UPDATE: Fourways consumers “spoilt for choice”

UPDATE: September 19, 3.30pm:

Booth made a presentation on her report which analysed market researcher, Hein du Toit’s report on consumer need for a Makro store in Magaliessig. Booth’s qualifications and experience were again called into question by Grobler.

However, Booth responded with examples of her many years of conducting market research studies. Booth started her presentation by conducting Makro’s survey on an audience member to demonstrate how the questions were asked and answered, and show the reasons why she criticised the survey. Some of the issues Booth brought up were that the proposed store was referred to as Makro Fourways not Makro Magaliessig in the survey which could have been misleading and that the question, ‘Do you own a Makro store card?’ should rather have been ‘What store cards do you own?’ as the former lead to a particular answer.

In Booth’s research she found that Fourways consumers’ needs were already being met by the other shopping centres and stores in the area and that they were in fact “spoilt for choice”. After Booth’s presentation Grobler was given the opportunity to ask her questions for clarity, however the questioning session became quite heated. Grobler asked Booth to justify her statement that Fourways consumers were “spoilt for choice” and asked her if she’s ever had to research whether a piece of land should be used for a shopping centre before. Booth replied that she had not, but said this was not her brief as she was tasked with assessing consumer need.

UPDATE: September 18, 2.30pm:

Day two of the Makro appeal hearing saw fireworks between Makro and Magailessig Action Forum’s (MAF) legal respresentatives and specialists.

The hearing commenced on the morning of 17 September with market specialist, Hein du Toit continuing with his presentation. Du Toit read out his research report, highlights of which included that a Makro store in Fourways would not affect the patronage of similar stores like Dion Wired and Game. He mentioned that the community poll that was conducted as part of his research did show that a vast number of people in the Magaliessig community said “no” to the development of the store in the area.

However Fanie Grobler, Makro’s legal representative, submitted that the group that was polled was already in opposition to the store being built, and therefore there could only have been one possible outcome to the poll.

Du Toit said the poll was also too localised, having only focused on the Magaliessig community and was not indicative of market need. He mentioned that Steyn City was put forward as a possible alternative site for the store, however the suggestion was abandoned as there was found to be no immediate potential for a shopping centre in that area.

Du Toit said his research showed that the proposed Makro store could become the best performing store nationwide.

He went on to question the validity of independent researcher, Debbie Booth’s report which offered criticism of his own report. He submitted that Booth was inexperienced and that her questions to the community in her research were flawed and misleading. Du Toit attacked Booth’s credentials, saying she had previously worked as a biokineticist and he had not encountered her professionally before. These statements were later challenged by the forum’s legal representative who suggested that it was Du Toit’s research questions which were misleading and that his report may be flawed as a result.

The first half of the hearing ended with the township board asking Du Toit to clarify his own qualifications.

UPDATE: September 17, 3.30pm:

Makro’s legal team spoke in detail about a new concept for an urban Makro store in Magaliessig during their opening statements in the Makro appeal hearing.

The store’s legal team explained to the township board that the concept for the proposed Makro store is based on a new urban design. They said the old “warehouse” design of other Makro stores would not be used for the proposed store. This design, which they believe helps the store to blend into a residential area, has already been implemented in the Western Cape.

Makro’s legal team mentioned that during the site visit to areas surrounding the site of the proposed development, many examples of retail development taking place next to residential areas were evident, namely in the Pineslopes area. The legal team said they had gathered from Makro’s cardholders database that a “huge” number of cardholders live within five kilometres of the proposed store, therefore there was a need in the area for a Makro store.

Hein du Toit, a town planning specialist hired by the store recounted the findings of his research into the proposed store. He said that a number of variables had been rated, such as accessibility and perceived need, and the proposed Fourways store had scored 70 percent, which he said was a very high score for a retail centre. Makro’s legal team implored the townships board to “not be slavishly bound to past decisions” and said Makro believed that there was no logical town planning reason for the store to not be built in Magaliessig.

September 17, 1.30pm:

Fourways residents turned up in full force for the start of the Makro appeal hearing on 16 September.

Makro is appealing a ruling by the township board to prohibit them from building a super store at the corner of Leslie Drive and Merrow Lane in Magaliessig. The hearing started with a site visit by members of the City of Joburg and Makro. The site visit included a walk around the entire property, on which Makro proposes to build the super store.

The visit also included an assessment of the whole Fourways precinct from Montecasino, to Cedar Square and Fourways Mall to investigate density and traffic conditions, but focused on the impact the store would have on the suburb of Magaliessig. The residents who gathered at the site of the proposed store were unhappy about the appeal and voiced their concerns about having a store in a residential area. Linda Horsfield of the Lonehill Residents’ Association said she was unhappy about the store being built in the area because she did not see a need for it. She said Fourways needed public schools, clinics and sports fields more than it needed another big retail development.

“Fourways needs a Makro like we need a hole in the head,” she said. “It’s not Makro per se that we’re opposed to, but rather the concept of yet another shopping centre in the area.”

The public hearing for Makro to appeal the ruling by the townships board will continue on 17 and 18 September at City Life Church in Lonehill from 9:15 am to 3pm each day. Residents who have a vested interest in the development are encouraged to attend.