6% 6 Quite good 31.5% 146 19.0% 15 38.0% 35 32.9% 24 37.1% 26 27.7% 13 31.0% 18 34.1% 15 Neither good nor poor 23.5% 109 26.6% 21 20.7% 19 31.5% 23 15.7% 11 14.9% 7 31.0% 18 22.7% 10 Quite Poor 10.2% 47 13.9% 11 4.3% 4 6.8% 5 21.4% 15 4.3% 2 8.6% 5 11.4% 5 Very poor 7.3% 34 19.0% 15 3.3% 3 4.1% 3 10.0% 7 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 9.1% 4 Don’t know 4.5% 21 5.1% 4 2.2% 2 1.4% 1 4.3% 3 4.3% 2 8.6% 5 9.1% 4 Mean: 0.55 0.00 0.92 0.65 0.19 1.27 0.55 0.35 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 40 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Access by public transport
Very good 33.0% 153 27.8% 22 48.9% 45 24.7% 18 34.3% 24 17.0% 8 32.8% 19 38.6% 17 Quite good 32.0% 148 39.2% 31 27.2% 25 31.5% 23 31.4% 22 19.1% 9 36.2% 21 38.6% 17 Neither good nor poor 10.6% 49 15.2% 12 6.5% 6 9.6% 7 12.9% 9 12.8% 6 12.1% 7 4.5% 2 Quite Poor 3.5% 16 1.3% 1 2.2% 2 8.2% 6 4.3% 3 4.3% 2 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 Very poor 4.1% 19 5.1% 4 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 2.9% 2 17.0% 8 3.4% 2 4.5% 2 Don’t know 16.8% 78 11.4% 9 15.2% 14 24.7% 18 14.3% 10 29.8% 14 12.1% 7 13.6% 6 Mean: 1.04 0.94 1.45 0.93 1.05 0.21 1.04 1.24 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Level of street cleaning
Very good 25.5% 118 25.3% 20 39.1% 36 26.0% 19 18.6% 13 36.2% 17 8.6% 5 18.2% 8 Quite good 39.1% 181 22.8% 18 51.1% 47 38.4% 28 28.6% 20 53.2% 25 48.3% 28 34.1% 15 Neither good nor poor 20.1% 93 26.6% 21 8.7% 8 23.3% 17 28.6% 20 8.5% 4 24.1% 14 20.5% 9 Quite Poor 7.1% 33 8.9% 7 1.1% 1 9.6% 7 12.9% 9 0.0% 0 6.9% 4 11.4% 5 Very poor 4.1% 19 11.4% 9 0.0% 0 2.7% 2 8.6% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.5% 2 Don’t know 4.1% 19 5.1% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.9% 2 2.1% 1 12.1% 7 11.4% 5 Mean: 0.78 0.44 1.28 0.75 0.37 1.28 0.67 0.56 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Liveliness / street character
Very good 19.9% 92 16.5% 13 20.7% 19 8.2% 6 17.1% 12 57.4% 27 20.7% 12 6.8% 3 Quite good 31.5% 146 21.5% 17 32.6% 30 30.1% 22 42.9% 30 34.0% 16 36.2% 21 22.7% 10 Neither good nor poor 26.4% 122 25.3% 20 35.9% 33 38.4% 28 21.4% 15 6.4% 3 19.0% 11 27.3% 12 Quite Poor 10.6% 49 16.5% 13 8.7% 8 12.3% 9 5.7% 4 0.0% 0 10.3% 6 20.5% 9 Very poor 5.8% 27 10.1% 8 1.1% 1 8.2% 6 5.7% 4 0.0% 0 5.2% 3 11.4% 5 Don’t know 5.8% 27 10.1% 8 1.1% 1 2.7% 2 7.1% 5 2.1% 1 8.6% 5 11.4% 5 Mean: 0.52 0.20 0.64 0.18 0.65 1.52 0.62 -0.08 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Amount of traffic
Very good 5.0% 23 5.1% 4 4.3% 4 9.6% 7 8.6% 6 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 2.3% 1 Quite good 15.1% 70 17.7% 14 13.0% 12 13.7% 10 18.6% 13 12.8% 6 12.1% 7 18.2% 8 Neither good nor poor 28.3% 131 19.0% 15 38.0% 35 30.1% 22 20.0% 14 40.4% 19 22.4% 13 29.5% 13 Quite Poor 21.6% 100 16.5% 13 23.9% 22 23.3% 17 21.4% 15 21.3% 10 29.3% 17 13.6% 6 Very poor 26.8% 124 38.0% 30 20.7% 19 23.3% 17 28.6% 20 21.3% 10 27.6% 16 27.3% 12 Don’t know 3.2% 15 3.8% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.9% 2 4.3% 2 6.9% 4 9.1% 4 Mean: -0.52 -0.67 -0.43 -0.37 -0.44 -0.53 -0.74 -0.50 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Evening / night-time facilities / activities
Very good 6.7% 31 3.8% 3 3.3% 3 6.8% 5 5.7% 4 17.0% 8 10.3% 6 4.5% 2 Quite good 19.4% 90 5.1% 4 23.9% 22 13.7% 10 15.7% 11 36.2% 17 31.0% 18 18.2% 8 Neither good nor poor 21.8% 101 15.2% 12 28.3% 26 23.3% 17 21.4% 15 23.4% 11 17.2% 10 22.7% 10 Quite Poor 14.0% 65 15.2% 12 14.1% 13 20.5% 15 11.4% 8 2.1% 1 17.2% 10 13.6% 6 Very poor 11.0% 51 22.8% 18 14.1% 13 8.2% 6 12.9% 9 2.1% 1 0.0% 0 9.1% 4 Don’t know 27.0% 125 38.0% 30 16.3% 15 27.4% 20 32.9% 23 19.1% 9 24.1% 14 31.8% 14 Mean: -0.04 -0.78 -0.14 -0.13 -0.15 0.79 0.45 -0.07 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Size / quality of supermarkets
Very good 14.0% 65 13.9% 11 6.5% 6 17.8% 13 7.1% 5 42.6% 20 8.6% 5 11.4% 5 Quite good 20.7% 96 20.3% 16 13.0% 12 30.1% 22 15.7% 11 36.2% 17 17.2% 10 18.2% 8 Neither good nor poor 22.7% 105 24.1% 19 33.7% 31 17.8% 13 15.7% 11 14.9% 7 34.5% 20 9.1% 4 Quite Poor 25.1% 116 24.1% 19 34.8% 32 17.8% 13 35.7% 25 6.4% 3 19.0% 11 29.5% 13 Very poor 11.7% 54 12.7% 10 9.8% 9 11.0% 8 20.0% 14 0.0% 0 6.9% 4 20.5% 9 Don’t know 5.8% 27 5.1% 4 2.2% 2 5.5% 4 5.7% 4 0.0% 0 13.8% 8 11.4% 5 Mean: 0.00 -0.01 -0.29 0.28 -0.48 1.15 0.02 -0.33 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 41 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Q08 What mode of transport do you normally use to get to Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street ? Those who have shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
Car - driver 7.8% 36 3.8% 3 19.6% 18 4.1% 3 4.3% 3 6.4% 3 6.9% 4 4.5% 2 Car - passenger 0.9% 4 1.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 2.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Walk 75.2% 348 77.2% 61 57.6% 53 87.7% 64 78.6% 55 80.9% 38 69.0% 40 84.1% 37 Bus 9.7% 45 12.7% 10 9.8% 9 4.1% 3 11.4% 8 2.1% 1 19.0% 11 6.8% 3 Motorbike / scooter 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Taxi 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 Underground 1.1% 5 0.0% 0 2.2% 2 0.0% 0 2.9% 2 2.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Bicycle 1.7% 8 2.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 6.4% 3 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 Other 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know / varies) 3.5% 16 2.5% 2 10.9% 10 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 2.3% 1 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Q09 On average, how often do you use shops or services at Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street ? Those who have shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
2 / 3 times a week or more 62.2% 288 67.1% 53 69.6% 64 58.9% 43 67.1% 47 66.0% 31 53.4% 31 43.2% 19 often Weekly 17.1% 79 11.4% 9 18.5% 17 23.3% 17 10.0% 7 19.1% 9 15.5% 9 25.0% 11 Fortnightly 8.0% 37 5.1% 4 9.8% 9 8.2% 6 5.7% 4 6.4% 3 8.6% 5 13.6% 6 Monthly 6.0% 28 6.3% 5 2.2% 2 6.8% 5 8.6% 6 2.1% 1 10.3% 6 6.8% 3 Less than once a month 5.2% 24 7.6% 6 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 7.1% 5 6.4% 3 8.6% 5 9.1% 4 (Varies / don’t know) 1.5% 7 2.5% 2 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 2.3% 1 Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Q10 Why do you choose to shop at this centre ? Those who have shopped at the locations mentioned at Q05
Convenient to home 78.0% 361 83.5% 66 89.1% 82 76.7% 56 68.6% 48 76.6% 36 74.1% 43 68.2% 30 Range of shops and services 15.8% 73 8.9% 7 13.0% 12 16.4% 12 20.0% 14 25.5% 12 13.8% 8 18.2% 8 Like the shop / centre 5.0% 23 2.5% 2 2.2% 2 4.1% 3 2.9% 2 4.3% 2 19.0% 11 2.3% 1 Pleasant environment 3.5% 16 2.5% 2 3.3% 3 0.0% 0 4.3% 3 10.6% 5 5.2% 3 0.0% 0 Low price / good value 3.5% 16 3.8% 3 1.1% 1 2.7% 2 11.4% 8 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 2.3% 1 Convenient to work 1.7% 8 3.8% 3 2.2% 2 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 Quality of the shopping 1.7% 8 0.0% 0 1.1% 1 2.7% 2 1.4% 1 6.4% 3 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 environment Friendly atmosphere 1.1% 5 1.3% 1 1.1% 1 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 To support local businesses 0.9% 4 2.5% 2 0.0% 0 2.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Best choice locally 0.6% 3 1.3% 1 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 For specific items 0.6% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 2.3% 1 If I am passing through 0.6% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 2.3% 1 Good public transport 0.4% 2 1.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 It is somewhere different to 0.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 shop Quiet / not very busy 0.4% 2 0.0% 0 1.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Late night shopping 0.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.9% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 No other choice locally 0.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 For emergency shopping 0.4% 2 1.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 Good range of products 0.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 Good parking 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.3% 1 If I have an appointment 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 locally Biggest centre locally 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Friends / family live close by 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don’t know / no particular 2.6% 12 5.1% 4 0.0% 0 4.1% 3 0.0% 0 2.1% 1 1.7% 1 6.8% 3 reason) Base: 463 79 92 73 70 47 58 44
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 42 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Q11 Which other shopping centre do you use once a month or more often ?
Oxford Street / West End 23.0% 151 9.0% 9 36.0% 36 17.0% 17 26.0% 26 27.1% 16 16.8% 17 30.9% 30 Marylebone High Street 7.2% 47 1.0% 1 8.0% 8 1.0% 1 12.0% 12 3.4% 2 2.0% 2 21.6% 21 Kensington High Street 6.1% 40 8.0% 8 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 21.8% 22 5.2% 5 Brent Cross 5.6% 37 6.0% 6 21.0% 21 0.0% 0 9.0% 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Edgware Road 3.2% 21 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.0% 8 3.4% 2 1.0% 1 8.2% 8 Kings Road 2.7% 18 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 13.0% 13 1.0% 1 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Warwick Way / Tachbrook 2.7% 18 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 15.0% 15 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Street Knightsbridge 2.6% 17 2.0% 2 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 11.9% 7 2.0% 2 3.1% 3 Victoria Street, Westminster 2.4% 16 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 16.0% 16 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Kilburn 2.3% 15 6.0% 6 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Queensway / Westbourne 2.3% 15 6.0% 6 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 4.0% 4 2.1% 2 Grove Notting Hill 2.1% 14 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 10.9% 11 0.0% 0 O2 Centre, Finchley Road 1.8% 12 0.0% 0 10.0% 10 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Ladbroke Grove, London 1.4% 9 6.0% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Finchley Road, London 1.4% 9 1.0% 1 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Whiteley's Shopping Centre 1.4% 9 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 1.0% 1 Bayswater 1.4% 9 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.7% 1 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 Market, Portobello Road 1.4% 9 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 2.1% 2 Hammersmith 1.1% 7 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 Harrow Road 1.1% 7 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Holloway Road, Camden 0.9% 6 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Town Marble Arch 0.9% 6 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Covent Garden 0.9% 6 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Camden Town 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Brompton Road 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 St Johns Wood 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Baker Street 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Cromwell Road 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 Sloane Square 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 Waterloo 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Praed Street 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.1% 3 Cardinal Place, Victoria 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Regent Street 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Church Street, Kent 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Bond Street, London 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Piccadilly 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Swiss Cottage 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Shepherd's Bush W12 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Clapham Junction 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Ashcroft Kings Mall 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Park Royal 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Earlscourt 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Chelsea 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Vauxhall Bridge Road 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Gloucester 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Portobello Road 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Tottenham Court Road 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Acton 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Maida Vale 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Ashford 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Elton 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Croydon Shopping Centre 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Borough Market, Borough 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Bromley 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Butterfly Walk, Surrey 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Denby Street, Queensbury 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Ealing, Broadway 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Hampstead 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Kew Shopping Park, Malt 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Lake Road Lewisham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Milton Keynes 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 North End Road, Fulham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Bloomsbury 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Peckham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Sainsbury's (unspecified 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 location) Southall, London 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Suffolk 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 43 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Surrey 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Market, White Chapel 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Wilton Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Wimbledon 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Berwick St John 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Bethnal Green 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Market, Church Street, 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 London Crawford Street 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Midfield 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Muswell Hill 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Orchid Street, Fulham 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Soho 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Stratford 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (No other used) 27.7% 182 34.0% 34 14.0% 14 20.0% 20 39.0% 39 25.4% 15 32.7% 33 27.8% 27 (Don't know / varies) 3.7% 24 6.0% 6 4.0% 4 2.0% 2 3.0% 3 1.7% 1 5.9% 6 2.1% 2 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 44 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove Q12 What, if anything would make you more likely to visit Church Street-Edgware Road / Harrow Road / Marylebone High Street / Praed Street / Queensway-Westbourne Grove / St John's Wood / Warwick Way-Tachbrook Street ?
Nothing 37.7% 248 34.0% 34 23.0% 23 32.0% 32 49.0% 49 57.6% 34 48.5% 49 27.8% 27 Better choice of shops in 20.5% 135 29.0% 29 38.0% 38 23.0% 23 8.0% 8 6.8% 4 6.9% 7 26.8% 26 general Better choice of other non- 12.0% 79 25.0% 25 20.0% 20 12.0% 12 4.0% 4 3.4% 2 4.0% 4 12.4% 12 food shops Better food and convenience 7.8% 51 3.0% 3 11.0% 11 11.0% 11 8.0% 8 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 13.4% 13 shops Better maintenance / 7.6% 50 16.0% 16 1.0% 1 7.0% 7 6.0% 6 0.0% 0 5.9% 6 14.4% 14 cleanliness More car parking 6.2% 41 7.0% 7 13.0% 13 8.0% 8 3.0% 3 5.1% 3 2.0% 2 5.2% 5 More / improved 5.2% 34 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 5.0% 5 17.0% 17 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 6.2% 6 supermarkets Better quality shops 4.6% 30 4.0% 4 6.0% 6 4.0% 4 3.0% 3 1.7% 1 7.9% 8 4.1% 4 Better safety / security 4.0% 26 12.0% 12 4.0% 4 2.0% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 5.0% 5 1.0% 1 Made the area more 2.1% 14 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 8.5% 5 2.0% 2 5.2% 5 pedestrian friendly Better public transport 2.1% 14 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 2.0% 2 5.1% 3 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 More or better restaurants 2.0% 13 4.0% 4 1.0% 1 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 4.1% 4 Better / cheaper car parking 2.0% 13 1.0% 1 5.0% 5 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 3.4% 2 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 More large shops 2.0% 13 4.0% 4 2.0% 2 4.0% 4 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Choice of cheaper shops 1.8% 12 0.0% 0 6.0% 6 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.1% 3 Less traffic congestion 1.7% 11 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 1.0% 1 5.1% 3 1.0% 1 2.1% 2 New department store 1.1% 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 2.1% 2 More or better public 0.8% 5 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 services / community uses Better atmosphere 0.8% 5 1.0% 1 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Less non-food shops 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Better entertainment 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 facilities More or better takeaways 0.6% 4 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 If I were given more 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 information about the area Support given to independent 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 businesses If money were invested in 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 4.1% 4 the area Improved cinema 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Larger / improved market 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 More or better pharmacy 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 More or better public houses 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Friendlier staff in stores / 0.5% 3 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 restaurants Less food shops 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Less foreign people in the 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 area More houses built 0.3% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Better access for cyclists 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 If it were more convenient to 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 my home Occupying the vacant stores 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Reduced opening hours 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 More or better health / dental 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 facilities Longer opening hours 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 No congestion charges 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Better access for disabled 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 people Less change to the area 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 If it were more spread out 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Quieter 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Improved roads 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Don't know) 5.0% 33 2.0% 2 3.0% 3 8.0% 8 8.0% 8 0.0% 0 8.9% 9 3.1% 3 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
GEN Gender of respondent:
Male 38.7% 254 31.0% 31 35.0% 35 41.0% 41 45.0% 45 35.6% 21 41.6% 42 40.2% 39 Female 61.3% 403 69.0% 69 65.0% 65 59.0% 59 55.0% 55 64.4% 38 58.4% 59 59.8% 58 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 45 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove AGE Could I ask, which of the following age bands do you fall into ?
16-24 4.7% 31 7.0% 7 6.0% 6 4.0% 4 6.0% 6 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 6.2% 6 25-34 10.8% 71 12.0% 12 11.0% 11 11.0% 11 11.0% 11 6.8% 4 10.9% 11 11.3% 11 35-59 39.0% 256 40.0% 40 40.0% 40 40.0% 40 40.0% 40 44.1% 26 39.6% 40 30.9% 30 60-64 17.0% 112 17.0% 17 19.0% 19 19.0% 19 12.0% 12 8.5% 5 19.8% 20 20.6% 20 65+ 25.9% 170 23.0% 23 22.0% 22 23.0% 23 28.0% 28 39.0% 23 24.8% 25 26.8% 26 (Refused) 2.6% 17 1.0% 1 2.0% 2 3.0% 3 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 4.1% 4 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
ETH For the purposes of this survey, could I ask you which ethnic group you belong to ?
White - British (Interviewer, 65.6% 431 41.0% 41 69.0% 69 72.0% 72 65.0% 65 74.6% 44 66.3% 67 75.3% 73 this includes English, Scottish, Welsh) White European 4.0% 26 3.0% 3 3.0% 3 3.0% 3 9.0% 9 3.4% 2 4.0% 4 2.1% 2 Indian 2.7% 18 1.0% 1 4.0% 4 1.0% 1 4.0% 4 5.1% 3 1.0% 1 4.1% 4 White - Irish 2.3% 15 6.0% 6 3.0% 3 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 Caribbean 1.8% 12 8.0% 8 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 White and Asian 1.5% 10 2.0% 2 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 2.1% 2 White American 1.4% 9 1.0% 1 5.0% 5 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 White and black Caribbean 1.2% 8 5.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 White (other) 0.9% 6 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 White and black African 0.9% 6 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Mixed Race 0.9% 6 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Greek 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 African 0.8% 5 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 Pakistani 0.8% 5 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 White Australian 0.6% 4 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 Iranian 0.6% 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 3.4% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 West Indian 0.6% 4 3.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Spanish 0.6% 4 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 Jamaican 0.5% 3 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 German 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Chinese 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Arabic 0.5% 3 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Albanian 0.5% 3 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Middle Eastern 0.5% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Latin American 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Polish 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 European 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.1% 2 Caucasian 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Black British 0.3% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Malian 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Pilipino British 0.3% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 White Croatian 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Bangladeshi 0.3% 2 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Portuguese 0.3% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 2.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 European Mixed Race 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 American Indian 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 Chinese American 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Egyptian 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 New Zealander 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Black (other) 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Swiss Portuguese 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Danish 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Mewari 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Dutch 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 Chinese West Indian 0.2% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 White South African 0.2% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 (Refused) 4.4% 29 3.0% 3 4.0% 4 7.0% 7 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 6.9% 7 4.1% 4 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Zone Westminster Telephone Household Survey Page 46 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners October 2006
Total Harrow Road St John's Warwick WayChurch Street Marylebone Queensway / Praed Street Wood /Tachbrook /Edgware High Street Westbourne Street Road Grove SAL Which of the following categories does your combined income fall into?
£0-25,000 31.4% 206 50.0% 50 16.0% 16 31.0% 31 48.0% 48 25.4% 15 19.8% 20 26.8% 26 £25,000 - 50,000 19.5% 128 15.0% 15 18.0% 18 22.0% 22 19.0% 19 23.7% 14 18.8% 19 21.6% 21 £50,000 - 100,000 12.6% 83 8.0% 8 13.0% 13 16.0% 16 7.0% 7 13.6% 8 13.9% 14 17.5% 17 £100,000 or more 13.2% 87 6.0% 6 25.0% 25 7.0% 7 6.0% 6 20.3% 12 17.8% 18 13.4% 13 (Don't know / can't 7.2% 47 15.0% 15 6.0% 6 4.0% 4 7.0% 7 5.1% 3 5.0% 5 7.2% 7 remember) (Refused) 16.1% 106 6.0% 6 22.0% 22 20.0% 20 13.0% 13 11.9% 7 24.8% 25 13.4% 13 Mean: 22686 18775 22250 25175 19275 25297 22599 26624 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
CAR Finally, how many cars are there normally available for use in the household ?
None 39.6% 260 49.0% 49 22.0% 22 38.0% 38 57.0% 57 39.0% 23 37.6% 38 34.0% 33 1 42.0% 276 37.0% 37 50.0% 50 49.0% 49 29.0% 29 35.6% 21 40.6% 41 50.5% 49 2 12.9% 85 10.0% 10 16.0% 16 11.0% 11 9.0% 9 22.0% 13 15.8% 16 10.3% 10 3ormore 2.4% 16 0.0% 0 10.0% 10 0.0% 0 1.0% 1 3.4% 2 2.0% 2 1.0% 1 (Don't know) 0.3% 2 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 (Refused) 2.7% 18 3.0% 3 1.0% 1 2.0% 2 4.0% 4 0.0% 0 4.0% 4 4.1% 4 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
SEG Socioeconmic Grouping:
A2.0% 13 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 1.0% 1 3.0% 3 1.7% 1 1.0% 1 5.2% 5 B 35.0% 230 28.0% 28 47.0% 47 38.0% 38 30.0% 30 52.5% 31 25.7% 26 30.9% 30 C1 32.9% 216 26.0% 26 30.0% 30 27.0% 27 28.0% 28 30.5% 18 47.5% 48 40.2% 39 C2 9.1% 60 12.0% 12 7.0% 7 7.0% 7 13.0% 13 6.8% 4 10.9% 11 6.2% 6 D8.8% 58 14.0% 14 7.0% 7 10.0% 10 10.0% 10 6.8% 4 5.9% 6 7.2% 7 E5.6% 37 13.0% 13 0.0% 0 8.0% 8 8.0% 8 1.7% 1 2.0% 2 5.2% 5 (Refused) 6.5% 43 6.0% 6 8.0% 8 9.0% 9 8.0% 8 0.0% 0 6.9% 7 5.2% 5 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
ZONE Zone
Harrow Road 15.2% 100 100.0% 100 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 St Johns Wood 15.2% 100 0.0% 0 100.0% 100 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Warwick Way / Tachbrook 15.2% 100 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 100 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Street Church Street / Edgeware 15.2% 100 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 100 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Road Marylebone High Street 9.0% 59 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 59 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 Queensway / Westbourne 15.4% 101 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 101 0.0% 0 Grove Praed Street 14.8% 97 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 97 Base: 657 100 100 100 100 59 101 97
Column %ges. 051006 NEMS market research Appendix I
Business Occupier Survey Results Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 37 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Q0A Please enter the name of your business below:
Other 76.2% 32 100.0% 1 80.0% 4 100.0% 5 75.0% 12 66.7% 8 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 (Not answered) 23.8% 10 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 25.0% 4 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 20.0%00.0%0 Base: 42155161220531
Q01 How long has your business been located in Marylebone High Street district centre ?
Less than a year 2.4% 1 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 1–2years 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 3–5years 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 6–10years 38.1% 16 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 16 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 10–25years 28.6% 12 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 12 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 More than 25 years 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Don’t know / not sure 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Base: 42155161220531
Q02 Are your premises leased or owner occupied (i.e. leasehold of freehold) ?
Leased 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 8.3% 1 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 50.0%00.0%0 Owner occupied 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 100.0% 3 0.0% 0 Don’t know / not sure 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Landowner - Howard de 35.7% 15 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 60.0% 3 37.5% 6 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Walden Landowner - Westminster 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Council (Not answered) 42.9% 18 100.0% 1 40.0% 2 20.0% 1 43.8% 7 41.7% 5 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 38 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Q03 Do you have any current plans to change your business premises ?
No plans 71.4% 30 100.0% 1 60.0% 3 80.0% 4 68.8% 11 83.3% 10 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Minor works / improvements 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 such as signage/shopfront alterations Major changes such as 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 extension of changes to internal layout Relocate within new 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 premises outside the centre but within Westminster Close or relocate to new 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 premises outside Westminster Other 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Base: 42155161220531
Q04 Which statement best describes your business’s current trading performance ?
Very good 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 18.8% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Good 35.7% 15 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 20.0% 1 43.8% 7 33.3% 4 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Satisfactory 35.7% 15 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 60.0% 3 18.8% 3 58.3% 7 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Poor 11.9% 5 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 18.8% 3 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Don’t know / no opinion 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Base: 42155161220531
Q05 Over the last 12 months has your trading performance…
Improved 45.2% 19 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 60.0% 3 56.3% 9 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Stayed the same 23.8% 10 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 40.0% 2 12.5% 2 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Declined 26.2% 11 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 31.3% 5 33.3% 4 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Don’t know / not sure 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 39 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Q06 Over the next 12 months do you expect your business performance to…
Improve 54.8% 23 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 60.0% 3 56.3% 9 41.7% 5 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Stay the same 23.8% 10 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 25.0% 4 25.0% 3 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Decline 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know / not sure 11.9% 5 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 40 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Q07 What are the main issues constraining your business ?
High overheads / rents 81.0% 34 100.0% 1 60.0% 3 80.0% 4 81.3% 13 83.3% 10 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 General economy 40.5% 17 100.0% 1 60.0% 3 0.0% 0 37.5% 6 41.7% 5 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Quality or size of premises 14.3% 6 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 12.5% 2 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Staff recruitment / retention 28.6% 12 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 40.0% 2 18.8% 3 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Availability and location of 28.6% 12 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 25.0% 4 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 car parking Price of car parking 54.8% 23 100.0% 1 40.0% 2 80.0% 4 31.3% 5 83.3% 10 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 100.0% 3 0.0% 0 Accessibility via public 14.3% 6 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 transport and cycle Competition from other 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 18.8% 3 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 businesses in the district centre Competition from other 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 18.8% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 businesses in the rest of the Westminster Competition from other town 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 centres If ‘Yes’ which centre/s Security issues 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Lack of footfall / customers 23.8% 10 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 20.0% 1 18.8% 3 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Poor location of premises 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Poor quality of town centre 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 environment If ‘Yes’ what aspect (litter, shop fronts, etc) Poor quality shops 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Poor quality restaurants / 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 cafes / bars Lack of services (eg banks, 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 dentists, estate agents, etc) Internet competition 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Planning restrictions If ‘Yes’ 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 what aspect Other 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Litter 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Congestion charges 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 41 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Q08 What is your opinion of Marylebone High Street s market position in shopping terms?
Too up market 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Fine as it is 85.7% 36 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 80.0% 4 87.5% 14 91.7% 11 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Toodownmarket 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Other 4.8% 2 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Base: 42155161220531
Q09 How would you describe Marylebone High Street ’s current shopping and service mix ?
Too many large chain shops / 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 not enough small (independent) stores About the right mix 71.4% 30 100.0% 1 60.0% 3 80.0% 4 81.3% 13 58.3% 7 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Not enough large (chain) 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 shops Toomanynon-retailuses 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Need more retail services 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (e.g. hairdressers) Too many retail services 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Other 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Base: 42155161220531
Mean score - Very good=5, Quite good=4, Neither good nor poor=3, Quite poor=2, Very poor=1
Q10 How do you rate the centre in terms of the following ?
Rents
Very good 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quite good 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Neither good nor poor 45.2% 19 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 56.3% 9 50.0% 6 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Quite poor 16.7% 7 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 18.8% 3 16.7% 2 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 20.0%00.0%0 Very poor 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 18.8% 3 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Don’t know 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 2.54 3.00 3.25 2.60 2.40 2.27 2.50 0.00 2.80 1.67 3.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 42 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Rates
Very good 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quite good 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Neither good nor poor 40.5% 17 100.0% 1 40.0% 2 40.0% 2 50.0% 8 16.7% 2 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Quite poor 26.2% 11 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 18.8% 3 50.0% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Very poor 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 18.8% 3 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Don’t know 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 2.34 3.00 3.00 2.00 2.36 1.91 3.00 0.00 2.60 1.33 3.00 Base: 42155161220531
Availability of parking
Very good 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quite good 23.8% 10 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 25.0% 4 16.7% 2 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 20.0%00.0%0 Neither good nor poor 14.3% 6 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 12.5% 2 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 42.9% 18 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 40.0% 2 37.5% 6 33.3% 4 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Very poor 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 25.0% 4 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 2.43 3.00 2.40 3.00 2.38 2.17 3.00 0.00 2.80 2.00 2.00 Base: 42155161220531
Parking charges
Very good 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quite good 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Neither good nor poor 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Quite poor 38.1% 16 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 40.0% 2 25.0% 4 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Very poor 50.0% 21 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 56.3% 9 66.7% 8 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 100.0% 3 0.0% 0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 4.8% 2 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 1.55 0.00 2.00 1.40 1.53 1.33 2.00 0.00 1.60 1.00 2.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 43 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Traffic congestion
Very good 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quite good 16.7% 7 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 52.4% 22 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 60.0% 3 62.5% 10 50.0% 6 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 40.0% 2 12.5% 2 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Very poor 7.1% 3 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Mean: 2.83 1.00 2.75 2.60 2.67 3.17 3.00 0.00 2.75 3.00 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
Bus service
Very good 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quite good 28.6% 12 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 37.5% 6 33.3% 4 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 16.7% 7 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 18.8% 3 8.3% 1 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Very poor 26.2% 11 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 25.0% 4 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Don’t know 14.3% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 18.8% 3 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 2.57 1.00 2.25 2.00 2.85 2.55 3.50 0.00 2.75 2.00 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
Train / Underground service
Very good 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Quite good 50.0% 21 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 62.5% 10 50.0% 6 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 23.8% 10 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 25.0% 4 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Quite poor 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Very poor 7.1% 3 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 3.45 1.00 3.25 3.80 3.53 3.50 4.00 0.00 4.00 3.33 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 44 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Personal safety
Very good 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 61.9% 26 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 60.0% 3 81.3% 13 66.7% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 14.3% 6 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 40.0% 20.0%00.0%0 Quite poor 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Very poor 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 3.66 3.00 2.60 3.40 4.13 3.75 3.00 0.00 3.80 4.33 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
Business security
Very good 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 40.5% 17 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 75.0% 12 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 21.4% 9 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 33.3% 4 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 21.4% 9 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 12.5% 2 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Very poor 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 3.25 3.00 2.60 3.00 3.80 3.00 3.00 0.00 3.40 3.33 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
Range of shops & services available
Very good 31.0% 13 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 60.0% 3 31.3% 5 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 40.5% 17 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 43.8% 7 50.0% 6 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 21.4% 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 18.8% 3 33.3% 4 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Very poor 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 3.98 4.00 3.75 4.40 4.00 3.83 3.50 0.00 3.80 4.00 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 45 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Quality of shops & services available
Very good 31.0% 13 100.0% 1 40.0% 2 60.0% 3 25.0% 4 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 47.6% 20 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 62.5% 10 58.3% 7 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 6.3% 1 16.7% 2 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Very poor 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 4.00 5.00 3.75 4.40 4.00 3.83 3.50 0.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
Entertainment and leisure facilities
Very good 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Quite good 23.8% 10 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 31.3% 5 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 23.8% 10 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 31.3% 5 25.0% 3 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 18.8% 3 16.7% 2 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Very poor 16.7% 7 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 20.0% 1 12.5% 2 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 2.90 4.00 2.25 3.20 2.87 3.00 2.50 0.00 2.75 3.00 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
Marketing / promotion / events
Very good 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quite good 33.3% 14 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 20.0% 1 25.0% 4 41.7% 5 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Neither good nor poor 23.8% 10 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 43.8% 7 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Quite poor 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 12.5% 2 33.3% 4 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Very poor 14.3% 6 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 20.0% 1 12.5% 2 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 2.95 3.00 2.60 3.40 2.87 2.91 3.00 0.00 2.50 2.67 3.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 46 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Liveliness / street life / character
Very good 26.2% 11 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 18.8% 3 25.0% 3 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 40.5% 17 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 60.0% 3 43.8% 7 41.7% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Neither good nor poor 21.4% 9 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 31.3% 5 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Quite poor 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 20.0%00.0%0 Very poor 7.1% 3 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 3.74 1.00 3.40 4.40 3.69 3.83 3.50 0.00 3.00 4.33 3.00 Base: 42155161220531
The market
Very good 14.3% 6 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 35.7% 15 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 43.8% 7 41.7% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 28.6% 12 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 25.0% 4 33.3% 4 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Very poor 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 3.61 3.00 3.33 4.20 3.54 3.55 3.00 0.00 3.60 4.00 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
Quality / number of places to eat / drink
Very good 38.1% 16 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 60.0% 3 31.3% 5 50.0% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Quite good 50.0% 21 100.0% 1 60.0% 3 20.0% 1 56.3% 9 41.7% 5 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Quite poor 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Very poor 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 4.17 4.00 4.00 4.20 4.00 4.42 4.00 0.00 4.40 4.00 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 47 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
General shopping environment
Very good 35.7% 15 100.0% 1 60.0% 3 60.0% 3 25.0% 4 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 42.9% 18 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 43.8% 7 58.3% 7 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Neither good nor poor 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 31.3% 5 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Quite poor 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Very poor 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 4.10 5.00 4.00 4.40 3.94 4.08 4.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 Base: 42155161220531
Convenience for shoppers
Very good 21.4% 9 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 60.0% 3 12.5% 2 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite good 47.6% 20 100.0% 1 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 56.3% 9 41.7% 5 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Neither good nor poor 23.8% 10 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 25.0% 4 33.3% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Quite poor 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Very poor 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Don’t know 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Mean: 3.81 4.00 3.60 4.40 3.75 3.67 4.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11AIncrease range of national multiple / chain stores
1st most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 (Not answered) 90.5% 38 100.0% 1 100.0% 5 100.0% 5 81.3% 13 91.7% 11 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 0.0% 0 Mean: 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 48 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11BIncrease range of local / speciality retailers
1st most important 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 2nd most important 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 21.4% 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 12.5% 2 33.3% 4 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 60.0% 30.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 50.0% 21 100.0% 1 60.0% 3 20.0% 1 62.5% 10 41.7% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Mean: 2.33 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.25 2.33 4.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11CImprove quality of shops and services
1st most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 4th most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 18.8% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 (Not answered) 73.8% 31 100.0% 1 60.0% 3 80.0% 4 68.8% 11 75.0% 9 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Mean: 2.86 0.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.50 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11DImprove appearance of the district centre If ‘Yes’ What in particular
1st most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Importance not rated 9.5% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 83.3% 35 100.0% 1 100.0% 5 60.0% 3 81.3% 13 91.7% 11 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Mean: 2.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 5.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 49 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11E Improve the market
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 92.9% 39 100.0% 1 100.0% 5 100.0% 5 81.3% 13 100.0% 12 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 4.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11F Make centre safer (CCTV, policing, better lighting etc..)
1st most important 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 3rd most important 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 26.2% 11 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 40.0% 2 12.5% 2 33.3% 4 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 (Not answered) 45.2% 19 100.0% 1 40.0% 2 20.0% 1 56.3% 9 41.7% 5 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Mean: 2.58 0.00 3.00 2.50 2.40 2.67 3.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11G Remove / reduce traffic congestion
1st most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 4th most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 (Not answered) 73.8% 31 100.0% 1 40.0% 2 80.0% 4 75.0% 12 75.0% 9 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 Mean: 2.50 0.00 2.00 4.00 2.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.50 4.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 50 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11HProvide more housing in the district centre
1st most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 95.2% 40 100.0% 1 100.0% 5 100.0% 5 87.5% 14 100.0% 12 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11I Improve frequency of bus services to the district centre
1st most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 2nd most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 2.4% 1 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 81.0% 34 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 60.0% 3 87.5% 14 83.3% 10 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Mean: 2.17 3.00 0.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11J Improve frequency of train services to the district centre
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 2.4% 1 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 95.2% 40 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 80.0% 4 100.0% 16 100.0% 12 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 51 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11KImprove public car parking availability and reduce car parking charges
1st most important 7.1% 3 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 31.3% 5 16.7% 2 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 3rd most important 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Importance not rated 38.1% 16 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 20.0% 1 31.3% 5 50.0% 6 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 2 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 (Not answered) 19.0% 8 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 40.0% 2 18.8% 3 8.3% 1 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 40.0% 20.0%00.0%0 Mean: 2.44 1.00 3.00 5.00 1.88 2.60 2.00 0.00 3.00 3.50 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11L Provide better entertainment and leisure
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 85.7% 36 100.0% 1 80.0% 4 100.0% 5 75.0% 12 91.7% 11 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 3.75 0.00 4.00 0.00 3.50 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11M Improve quality and range of cafes and restaurants
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 92.9% 39 100.0% 1 80.0% 4 100.0% 5 87.5% 14 100.0% 12 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 3.50 0.00 5.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 52 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11NImprove pedestrian links and facilities in the district centre
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 4.8% 2 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 33.3% 1 100.0% 1 (Not answered) 88.1% 37 100.0% 1 80.0% 4 100.0% 5 93.8% 15 75.0% 9 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 66.7% 2 0.0% 0 Mean: 5.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11O Improve quality of shop units / retail accommodation
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 40.0% 20.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 92.9% 39 100.0% 1 80.0% 4 100.0% 5 93.8% 15 91.7% 11 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 4.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11PEncourage / promote Sunday trading
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 7.1% 3 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 11.9% 5 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 1 (Not answered) 78.6% 33 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 100.0% 5 75.0% 12 91.7% 11 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 60.0% 3 100.0% 3 0.0% 0 Mean: 4.25 4.00 0.00 0.00 4.50 4.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 53 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11Q Promote / publicise the attractions of the district centre
1st most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 7.1% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 12.5% 2 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 4th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 14.3% 6 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 25.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 20.0% 10.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 71.4% 30 100.0% 1 80.0% 4 60.0% 3 81.3% 13 58.3% 7 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Mean: 3.17 0.00 0.00 4.00 2.33 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11RImprove the quality of public transport facilities in the district centre
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 100.0% 42 100.0% 1 100.0% 5 100.0% 5 100.0% 16 100.0% 12 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11S More commercial uses / office accommodation
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 97.6% 41 100.0% 1 100.0% 5 100.0% 5 100.0% 16 91.7% 11 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 54 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11T Opportunities from more people living and working in the area
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 11.9% 5 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 18.8% 3 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 85.7% 36 0.0% 0 80.0% 4 100.0% 5 81.3% 13 91.7% 11 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11UOpportunities to employ more local people
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 97.6% 41 100.0% 1 100.0% 5 100.0% 5 93.8% 15 100.0% 12 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
In planning for the future of the town centre, what do you think are the FIVE most important things listed below ?
Q11V Others not listed
1st most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 2nd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 3rd most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 4th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 5th most important 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Importance not rated 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 (Not answered) 97.6% 41 100.0% 1 100.0% 5 100.0% 5 100.0% 16 100.0% 12 100.0% 2 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 100.0% 1 Mean: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Q01 and Q02 Marylebone High Street Business Occupiers Survey Page 55 for Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners November 2006
Total Less than a 1–2years 3–5years 6–10years 10–25years Morethan25 Don’t know / Leased Owner Don’t know / year years not sure occupied not sure
Q12 Please make any additional comments in the space provided below:
Other 9.5% 4 100.0% 1 0.0% 0 20.0% 1 0.0% 0 16.7% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 0 33.3% 1 0.0% 0 Toomanytrafficwardens 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 8.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 The rent is too high 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 6.3% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 Get rid of the congestion 2.4% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 50.0% 1 0.0% 00.0% 00.0%00.0%0 charge (Not answered) 83.3% 35 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 80.0% 4 93.8% 15 75.0% 9 50.0% 1 0.0% 0 100.0% 5 66.7% 2 100.0% 1 Base: 42155161220531
071006C NEMS market research Appendix J
Land Use Map – November 2006 DE
V
ON
S
HI
R
E
M
T E
W
EE SW R 55 T D
S E E LU V H S O G T XBOR I NS H
NO OLD E 28 H N I R BI OUG T O D E
T N P BURY 30 EV
I PLA
G NG EB L HAM PLA HSTR O Y
H N C R
MP AM E A S
LA HI M
E R
C
L ET EP
C E ACE
E
L A 54 C 65 E 66 52 M E
WS 67 51 ET TRE 68 E S HIR 50 S 69 DEVON 70 D E
71 47 46 45 44 43 HAM STREET 26 25 NOTTING 27 73 42 0 DEV ET STRE O SHIRE NSHI 75 DEVON
RE U
PPER WI
76 MEWS 77 78 28 79 41 M S BE O POLE ST 4 UTH 6 5 3 79 A 10 39 UMO 38 37 NT ST REET
R
EET TON STREET 0 36 PADDING 0 63 66 MARYLEBONE 61 62 81 0 57 58 49 52 53 54 55 56 50 51 82 0 60 83 0
84 HI 85 STR GH 34 ET A 86 RE HADPSHLAND 32 HST E
E WEYMOUT OSSING 87 T 31
GARBUTT P
88 30 HAR
L
A BUIL TON 89 L CE 62 29 EY S 90 WO
LACE 51 TR 91 55 ODS ME DIN 92 57 E 0 E 59 WS TOCK WIMPOLE 61 T G 6 4 S 10 8 93 69 65 63 27 71
WIMPOLE EET 26 MOXON STR MEWS 25 W 94 ESTMORELAND STREET
24 STRE 95 23
ET 22 96 M T AR E 20 RE
Y HEATLEY ST BROWN LEBO W 21
101 STREETNE I 19 N
GME REET 17 ST W AVE NDISH MAN 0 16 S NEWC STREET AYBROOK STREET 15 C HE DE WALDEN 45 104 14 43 STE 41 13 R 105 37 ST 11 31 35 RE 107 23 27 29 33 25 E 21 T 10 9 19 109 15 17 11 13 0 9 1
MARYLEBONE H 8 7 110 3 5 STVINCENT STRE 7 H ET 6 REET A ROAD 40 ISH ST 36 RLEY PL 111 NEW CAVEND 34 36 STONE PLACE 30 112 26 AC 24 MARYL I 22 G E HSTREET 18 114 16 10 12 6 EBONE 115 4 10 68 0 4 116 MEWS BLANDFORD STREET 3 2 STREET NDFORD 1 BLA 120 WE 57 3 1 1 0 118 LB 2 DE PLACE MARYLE STRO EC ER BUL ST 2 BONE LANE 4 0 3 K MANCHE 6 MEWS 37 79 ST RE 75 36 77 73 71 E ET 0 T ESTRE 69 GEORG 35 1 34 EET KENDALL 65 R 5 33 NEST PLACE 3 7 1614 STREET 5 32 61 QUEEN AN 6 31 BULSTRODE JAC 7 8 OB 59 102 SPAN ' SWELLM 30 10 29 98
IS 28 WS HPLACE 11
MANCHESTE T EWS 96 TINCK M E REE 12 BEN W E ORGE ST THAY 51 L GE 14 27 BE
CK WAY E 94 15 RST 43 RS 16 39 BAKER STREET R TR
E 17 W EE ET 37 ET I 18 TRE MPO T S 18 88 AM STREET 16 BENTINCK KWAY LE ROBERT AD LBEC WE S 131414 TRE
MAR
E
T
YLEB
'S MEWS KER ESTREET O BA HIND Marylebone High Street: Ground Floor Retail Land Use Key Ground Floor Use (2006) CL10820 - LB West - District Centres A1 Convenience A2 C3 District Centre Boundary -Core Ground Floor Use (2006) - Marylebone High Street A1 Independent A3 Health District Centre Boundary - Non Core (Secondary) A1 International A4 SG 11.12.06 1 : 1,900 A1 National A5 Vacant MAr CL10820 - 003 A1 Specialist B1
GIS Reference: S:\CL10820 - LB West - District Centres\CL10820 LB West District Centres - Marylebone High Street - Ground Floor Use.mxd Appendix K
National and Local Policy - Centre Boundaries and Frontages PPS6 – Planning for Town Centres
PPS6 indicates that local authorities should define the boundary of town and district centres. It states that for purposes of this policy statement, the “centre” for a retail development constitutes the primary shopping area. For all other main town centre uses the “centre” should be regarded as the area embraced by the town centre boundary. The extent of the town centre should be defined on the proposals map.
PPS6 states that the Primary Shopping Area should be the defined area where retail development is concentrated (generally comprising the primary frontages and those secondary frontages which are contiguous and closely related to the primary shopping frontage). The extent of the primary shopping area should be defined on the proposals map. Smaller centres may not have areas of predominantly leisure, business and other main town centre uses adjacent to the primary shopping area, and therefore the town centre may not extend beyond the primary shopping area. Primary frontages are likely to include a high proportion of retail uses. Secondary frontages provide greater opportunities for a diversity of uses. In Westminster these designations have been defined as ‘Core’ and ‘Secondary’ Frontages in relation to the District Centres.
The Westminster UDP
The Westminster UDP Adopted January 2007 seeks to control the amount of non- retail use (outside Class A1) within the 7 designated District Centres. Policy SS7 sets out the criteria for determining changes of use within these centres.
Criterion A seeks to control A3 uses where their impact (in terms of smells, noise, increased late–night activity/disturbance or parking and traffic. The new use Class order will require this policy criterion to be changed to include Class A3, A4 and A5.
Criteria B seeks to control the loss of Class A1 use at ground floor level in the Core Frontages, by preventing inappropriate changes of use to non-Class A1 uses.
Criteria C relates to Secondary Frontages and basement and first floor levels within the district centres, and provides more flexibility for changes of use to non- Class A1 use subject to a number of criteria.
Consistent with guidance in PPS6 these policies adopt a more flexible approach within the Secondary Frontages compared with the Core Frontages. Service uses (A2, A3, A4 and A5 uses) are generally more acceptable in the Secondary Frontages. Appendix L
Retail Capacity Assessment Methodology Retail Capacity Assessment Methodology
i. The retail capacity assessment in this report provides a quantitative capacity analysis in terms of levels of spending for convenience and comparison shopping. All monetary values expressed in this analysis are at 2005 prices, consistent with Experian’s base year expenditure figures for 2005. Expenditure data for 2006/7 is not currently available.
ii. The quantitative analysis is based on catchment areas for each of the 7 District Centres in Westminster (see section 10.2). The catchment/study area is based on postcode sectors and the proximity of other competing town centres. It represents the areas where the District Centre is expected to derive most of its trade. iii. Shopping facilities within the District Centre are expected to attract trade from residents within the local catchment areas, although there will be an element of trade drawn from beyond the study area (i.e. from commuters, tourists and other visitors). The level of available expenditure to support retailers is based on first establishing per capita levels of spending for the local catchment area population. Experian’s ‘local consumer expenditure estimates for comparison and convenience goods’ for each of the study area zones for the year 2005 have been obtained. iv. Experian’s latest national expenditure projections between 2005 and 2015 have been used to forecast expenditure within the catchment area. Unlike previous expenditure growth rates provided by The Data Consultancy (formerly URPI), which were based on past trends, Experian’s projections are based on an econometric model of disaggregated consumer spending. This model takes a number of macro-economic forecasts (chiefly consumer spending, incomes and inflation) and uses them to produce forecasts of disaggregated consumer spending volumes, prices and values. The model incorporates assumptions about income and price elasticities. v. Experian provides recommended growth rates for the period 2005 to 2010, and 2005 to 2015. The recommended growth rates for the period 2005 and 2010 are 0.5% per annum for convenience goods and 4.3% per annum for comparison goods. These growth rates have been used in this study to forecast expenditure per capita up to 2009. Adjusted growth rates (0.9% and 3.3% per annum for convenience and comparison goods respectively) have been adopted to project expenditure between 2010 and 2015, consistent with Experian’s overall growth forecasts for 2004 to 2014. Growth in expenditure beyond 2015 is based on 0.7% and 3.8% per annum for convenience and comparison goods respectively, in line with Experian’s growth forecast for 2005 to 2015. These have been factored up to provide figures for 2006, 2011 and 2016. vi. To assess the capacity for new retail floorspace, penetration rates are estimated for shopping facilities within the local catchment area. The assessment of penetration rates are based on a range of factors including:
information from household and in-street surveys;
the level and quality of retail facilities; and
the relative distance between shopping centres and catchment areas. vii. The total turnover of shops within the centre is estimated based on expected penetration rates and the expected level of expenditure inflow. These turnover estimates are converted into average turnover to sales floorspace densities. viii. The local catchment area population and expenditure projections for 2006 to 2016 are based on the 2001 Census and Westminster’s ward based projections.
ix. For both comparison and convenience spending, a reduction has been made for special forms of trading such as mail order, e-tail (non-retail businesses carried out online and using vending machines). Special Forms of Trading (SFT) and non-store activity is included within Experian’s goods based expenditure estimates. “Special forms of trading” includes other forms of retail expenditure not spent in shops e.g. mail order sales, some internet sales, vending machines, party plan selling, market stalls and door to door selling. SFT needs to be excluded from retail assessments because it relates to expenditure not spent in shops and does not have a direct relationship to the demand for retail floorspace.
x. The growth in home computing, Internet connections and interactive TV may lead to a growth in home shopping and may have effects on retailing in the high street. Experian has attempted to provide projections for special forms of trading and e- tailing (Experian Retail Planner Briefing Note 2.3D – December 2005).
xi. This latest Experian information suggests that non-store retail sales accounts for:
2.5% of convenience goods expenditure; and
5.7% of comparison goods expenditure.
xii. For convenience expenditure 1.6% of the 2.5% is estimated to be e-tailing, and the remaining 0.9% is other forms of SFT e.g. mail order. E-tailing can be broken down into e-tailing through retail businesses (e.g. Tesco and Sainsbury’s) at 1.1% and non- retail store businesses (i.e. those that only operate online) (0.5%). Therefore the e- tailing split for retail and non-retail businesses is approximately 70:30. xiii. For comparison expenditure in 2004, 3.1% of the 5.7% is estimated to be e-tailing, and the rest 2.6% is other forms of SFT e.g. mail order. E-tailing through retail businesses (e.g. Next and Argos) is 1.3%, and for non-retail businesses is 1.8% (e.g. Amazon). Therefore the e-tailing split for retail and non-retail businesses is approximately 40:60. xiv. Experian provide projections for e-tailing and other SFT. These projections have been used to exclude expenditure attributed to e-tailing through non-retail businesses, which will not directly impact on the demand for retail floorspace. In 2004 Experian estimate that SFT (including non-retail e-tailing) was 1.4% and 4.4% of total convenience and comparison goods expenditure respectively. The mid-point of the range of projections provided by Experian suggests that these percentages could increase to 2% and 6.8% by 2011 respectively. Therefore the amount of e-tail expenditure through non-retail businesses is expected to increase significantly in proportional terms (+43% for convenience expenditure and +55% for comparison expenditure), but as a proportion of total expenditure this sector is expected to remain relatively insignificant for the foreseeable future. xv. The levels of available spending are derived by combining the population and per capita spending figures. For both comparison and convenience spending, a reduction has been made for special forms of trading such as mail order and vending machines.
xvi. The analysis of existing shopping patterns in 2006 for convenience and comparison shopping are shown in Tables 1 and 4 below. The turnover density of existing floorspace is shown in Tables 2 and 5 and the summary of available expenditure within each centre between 2006 and 2016 is shown in Tables 3 and 6. xvii. Available convenience expenditure in the future is based on adjusted market shares following the implementation of existing food store commitments i.e. a proposed food store in Church Street/Edgware Road and the build up of trade following the opening of Tesco Express in Praed Street. These new food stores are expected to reduce the market share of the other five District Centres. For comparison shopping constant market shares have been adopted.
TABLE 1: EXISTING CONVENIENCE SHOPPING PATTERNS 2006
Catchment Area Harrow Rd. St John's Wood Warwick Way Church St Marylebone Queensway Praed St TOTAL Tachbrook St Edgware Road High Street Westbourne Gr
Population 31,039 21,104 33,252 17,007 12,403 47,591 9,943 172,339
Convenience expendiutre per capita £1,455 £2,150 £1,926 £1,637 £2,314 £1,967 £1,968
Total Convenience expenditure £M £45.16 £45.37 £64.04 £27.84 £28.70 £93.61 £19.57 £324.30
Market Share of Expenditure Overall Market Share Harrow Road DC 34% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 4.8%
St. John's Wood DC 0% 18% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2.6%
Warwick Way/Tachbrook St Dc 0% 0% 55% 0% 0% 0% 0% 11.0%
Church St/Edgware Rd DC 1% 0% 0% 43% 2% 0% 5% 4.3%
Marylebone High St DC 0% 0% 1% 12% 59% 1% 11% 7.4%
Queensway/Westbourne Grove DC 3% 0% 2% 0% 0% 22% 1% 7.2%
Praed St DC 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 5% 0.4%
Other 62% 81% 42% 44% 38% 76% 78% 62.2%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100.0% Turnover £ Millions
Harrow Road DC £15.34 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.17 £15.51
St. John's Wood DC £0.16 £8.25 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £8.41
Warwick Way/Tachbrook St DC £0.00 £0.16 £35.20 £0.09 £0.00 £0.37 £0.00 £35.82
Church St/Edgware Rd DC £0.54 £0.00 £0.00 £11.90 £0.54 £0.00 £0.88 £13.86
Marylebone High St DC £0.00 £0.00 £0.73 £3.34 £17.01 £0.86 £2.21 £24.15
Queensway/Westbourne Grove DC £1.30 £0.00 £1.02 £0.00 £0.00 £20.98 £0.17 £23.47
Praed St DC £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.18 £0.23 £0.00 £0.93 £1.34
Other £27.82 £36.96 £27.09 £12.34 £10.92 £71.40 £15.21 £201.75
Total £45.16 £45.37 £64.04 £27.84 £28.70 £93.61 £19.57 £324.30 TABLE 2: CONVENIENCE TURNOVER DENSITIES 2006
Tunrover from % Turnover Total Net Sales Average Centres catchment from outside Turnover Floorspace Turnover Density areas £M catchment areas £M Sq M Net £ Per Sq M
Harrow Road DC £15.51 30% £22.16 2,700 £8,206
St. John's Wood DC £8.41 30% £12.02 1,300 £9,244
Warwick Way/Tachbrook St DC £35.82 30% £51.17 5,100 £10,033
Church St/Edgware Rd DC £13.86 20% £17.32 2,200 £7,872
Marylebone High St DC £24.15 40% £40.25 2,300 £17,502
Queensway/Westbourne Grove DC £23.47 40% £39.11 3,900 £10,028
Praed St DC £1.34 70% £4.45 1,400 £3,180
Other £201.75 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Total £324.30 n/a £186.47 18,900 £9,866
TABLE 3: AVAILABLE CONVENIENCE EXPENDITURE 2006 TO 2016
Expenditure Expenditure Expenditure Centres 2006 2011 2016 £M £M £M
Harrow Road DC £22.16 £21.20 £22.08
St. John's Wood DC £12.02 £11.26 £11.71
Warwick Way/Tachbrook St DC £51.17 £52.07 £55.20
Church St/Edgware Rd DC £17.32 £44.82 £47.04
Marylebone High St DC £40.25 £36.93 £39.78
Queensway/Westbourne Grove. DC £39.11 £39.92 £42.01
Praed St DC £4.45 £9.83 £10.59
Total £186.47 £216.02 £228.42 TABLE 4: EXISTING COMPARISON SHOPPING PATTERNS 2006
Catchment Area Harrow Rd. St John's Wood Warwick Way Church St Marylebone Queensway Praed St TOTAL Tachbrook St Edgware Road High Street Westbourne Gr
Population 31,039 21,104 33,252 17,007 12,403 47,591 9,943 172,339
Comparison expendiutre per capita £2,818 £4,223 £3,771 £3,179 £4,604 £3,888 £3,901
Total Comparison expenditure £M £87.47 £89.12 £125.39 £54.07 £57.10 £185.03 £38.79 £636.97
Market Share of Expenditure Overall Market Share Harrow Road DC 5% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1.1%
St. John's Wood DC 1% 6% 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1.5%
Warwick Way/Tachbrook St Dc 0% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1.4%
Church St/Edgware Rd DC 6% 1% 1% 15% 1% 1% 8% 3.3%
Marylebone High St DC 1% 6% 1% 9% 7% 2% 13% 3.9%
Queensway/Westbourne Grove DC 12% 0% 2% 2% 4% 18% 2% 7.9%
Praed St DC 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0.2%
Other 75% 87% 88% 72% 88% 77% 74% 80.7%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Turnover £ Millions
Harrow Road DC £4.37 £0.00 £0.00 £0.54 £0.00 £1.85 £0.00 £6.76
St. John's Wood DC £0.87 £5.35 £1.25 £0.54 £0.00 £1.85 £0.00 £9.87
Warwick Way/Tachbrook St DC £0.00 £0.00 £8.78 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £8.78
Church St/Edgware Rd DC £5.25 £0.89 £1.25 £8.11 £0.57 £1.85 £3.10 £21.03
Marylebone High St DC £0.87 £5.35 £1.25 £4.87 £4.00 £3.70 £5.04 £25.08
Queensway/Westbourne Grove DC £10.50 £0.00 £2.51 £1.08 £2.28 £33.31 £0.78 £50.45
Praed St DC £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £0.00 £1.16 £1.16
Other £65.60 £77.54 £110.35 £38.93 £50.25 £142.48 £28.70 £513.84
Total £87.47 £89.12 £125.39 £54.07 £57.10 £185.03 £38.79 £636.97
TABLE 5: COMPARISON TURNOVER DENSITIES 2006
Tunrover from % Turnover Total Net Sales Average Centres catchment from outside Turnover Floorspace Turnover Density areas £M catchment areas £M Sq M Net £ Per Sq M
Harrow Road DC £6.76 30% £9.66 2,000 £4,832
St. John's Wood DC £9.87 30% £14.10 3,300 £4,271
Warwick Way/Tachbrook St DC £8.78 30% £12.54 2,700 £4,644
Church St/Edgware Rd DC £21.03 20% £26.28 5,300 £4,959
Marylebone High St DC £25.08 40% £41.80 7,200 £5,806
Queensway/Westbourne Grove DC £50.45 40% £84.09 14,200 £5,922
Praed St DC £1.16 70% £3.88 1,400 £2,771
Other £513.84 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Total £636.97 n/a £192.35 36,100 £5,328 TABLE 6: AVAILABLE COMPARISON EXPENDITURE 2006 TO 2016
Expenditure Expenditure Expenditure Centres 2006 2011 2016 £M £M £M
Harrow Road DC £9.66 £11.50 £13.59
St. John's Wood DC £14.10 £16.64 £19.67
Warwick Way/Tachbrook St DC £12.54 £14.94 £17.92
Church St/Edgware Rd DC £26.28 £31.62 £37.47
Marylebone High St DC £41.80 £50.57 £58.84
Queensway/Westbourne Grove DC £84.09 £100.54 £118.66
Praed St DC £3.88 £4.98 £6.12
Total £192.35 £230.78 £272.26 Appendix M
Operator Requirements OPERATOR REQUIREMENTS
Over 300 companies were sent a questionnaire asking about their requirements in Westminster. 33 companies responded to the questionnaire, which equates to an 11% response rate. Of those who did respond, 13 (39%) indicated that they do have a requirement in the near future in Westminster, while 20 (61%) indicated that they do not have any requirements. Below is a summary of the responses.
The vast majority of respondents were looking for a new unit, rather than expanding an existing unit. Only London Clubs International was looking to expand an existing unit which was their ‘Sportsman’ on Quebec Street, in the Church Street/Edgware Road District Centre. Four respondents were not looking for a specific location for their new development(s), but were looking for a new unit within the general area.
The most popular location in which respondents wished to open a new unit was Marylebone High Street with four identifying it specifically. Queensway/Westbourne Grove and St John’s Wood District Centres were the next most popular locations with three respondents identifying each as a location for a prospective new unit. Church Street and Praed Street were 3rd most popular with 2 respondents identifying them in particular as a location for a new unit. Warwick Way/Tachbrook Street and Harrow Road were the least popular locations identified by respondents for a new unit, with only one specifically identifying each.
When asked what additional information may be of use in deciding whether to choose to locate in Westminster in the future, the most common responses were information regarding the demographic profile, and the availability/price of car parking. Other pieces of information which respondents thought would help make such decisions were those relating to future developments/future availability of sites and footfall numbers.
Respondents who answered positively about their requirements in Westminster were also asked why they had not yet secured their requirements. The overwhelming majority gave availability of sites as a reason, the cost of renting wasalsoafairly common response.
Respondents who answered negatively about their requirements in Westminster were then asked why they weren’t looking in the area. The most common response was that they were fully represented in nearby/other central locations, the next most popular reason was that the rents are too high.
When asked for any additional comments, only Nandos, who required a new unit in Marylebone and/or Praed Street, indicated that Westminster’s planning policy regarding A3 uses discouraged investment in the area. Glossary of Terms
A1 Shops, retail warehouses, hairdressers, undertakers, travel and ticket agencies, post offices, dry cleaners, pet shops, sandwich bars, retail showrooms, and domestic hire shops. A1 café type uses Shops such as sandwich bars or coffee shops selling food and drinks to be consumed mainly off the premises, but not hot food takeaways. Examples include certain Pret a Manger shops, Costa Coffee and the Seattle Coffee Co. shops. A2 Banks, building societies, bureau de change, estate and employment agencies, professional and financial services, telephone bureaux, betting offices and beauty salons (excluding hair salons). A3 Restaurants, snack bars and cafés selling food and drinks to be consumed mainly on the premises A4 Pubs and bars. A5 Shops for the sale of hot food to be consumed mainly off the premises (hot food take-aways). B1 Business uses such as offices, research and development and industrial uses. CAZ Central Activities Zone (CAZ). The CAZ is an area of mixed uses, many of which contribute directly to the national, regional and local economy. It is this mix of activities and their supporting resources which underpins the success of London’s economy. CAZ Frontages Frontages outside CAZ shown on the UDP Proposals Map where the City Council envisages the maintenance or growth of Central London Activities. Comparison A1 floorspace selling predominantly durable items and not in convenience use. Convenience Includes shops selling food, alcoholic drink, tobacco and other goods (newspapers and magazines, cleaning materials and matches). For the purposes of this assessment, convenience includes shops selling food or drink (excluding A1 café-type uses), and newsagents (including specialist tobacco stores). Core Frontages Shopping frontages identified in the District Centres within which UDP policies aim to maintain a high concentration of shops. District Centre District Centres provide a range and level of services below GLA defined Major Centres, but above that of Local Centres, and are a focus for shopping and other town centre activities. Experian GOAD An independent retail data consultancy who provide maps of ground floor uses in shopping centres. Greater London A new form of strategic government for London established in July 2000, run by the Mayor of Authority (GLA) London. Gross Floorspace Floorspace of buildings on all floors including external walls, half the thickness of parting walls and circulation areas. Independent store This includes non-convenience stores (see definition above) irrespective of size, that are not considered to be specialist retailers (see definition below), that are operated by retailers that are not included within national retail chains or groups. International stores This includes national multiple retailers with stores all over the world such as Ghost and The Conran Shop. National retailers This includes all retailers (Class A1 only) that operate within the context of a national retail chain or group, such as Sears. A schedule of all national retail multiples can be found in the Retail Directory of the UK 2002 (Hemming Information). Specialist shops that are part of a retail chain or group, such as Whittards and Thorntons, are classified as national retailers. Although there are national chains of betting shops, such as Ladbrokes, these are classified as A2 uses and not national retailers. PPS6 Planning Policy Statement 6 – Planning for Town Centres published by the ODPM Prestige international Prestigious retailers that operate in more than one country, e.g. Gucci, Gianni Versace, and retailers Giorgio Armani. Also includes flagship stores only found in select town centres in Britain. Secondary Frontages Shopping frontages identified in District Centres, where an element of non-A1 uses may be allowed. Retail floorspace This is all A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 and sui generis floorspace, and vacant floorspace of any of the aforementioned categories. Specialist Similar to an independent store, but this category reflects the quality and specialisation of the independent retailer so that a shopper may make a specific shopping trip to that shop.
Sui Generis Sui Generis is a term that refers to a use on its own. Any planning use not falling within a specific class within the Use Class Order falls within this category. Examples of sui generis uses in shopping centres are launderettes, mini cab offices, amusement centres and car showrooms. Town centre Town centre is defined in Annex A of PPS6 to cover city, town, and traditional suburban centres, which provide a broad range of facilities and services which fulfil a function as a focus for both the community and for public transport. It excludes parades of purely local significance. Town Centre Health Required under PPS6, these contain information on the mix of uses, environmental quality and Check general economic health of shopping centres/areas. UDP Unitary Development Plan produced by Westminster City Council as the statutory development plan for Westminster, see www.westminster.gov.uk/udp Vacancy This category includes vacant street level units, as well as units that are under alteration. However, if at any time the survey was completed it was evident who the unit would be occupied by, the unit was treated as being occupied by that occupant. Zone A Rent The rental level per square metre achieved on the first six metres of a shop unit measured from the main shop frontage.