Quote:
Originally Posted by garinda
'Hyndburn is the 40th most deprived out of 354 council areas. Unemployment is higher than the Lancashire, national and regional averages. There are areas within the borough where long term unemployment and the number of people out of work have contributed to some wards featuring in the worst 10 per cent in England. About one in three residents live in the most disadvantaged 20 per cent of neighbourhoods.'
http://www.hyndburnbc.gov.uk/downloa...Assessment.pdf
...i.e. a place not over run with young urban professionals, or YUPPIES.
It's exactly these sort of figures companies look at, when planning whether an area can financially support their businesses. That, and the historical figure of the number of other similar businesses, who opened, and have since closed. Of which we have many examples in Accrington over the last twenty years.
If you really think the area's socio-economic demographic rates highly on a national scale, perhaps it's time you travelled a bit more, and opened your eyes. |
Not going to let that word drop, are you?
It's nothing to do with thinking that the socio-economic demographic rates highly, more that a shopping district with decent amenities will do better than one which has been allowed to run down. Take Preston as an example - Friargate had gone into quite a decline but a collaboration of public and private sector investment totally turned it around within a year.
All town centres need occasional regeneration schemes and Accrington is clearly no different. I'm not suggesting that shoppers are better off than they make out, but I go to Blackburn town centre far more because of the better range of shops. I suspect many other shoppers do exactly the same - people go where they can get what they want.
Accrington has a brilliant setup and I would never knock it but the more empty units you have, the more people will start looking at it as being a bit tatty.