Impact of the Pay and Display Parking Scheme on the Economic Development of Dún Laoghaire by Michael Merrigan, MA. FGSI

Impact of the Pay and Display Parking Scheme on the Economic Development of DĂşn Laoghaire By

Anthony Foley Dublin City University Business School With the assistance of the

Marketing Development Programme UCD Smurfit Graduate Business School October 2017

Contents Acknowledgements Executive Summary Section 1. Introduction, objectives and methodology

Section 2. Economic profile of Dún Laoghaire

Section 3. Context of local and national economic and retail performance

Section 4. Context of parking and retail in urban areas

Section 5. Overview of parking system and finances in Dún LaoghaireRathdown and Dún Laoghaire

Section 6. Survey of residents and non-residents in and near Dún Laoghaire 69 Section 7. Survey of businesses in Dún Laoghaire

Section 8. Conclusions, assessment and recommendations

Acknowledgements I am very grateful to all the DĂşn Laoghaire Rathdown county council staff and councillors and other individuals who discussed the issue of parking with me. I am very appreciative of the many people who completed the two surveys. I am particularly appreciative of the speedy and efficient efforts of Tom Byrne from the council staff in responding to my very many requests for data and clarifications. Thanks are also due to Martin Allidine for his work in ensuring the completion of the project. I appreciate the ongoing support of Eimear Lenahan and Patricia Doherty. The two surveys were carried out by Eabha O Sullivan (team leader), Emily Reidy, Nicola Murray, Robyn Mullan and Gordan Geraghty who were students of the Marketing Development Programme, UCD Michael Smurfit Graduate Business School.

I am very grateful to them for their enthusiasm, efficiency and

professionalism. All errors and omissions are my responsibility. Anthony Foley Associate Professor of Economics Dublin City University Business School Dublin City University October 2017

Executive Summary Objectives This report assesses the impact of the pay and display parking scheme in Dún Laoghaire on the economic development and retail sector of the town. Specific subobjectives are:  assess the negative perception of the Town of Dún Laoghaire generated by the operation of the parking regulations. 

examine whether there is a disincentive for residents to shop locally due to the multiple zonal nature of the parking.



quantify the potential loss in revenue to local businesses by residents shopping elsewhere due to the parking charges.



examine the sustainability of a scheme that has the local authority competing with businesses for the time of their customers.



assess whether the scheme results in rotation of on- street parking spaces.



undertake an empirical analysis of the parking trends and structure through the availability of council data.



undertake a survey of, and consultations with, the relevant stakeholders such as business bodies, businesses, residents, shoppers, officials and councillors.

Methodology The methodology includes analysis of the local, national and international parking, retail and economic context, analysis of the parking database and other council data, surveys of stakeholders with a specific focus on primary data collection from residents, visitors and shoppers (with a survey of approximately 380 persons) and primary data collection from the retail and commercial establishments in Dún Laoghaire (with a survey of 94 enterprises). The project includes examination of relevant local and other documentation and consideration of views of Dún Laoghaire stakeholders in the parking regime.

Conclusions from the literature and empirical analysis The following lists the main conclusions from the literature review, the empirical analysis and the survey responses.

1. Urban and town centre parking problems are a national and international phenomenon. The problem is not confined to Dún Laoghaire. 2. The difficulties facing town centre shopping areas are a national and international problem and are not confined to Dún Laoghaire. 3. The retail sector in Dún Laoghaire has suffered substantially over the past several years. However, the national retail sector has also performed badly since the economic collapse in 2007/08. 4. Many retail sectors nationally are still below the 2007 level of sales. 5. Wholesale and retail employed 94.2k persons in 2008 in Dublin. The 2017 figure is 79.6k, a decline of 15.5%. 6. Retail value in 2016 in Ireland is 14.3% below the 2007 level. In volume terms it is 1.1% below the 2007 level. Excluding the motor industry, the 2016 value is 11.5% below the 2007 level and in the volume terms the 2016 level is 1.2% above the 2007 level. Retail value has not yet returned to the 2007 level. 7. Dún Laoghaire, as a shopping centre, faces very intensive competition due to its proximity to two of the state’s largest and most attractive shopping facilities, Dublin City centre and Dundrum shopping centre. 8. Dún Laoghaire, through the Dart service, has very good access to Dublin City centre which facilitates shopping there by Dún Laoghaire residents. 9. As a town shopping facility, Dún Laoghaire also faces competition from other adjacent shopping facilities such as Blackrock and Frascati shopping centres. 10. The overall “traditional” retail sector is facing increased threats to its volume of business from internet sales. 11. The “main street” shopping facilities within Dún Laoghaire have also faced competition from adjacent town centre shopping centres such as Dún Laoghaire Shopping Centre (opened in 1977) and Bloomfield Shopping Centre (opened in 1997), each with its own car park. 12. Other aspects of economic development such as tourism and hospitality have done well in recent years in Dún Laoghaire. 13. High vacancy rates in commercial property including retail are a national problem and are not confined to Dún Laoghaire. 14. Based on a review of the research no town or urban area has resolved the parking and car issues in a way that is satisfactory to all stakeholders.

15. Dún Laoghaire (local electoral area), in common with most other areas, has a high level of car ownership with only 18% of its 16,395 households not having a car. The remaining 13,442 households have an estimated 20,297 cars. 16. There are approx 2,000 on street parking bays in Dún Laoghaire Town and at the last count the council had issued about 1,400 permits to residents 17. Between 1990 and 2015 the number of private cars in Ireland increased from just below 800k to almost 2 million. The precise increase was 1.189 million or 149.3%. 18. Dún Laoghaire has a large consumer base with a large population concentration and a relatively high socio-economic profile to its population which is a solid base for a strong retail sector 19. A large proportion of the available purchasing power of the local population is spent elsewhere. This is due to several factors of which parking is only one. 20. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council generates a relatively high level of both gross and net revenue from its car parking and enforcement operation. It also spends a relatively large amount on its car parking and enforcement operation. 21. The annual net revenue from the council car parking is used for the benefit of the county and its citizens in the provision of various services. This was €3.6 million in 2016. 22. The €3.6 million was spent on a range of services including footpath improvement, road maintenance materials, public lighting, signing, traffic management and school warden service. 23. The total parking income generated in 2016 was €6.388 million. Residents’ parking permits provided only €131.9k or 2.1% of this total. Visitor permits provided only €85.5k or 1.3%. Resident and visitor permits generate a very small proportion of the parking revenues. 24. Off street meters (in council car parks) generate €1.1047 million or 17.3%. On street meters generate the largest flow of revenue, €3.9107 million or 61.2% of the total. 25. On street fines generated € 1.0354 million or 16.2% and off street fines generated €169.1k or 2.6%. 26. It is notable that the ratio of fines to meter revenue in the on street category is 26.5% compared to 15.3% in the off street category. This suggests either a 6

higher level of enforcement in the on street category and/or different compliance patterns in the two categories. 27. A range of different payment for parking options are provided by the Council, including coin, credit card, wave and pay (contactless at the smart meters) and Parkingtag (remote/mobile payment option). 28. From €411k in 2014, Parkingtag revenue grew to €1.107 million in 2016. 29. Coins as a means of parking payments has continued to decline and were 64% of meter income in the Jan-July 2017 period compared with 69% in the same period of 2016. 30. In addition to the council pay and display capacity Dún Laoghaire has a substantial supply of non-council parking facilities including car parks in the town’s two shopping centres. Public car parks at other town facilities and the Harbour Company car park which also includes pay and display street parking. 31. There is a very high occupancy rate of pay and display spaces in the towns centre area streets. 32. The current (2016) county parking fines total of 33,149 is significantly less than the 2009 total of 41,109. There was a decline of 19.4% between 2009 and 2016. Between 2013 and 2016 there was an increase of 1,124 tickets or 3.5%. 33. In 2011 there were 12,112 parking tickets in Dún Laoghaire. By 2016 this had declined to 8,902 tickets, a decrease of 26.5%. However, the decrease has not been continuous over the period. 34. The lowest annual total was in 2013, with 8585 tickets. Since 2013 the number of Dún Laoghaire tickets has remained much the same. The total increased to 9150 in 2014 and increased again in 2015 to 9218. There was a decline in the 2016 level to 8902. 35. Dún Laoghaire’s share of the total county parking tickets declined from 32.5% in 2011 to 26.9% in 2016. The 2016 share is much the same as the 2013 share of 26.8%. The share has decline slightly in 2015 and 2016. 36. The parking fines are for a variety of offences. While the largest single category is pay and display/permit offences, these accounted for only 61% of parking fines in the county in 2016. The next largest category is parking in prohibited places such as on yellow lines and it was 18.3% in 2016. 37. The “other” category including bus lanes and cycleway parking was 12.5% in 2016. Disabled bay parking was 2.1%. Parking on footpaths was 6.2% in 7

2016. The key point from the data on type of offences is that pay and display offences which includes both on and off street parking made up 61%, less than two thirds of all the parking offences in 2016 on a county wide basis and this share has declined since 2013. 38. In 2016, in Dún Laoghaire, a third of parking fines were for offences other than park and display. Between 2011 and 2016, in Dún Laoghaire pay and display offences declined from 7065 to 5916 but their share of total increased from 58.3% to 66.5%. 39. In the other main offences in Dún Laoghaire, wrongful use of a loading bay decreased from 2813 to 1351, parking on a double yellow line decreased from 708 to 544, parking on a footway decreased from 584 to 307, wrongful use of a disabled persons space decreased from 349 to 340, parking in a taxi stand increased from 125 to 168 and overstaying in a loading bay decreased from 295 to 113. 40. The time distribution of the sample of parking transactions indicates a high degree of turnover of parking spaces. The data indicate a pattern of high occupancy rates allied with relatively short durations (defined as up to 1.5 hours). Actual durations will be longer than the actual paid time suggests due to the grace periods at the start and end of paid stays. In summary, 60.2% of stays are under one hour and only 5.6% of stays are over 2.5 hours to three hours. 41. For every 100 parking transactions in the on street pay and display system in the county there is 0.63 of a fine or for every 159 parking transactions there is one fine, on average. 42. The council has implemented various parking innovations in recent years, including reduction of the central rate from €2 per hour to €1.50 per hour, free hour in the Christmas period, suspension of pay and display regulations for various days/holidays, fifteen minutes grace period (increase from ten minutes), reduced rate associated with Blackrock road works and alternative non-cash payments methods. 43. Based on the survey undertaken as part of the project, recreational activities are the main reasons why people come to Dún Laoghaire.

44. However, 51% of Dún Laoghaire residents include grocery shopping as one of their three reasons for being in Dún Laoghaire town. Of course, this implies that 49% of residents did not include grocery shopping in their three reasons. 45. Consumers are attracted to Dún Laoghaire for particular shops such as Shaws, Scrumdiddly’s, Tierney’s, Sostrene Grene and Penneys. 46. 62% of the respondents to the project survey were either dissatisfied (40%) or very dissatisfied (22%) with the range of shops in Dún Laoghaire. This contrasts with 22% who were satisfied (19%) or very satisfied (3%). 47. Younger people are more satisfied with the range of shops which partly reflects their narrower range of purchasing. The indifference level is high with the younger age group. 48. Some of the older age groups are particularly dissatisfied, which is a particular problem as their purchasing power is greater. 49. The dissatisfied/very dissatisfied percentages for different age groups are 3039 years 50%, 40-49 years 79%, 50-59 years 57%, 60 years and over 75%. 50. Dissatisfaction with range of shops was 64% among residents and 69% among those who were resident in other parts of the council area. Visitors had only a 46% dissatisfaction rating which partly reflects their lower expectations on shopping as the main reason for being in Dún Laoghaire was hospitality and leisure. 51. The top retail destinations based on respondents selecting their top 3 were Dundrum 27%, Dublin City Centre 24% and Dún Laoghaire 12%. While the first two are substantially ahead the 12% Dún Laoghaire figure is equivalent to 36% of respondents including Dún Laoghaire as one of their top 3 locations. 52. When the focus is on Dún Laoghaire residents the top three retail locations are close together, Dundrum 26%, Dublin City Centre 23% and Dún Laoghaire 22%. The 22% is equivalent to 66% of Dún Laoghaire residents including the town as one of their top three retail locations. Dún Laoghaire does not appear as one of the highest three locations in either of the other two groups. 53. There is a high level of satisfaction with transport (77%) and a high level of dissatisfaction with the parking situation (67%). 54. There is a high level of dissatisfaction with the price of parking, the dissatisfied percentage for the three groups are , residents 74%, rest of council area residents 71% and visitors 56%. 9

55. There is less dissatisfaction with the availability of parking, residents 52% rest of council area 43% visitors 36%. 56. There is a high level of dissatisfaction with enforcement among residents. The figures are residents 72% rest of council area 55% and visitors 45%. 57. There is a low level of dissatisfaction with parking locations, the dissatisfaction figures were residents 23% rest of council area 17% and visitors 14%. 58. In terms of comparisons with parking in other retail locations Dún Laoghaire was considered relatively poor. 59. There is a very high proportion of leakage of potential Dún Laoghaire retail spend from Dún Laoghaire retail establishments to elsewhere. Of the residents who do spend in Dún Laoghaire 59% spend a quarter or less and 26% spend more than half. 60. There is a high proportion of leakage of potential Dún Laoghaire grocery spend from Dún Laoghaire grocery establishments but it is much less than for retail overall. 61. While there is a substantial leakage of local originating spending from Dún Laoghaire there is also a high incidence of shopping visits in the town by residents. 63% of resident respondents shop in the town “multiple times per week”, 15% shop once per week in the town, 9% shop twice per month, 2% shop once per month, 5% shop less than once per month and 6% said never. Overall, 78% of residents shop once per week or more in the town. 62. The high incidence of shopping trips suggests an extensive use of the town and that parking does not dissuade residents from patronising the town. However, despite this there is a large leakage of local originating spending from the town which would indicate a greater reluctance to spend as opposed to visit by residents. 63. The usual mode of transport in accessing shops in Dún Laoghaire by residents is car 33.3%, bus 7.4%, dart 3.7%, foot 49.4%, cycle 6.2%. 64. The survey of retailers asked respondents to identify the top two negative impacts on business. Pay and display parking was ranked number one by 39%, quality of Dún Laoghaire shopping facilities was ranked number one by 28%, proximity of competing locations was ranked number one by 20% and the

Assessment relative to sub-objectives Assess the negative perception of the Town of Dún Laoghaire generated by the operation of the parking regulations. There is a negative perception of Dún Laoghaire’s parking situation. 67% of the shopper/visitor survey respondents were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with parking in Dún Laoghaire. Only 19% were satisfied or very satisfied. 75% of Dún Laoghaire residents are either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with parking. Only 7.5% are satisfied or very satisfied. DLR residents have a 62% dissatisfaction rating and visitors are 51%. The visitor dissatisfaction level is substantially lower than that of residents of Dún Laoghaire. There is a 19.2% satisfaction rating by DLR residents and 22% by visitors. Overall there are very high levels of dissatisfaction. Of course, it may be the case that surveys of parking in other urban locations would also generate high levels of dissatisfaction on the part of local users and visitors. 74% of residents are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the price of parking. The DLR figure is 71% and the visitor figure is 56%. This is surprising because the objective comparison of prices shows that Dún Laoghaire pay and display parking rates are comparable with other areas, are lower than Dublin and are cheaper than non-council parking facilities in Dún Laoghaire. Of course, the €1.50 per hour is high relative to free parking which is available in some locations. It also has to be compared with the previous resident parking scheme in which residents had free

access to the whole Dún Laoghaire area. Now, there is only free resident parking in one’s own zone. In effect, a benefit has been removed by the multi-zonal resident parking system. Parking availability performs better than price. 52% of residents are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with parking availability. The DLR share is 43% and the visitor share is 36%. 38% of Dún Laoghaire residents are satisfied with the availability of parking as are 40% of DLR residents and 42% of visitors. There is substantial dissatisfaction with parking enforcement among residents but the dissatisfaction is lower in the other two respondent categories. 72% of residents are either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied compared with 55% of DLR residents and 45% of visitors. The satisfaction shares are 8% residents, 15% DLR and 17% visitors. 63% of residents are satisfied with the proximity of parking to locations. Only 23% are dissatisfied. The satisfaction level for DLR residents is 64% and for visitors it is 68%. The dissatisfaction ratings are 17% DLR and 14% visitors.

Respondents were asked to compare various parking factors in Dún Laoghaire to those in other retail locations. Overall, parking enforcement was rated as worse (worse is defined as more stringent) by 42% and the same by 51%. Proximity was ranked as 26% worse and 56% the same. Price was 54% worse and 38% the same. Availability was ranked 50% worse and 37% the same. 6% ranked enforcement as better (less stringent) in Dún Laoghaire than elsewhere, 17% ranked proximity as better. 9% ranked price as better and 12% ranked availability as better.

The responses by residents of Dún Laoghaire in comparing the parking experience in Dún Laoghaire with elsewhere were: 

Availability, worse 57%, same 37%, better 6%



Price, worse 57%, same 39%, better 4%.



Proximity to locations, worse 27%, same 63%, better 10%



Enforcement, worse 49%, same 48%, better 4%

These responses suggest that while residents and the other two groups are dissatisfied with parking this dissatisfaction also applies to other locations to a significant extent. For example, enforcement (while generating a high dissatisfaction rating) was rated the same as elsewhere by 48% of residents and 51% of the overall responses. Clearly, it would be desirable to generate lower rates of “worse” in the various categories. However, some of these price views are not objectively supported by the facts in relation to the council provided parking which is relatively cheap. Dún Laoghaire, unlike some other parking locations and facilities, does not operate a clamping regime. Some respondents to the questionnaire referred to clamping as an issue. However, private on-street parking provided by the harbour company, and which includes clamping and higher cost, is often assumed to be council provided parking. Examine whether there is a disincentive for residents to shop locally due to the multiple zonal nature of the parking. Our conclusion is that the current multi zonal nature of resident parking permits is a disincentive for some Dún Laoghaire residents to shop locally. The multi-zonal aspect is one of the factors generating the high resident dissatisfaction with local parking. A notable feature of the information generated through the project was the often strong feeling of residents with permits having to pay to shop within what they would describe as their local area or town. One can see various scenarios which result in the multi-zonal nature of the resident parking permit parking regime having a negative effect on local shopping. Quantify the potential loss in revenue to local businesses by residents shopping elsewhere due to the parking charges. The evidence from the survey indicates that there is substantial leakage of Dún Laoghaire- originating retail spend from the local retail operations. In addition there is a relatively low propensity of non-residents to undertake retail purchases in Dún Laoghaire. The cause of the leakage of local originating expenditure is multi-faceted. The parking situation contributes to the leakage but other causes include the availability of high quality alternative shopping facilities including Dublin City and Dundrum as well as several more smaller proximate shopping locations, the quality and range of Dún Laoghaire’s shopping facilities, consumer tastes and online 13

purchases. Aldi and Lidl together account for 23.5% of the overall grocery market nationally. Neither chain has a presence in the central commercial area of Dún Laoghaire but both are located near the town. On the assumption that one fifth of Dún Laoghaire residents wish to shop at these chains, there will be a leakage of potential expenditure from the town. Of course, the more favourable parking regime at these locations would also result in a larger leakage of potential expenditure from the town. As shown from the survey responses only 35 % of residents do half or more of their retail shopping locally. 34% of residents undertake less than one quarter of their retail shopping locally. Visitors have a very low propensity to shop in Dún Laoghaire. We first estimate the level of retail expenditure which is leaked from Dún Laoghaire to other shopping locations. We then estimate the impact of the parking regime on this leakage as it is only one of determining factors. The estimation of leaked revenue is based on the average household expenditure from the CSO Household Budget Survey; this is adjusted for non-retail and locational factors; the number of households in Dún Laoghaire; the local expenditure proportions reported in the survey and the local business estimate of the impact of the parking system on turnover. This is a broad estimate which is subject to a large margin of error. However, in terms of broad indicative impact it is reasonably robust. It should be noted that lost retail expenditure is not all lost to the county. Dundrum is one of the main beneficiaries of Dún Laoghaire- originating expenditure. The values of the main variables are shown below. 

Average weekly household expenditure in State €837.47



Estimated average weekly household retail expenditure in State €450.00



Adjusted estimated weekly average household retail expenditure in Dún Laoghaire €500.00



Number of households in Dún Laoghaire Town (approx) 3,800



Locally weekly arising total retail expenditure from Dún Laoghaire €1.9 million



Estimated average retail proportion spent locally (from survey) 40%



Retail weekly expenditure by local residents €760 k



Leaked retail weekly expenditure from Dún Laoghaire €1.14 million



Retail expenditure weekly displaced from residents due to parking; (based on survey data) €91k

Based on the available data which is relatively scant there is a substantial leakage of retail expenditure from Dún Laoghaire equivalent to 60% of locally originating expenditure. Of course this leakage is due to factors in addition to parking charges and other parking issues. The survey suggests a decline of about 12% in turnover due to parking based on the town’s households. This amounts to €91k weekly for the town’s residents. The impact of parking charges as opposed to enforcement or availability would be, in our view, relatively small at about a quarter of the figures estimated above, or €23k. The major parking problem would be enforcement and concern over possibility of a fine. It is necessary to emphasise that the parking situation refers not only to the specific management and implementation of the Dún Laoghaire parking system but to the wider parking problems which arise in town centres internationally and are not confined to Dún Laoghaire. Consequently, incremental adjustments to the parking scheme will not restore the system to what it was when car users could have easy, quick and free access to town centres. Examine the sustainability of a scheme that has the local authority competing with businesses for the time of their customers. This situation arises in town centres generally. The volume of cars and impact on traffic management has generally led to a situation of paid and regulated parking. Indeed, the Dún Laoghaire system is more “friendly” to shoppers in terms of price than what is usually recommended in the economics of parking. The economic development of the town depends on sectors other than retail, including office facilities and hospitality. For the town to thrive there must be good quality traffic management and parking availability. The present system provides these to a reasonable extent. None of the potential improvements to the parking system will solve the basic allocation problem of many cars relative to parking spaces. However, as recommended below, there is scope for the parking system to be more customerfriendly but this will not remove the basic supply/demand problem. The population and car ownership levels will continue to increase and the long term solution for town centres will be increased regulation of car usage and ultimately 15

probable pedestrianisation if bypasses are possible and are developed. The Council planning efforts to enhance the non-car accessibility of the central district should be continued. Dún Laoghaire has a strong future as a hospitality centre and as a retail centre for the local catchment population subject to the quality and mix of retail facilities meeting market demands and as a location for specific niche retail operations attracting a wider demand. Geographically and physically it will be impossible to rival either Dublin City centre or Dundrum. It is perfectly reasonable in the current supply/demand situation for car use and car parking to be managed and regulated. We believe that Dún Laoghaire can thrive even with the current parking regime with its high level of enforcement. Ideally, as the system is made more customer-friendly the volume of fines will decline and the future problem will be adjusting for a significant loss of revenue. Assess whether the scheme results in rotation of on- street parking spaces. The evidence suggests that substantial rotation takes place. This is mainly due to the behavioural characteristics of the users of the pay and display regime, the three hour maximum period and the enforcement system rather than due to the pricing structure of the pay and display regime. For example, the pricing structure charges the same rate per unit of time regardless of the length of stay. Pricing theory suggests that to encourage short stays, the price per unit of time (per hour or per half hour) should increase with length of duration. A sample of parking transactions covering 67,540 transactions shows that 60.2% were under 1 hour, 25.2% were 1 hour to 1.5 hours, 3.4% were over 1.5 hours and less than 2 hours, 5.6% were 2 hours to 2.5 hours and 5.6% were over 2.5 hours to 3 hours. This contrasts with a situation where a large proportion of the stays would be for the maximum period of one hour. More extensive and location specific data of this type should be utilised in future management and assessment of the parking scheme. Of course, it should be noted that a large proportion of stays which are under one hour does not support the more time- consuming types of shopping such as clothes. Instead it facilitates the quick “in-and-out” type of shopping. Undertake an empirical analysis of the parking trends and structure through the availability of council data. 16

This is presented in Section 5. Undertake a survey of, and consultations with, the relevant stakeholders such as business bodies, businesses, residents, shoppers, officials and councillors. The survey of shoppers/residents/visitors is presented in Section 6 and the survey of retailers is presented in Section 7. Other consultations inform the discussion and assessment throughout the report.

Parkingtag promotion should consider a time constrained preferential parking rate for new users. 7. The Christmas period parking promotion of a free hour available to all users should be continued. This initiative should be assessed to identify its impact. There should be consideration of a longer promotional period for 2017. 8. Measures should be taken to counter the unjustified negative perception of DL parking emphasising positive features such as grace period, price, payment methods, availability of spaces and absence of clamping in Council parking bays. 9. There should be a target to increase consumer satisfaction with the DL parking system and to adopt a more consumer-oriented focus. 10. Signage should clearly identify the geographic demarcation between Council on-street parking and the Harbour Company onstreet parking which includes clamping and has higher prices. 11. The commercial sector in DĂşn Laoghaire should develop a shared validation scheme for part of shoppersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; parking costs. 12. In consultation with the commercial sector, the Council should consider occasional and periodic time-limited parking initiatives such as low priced periods. These should be considered following an assessment of the effect of the Christmas promotion. 13. Alongside parking initiatives, there is a need to enhance and promote the DL shopping experience and shopping offer and to implement an integrated town centre development strategy. 14. Ongoing efforts to develop retail in DL and to reduce the negative impact of parking on local retail must acknowledge the underlying constraints

associated

with

traffic

management,

necessary

a co-operative effort between local businesses and associations, BID and the council. 16. The overall parking situation and perception would be improved by the council taking charge of the harbour area street parking.

Section 1. Introduction, objectives and methodology The purpose of this report is to assess the impact of the pay and display parking scheme on the economic development of Dún Laoghaire, and, in particular, the impact on the retail sector. The specific sub-objectives within that overall objective are to: 

assess the negative perception of the Town of Dún Laoghaire generated by the operation of the parking regulations.



examine whether there is a disincentive for residents to shop locally due to the multiple zonal nature of the parking.



quantify the potential loss in revenue to local businesses by residents shopping elsewhere due to the parking charges.



examine the sustainability of a scheme that has the local authority competing with businesses for the time of their customers.



assess whether the scheme results in rotation of on- street parking spaces.



undertake an empirical analysis of the parking trends and structure through the availability of council data.



undertake a survey of , and consultations with, the relevant stakeholders such as business bodies, businesses, residents, shoppers, officials and councillors.

The methodology includes analysis of the local, national and international parking, retail and economic context, analysis of the parking database and footfall data, surveys of stakeholders with specific focus on primary data collection from residents, visitors and shoppers (with a survey of approximately 380 persons) and primary data collection from the retail and commercial establishments in Dún Laoghaire (with a survey of 94 enterprises) which have not been undertaken hitherto, examination of relevant local and other documentation and discussions with Dún Laoghaire stakeholders. The field work, survey design, interviews and data analysis for the two surveys was undertaken by the Smurfit Graduate Business School, Marketing Development Programme under the direction of A. Foley.

The broad background to the report is as follows. It has been argued the Dún Laoghaire County Council parking regime has a caused a significant negative impact on local business, discouraging shoppers from remaining locally and moving instead to other locations, especially shopping centres. There are other factors influencing shopping patterns and activity including, general and retail economic decline since the economic collapse, structural change in retail and shoppers demands, value and quality of shops, free or easier parking in shopping centres and the widespread demise of town centres for traditional shopping. Councillors have determined that an assessment of the role of the parking regime on the economic development of Dún Laoghaire should be undertaken. Section 2 presents an economic profile of Dún Laoghaire within which the issues of parking and retail can be considered. Section 3 of the report examines the local, national economic and retail context within which the Dub Laoghaire situation should be assessed. Section 4 considers the wider issue of parking in urban areas. Section 5 examines the Dún Laoghaire parking structure. Sections 6 and 7 respectively present the findings from the two surveys of residents/visitors/shoppers and enterprises. The overall assessment, conclusions and recommendations are presented in Section 8. By way of introduction, it can readily be seen from the following statistics that matching the demand for urban parking (especially on- street parking) with the growing supply of private cars in a manner that meets the approval, and achieves the objectives, of the different stakeholders, is a very difficult task. The national growth in the number of private cars since 1990 is shown in Table 1.1 below. Table 1.1 Private cars under Current Licence (Number) by various years 1990 1995 Private cars 796,408 990,384 Source. CSO.

2000 2005 2010 2015 1,319,250 1,662,157 1,872,715 1,985,130

Between 1990 and 2015 the number of private cars in Ireland increased from just below 800k to almost 2 million. The actual increase was 1.189 million or 149.3%.

The rate of increase slowed in the most recent decade, 2005/2010 +210.6k and 2010/2015 +112.4k. This compares with +342.9k in 2000/2005 and +328.9k in 1995/2000. While there have been many multi-storey car parks built to respond to this growth, there are easily acknowledged severe constraints on increasing street parking capacity. Over the long term the number of goods vehicles has also increased significantly from 143.2k in 1990 to 330.5k in 2015 adding to demand for, and pressure on, street parking capacity. The more recent increase was much more moderate, growing from 228.5k in 2010 to the 2015 level of 330.5k The immediate expectations are for continuing growth in the number of private cars. In Table 1.2 the most recent annual private new car registrations are shown. As would be expected with the improving economic environment the number of annual new car registrations increased from 92k in 2014 to 121k in 2015 and to 143k in 2016. This excludes used cars being registered for the first time. Of course, there will also be an exit of older cars from the national total. Table 1.2 New private Cars Licensed for the first time, number and Year 2014 All licensing authorities New Private Cars (Number) Source. CSO

92,361

2015 121,110

2016 142,688

Dublin City and County new car registrations increased from 33k in 2014 to 50k in 2016. The Dublin area councilsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; degree of car ownership is shown below in Table 1.3. Dublin City has a low proportion of households with at least one car, 66.3%, compared to the state as a whole 84.8% and the other three Dublin local authorities which are close together, DĂşn Laoghaire- Rathdown 87.4%, Fingal 90.0% and South Dublin 87.6%.

Table 1.3 Private Households in Permanent Housing Units Having At Least One Motor Car (%) by certain areas 2016 Dublin City Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Fingal South Dublin State Source. CSO. Table 1.4 presents data on the car ownership pattern in Dún Laoghaire electoral

66.3 87.4 90.0 87.6 84.8 area.

In our estimation of the number of cars in Dún Laoghaire we have assumed that the 419 households who gave no information each have an average of one car and the 212 households with four or more cars each has four cars. The total number of cars of Dún Laoghaire residents is estimated at 20,297 or 1.24 cars per household on average. 82% of households have at least one car. Table 1.4 Households with cars and total number of cars. Dún Laoghaire Electoral Area. 2016 Number of cars Number of % of households Total cars households None 2953 18.0 0 I 7341 44.8 7341 2 4721 28.8 9442 3 749 4.6 2247 4 212 1.3 848 Not stated 419 2.6 419 Total 16395 100.0 20297 Source. Derived from CSO Small Area Statistics data. The demand for parking which is generated by the resident car population has to be adjusted downwards by the number of cars which are used to travel daily to work and other activities outside the town and has to be adjusted upwards by the number of cars coming into the town with workers, visitors and other people. The resident-non-resident employment pattern in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown is shown below in Table 1.5. There is a very substantial degree of job related commuting in Dún Laoghaire- Rathdown. Of 81300 residents with a fixed place of work only 43.7%, or 35512, work in the county and 56.3%, or 45788, work outside the county. 43946 workers commute into Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown for employment. In summary, 45788 residents leave for employment elsewhere and 43946 non-residents commute into the county for employment.

Table 1.5 Usually resident workers and place of work. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown (DLR). 2016 Total residents in DLR with a fixed place 81300 of work Persons working in the county of usual 35512 residence, DLR Persons working outside the county of 45788 usual residence,

non-residents working

in DLR Persons commuting into DLR to work Source. CSO

43946

Cars dominate the means of travelling to work of the county’s residents. In terms of travel to work the category “car driver” accounts for 50.4% of the total. Vans account for 2.4%. Train/Dart/Luas accounts for 14.9%. Bus accounts for 8.2%. Bicycles account for 6.1% and walking accounts for 7.3% of all travel to work means.

Section 2. Economic profile of Dún Laoghaire The recently published Small Area Statistics from the 2016 Census of Population provide an informative economic picture of Dún Laoghaire in terms of its parking and 24

retail market factors. The statistical area covered is the local electoral area of Dún Laoghaire which is not exactly equivalent to the town. The population is 43,307 which is a large town catchment population from the perspective of market size. 52.7% of the population is female and 47.3% is male. The age profile is as follows. 17.5% is 14 years and below. 65 years and over account for 19.7% and 15-64 years account for 62.8%. The comparable figures for the state as a whole in 2016 are 0-14 years 21.2%, 65 years and over 13.4% and 15-64 years 65.4%. Dub Laoghaire has a lower proportion of 14 years and under and a substantially higher older population share. The 15 and over population share in Dún Laoghaire is 82.5% compared to 78.8% for the state as a whole. 97.3% of the Dún Laoghaire population are living in private households. The number of private households in Dún Laoghaire is 16.4k. 78.8% of the private households are houses and 20.0% are flats/apartments. 1.1% is other accommodation or not stated. 40.5% of the households are owner-occupied without a mortgage, 27.7% are owneroccupied with a mortgage. 18.8% are rented from a private landlord and 7.8% are rented from the local authority. 0.9% is rented from a voluntary body. By contrast the national figures show that 36.0% of households are owner-occupied without a mortgage, 31.6% are owner-occupied with a mortgage. 8.4% rent from a local authority and 18.2% rent from a private landlord/landlady. 9.9% rent from a voluntary body nationally. The labour market/economic status features of Dún Laoghaire are outlined below in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1 Economic status of Dún Laoghaire and State population aged 15 years and over Economic status At work Looking for first regular

Dún Laoghaire % 51.4 0.5

State % 53.4 0.8

job Unemployed having lost or 4.1

7.1

left previous job Student Home/family Retired Unable to work due to

11.7 8.0 21.0 2.9

11.4 8.1 14.5 4.2

permanent illness Other 0.3 Total 100 Source. Derived from CSO data.

0.4 100

Dún Laoghaire has a smaller proportion of its population at work 51.4% than the State as a whole which is 53.4%. However, retired plus workers are 72.4% in Dún Laoghaire compared to 67.9% in the state as a whole. The retired totals are Dún Laoghaire 21.0% and the State 14.5%. The proportion of the 15 years and over population which is unemployed is 4.6% in Dún Laoghaire compared to the state’s 7.9%. Those unable to work due to health issues are 2.9% in Dún Laoghaire and 4.2% nationally. The shares of students, those on home duties and others are much the same in the two areas. Dún Laoghaire is a relatively affluent area with 55.4% of the population in the categories of professional workers and managers and technical.

There is a population of approximately 9k within ten minutes walking time of Georges St Upper.

Section 3. Context of local and national economic and retail performance The Dún Laoghaire retail sector has experienced very difficult operating conditions over the past several years. However, the weak economic and retail situations were not confined to Dún Laoghaire. The national, regional and county economic and retail peformances were also weak. Overall, retail nationally has not fully recovered from the post 2007 economic collapse; in addition there has been a shift to internet

purchases and the continuing structural shift from main street shopping to large shopping centres. Dún Laoghaire, as a shopping location, is in close geographic competition with two of the dominant shopping locations in Ireland, Dublin City centre and Dundrum Shopping Centre. Dub Laoghaire’s main street shopping is in competition with adjacent shopping centres such as Bloomfield and Dún Laoghaire Shopping Centres, proximate shopping centres such as Blackrock and Frascati shopping centres, and other nearby shopping facilities in addition to the strong locations of Dublin City Centre and Dundrum. This section briefly identifies the national economic and retail performance over the past several years. Economic activity is a significant determinant of the demand for local and commuting travel and of the demand for parking spaces. Following several years of very weak economic performance national economic growth performance over recent years has been excellent and short and medium-term economic growth prospects remain good, despite significant negative international and internal risks including Brexit, USA economic policy, housing and competitiveness. The usual international measure of economic growth is change in the volume of GDP. The national economic growth rate will moderate from 2018 compared with recent years but will still be good. However, this indicator has ceased to be an accurate measure of the performance of the Irish economy especially since 2015, when various aspects of multinational enterprise activity greatly increased the value of GDP without an accompanying increase in “real” domestic economic activity. The CSO has devised a new measure of economic performance, “Gross National Income Adjusted”. Other indicators such as employment and consumption are free of the multinational related distortions. The performance of the national and Dublin economies as illustrated by the changes in employment are shown in Table 3.1. Employment in the national economy was 2.1106 million persons in Quarter 1 2007. It was 2.1464 million persons in quarter 1 2008 and declined each year to 2012 Quarter 1 to a level of 1.8250 million persons a decline of 13.5% or 285,600 persons. Employment increased each year since 2013 and reached 2.0451 million persons in quarter 1 2017.

The current national

employment level is at 95.3% of the peak pre-economic collapse level. Employment 27

is almost back at the pre-collapse level. Since 2012 national employment has increased by 220.1k persons or 12.1%. Dublinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s employment peaked at 636.3 k persons in Quarter1 2008 and declined each year to 2012 when it reached 541.5k persons. Since then it increased each year to reach 627.1k in Quarter 1 2017. The Dublin increase between 2012 and 2017 was 15.8% which is higher than the national increase. Dublinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current employment is at 98.6% of its peak in 2008. In 2008 Dublin had 29.6% of the total national employment. In 2017 this share had increased to 30.7%. Table 3.1 Employment Quarter 1 2007 to Quarter 1 2017, National and Dublin, k persons Quarter 1

2007 628.2

Dublin National 2110.6 Source. CSO

2008 636.3

2009 598.4

2010 565.2

2011 546.3

2012 541.5

2013 547.1

2014 572.9

2015 584.9

2016 611.7

2017 627.2

2146.4

1996.4

1891.9

1841.8

1825.0

1845.6

1888.2

1929.5

1976.5

2045.1

However all sectors have not benefited equally from the aggregate increase. The different sectoral employment performances are shown in Table 3.2 below. While Quarter 1 total employment in 2017 is lower by 4.7% than Quarter 1 2007, construction employment in 2017 is 142.5k compared with 255.8k in 2008, a decline of 44.3%. Industry employment which is mainly manufacturing declined between 2008 and 207 by 7.1%. Services employment increased by 2.8%.

Table 3.2 Person aged 15 years and over in 2008Q Employment (Thousand), NACE Rev 1 2 Economic Sector and Quarter State Agriculture, forestry and fishing (A) Industry (B to E) Construction (F) Services (G to U) Wholesale and retail trade, repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles (G) Transportation and storage (H) Accommodation and food service activities (I) 28

2012Q1

2017Q 1

116.3 284.1 255.8 1,482.0

80.5 107.7 236.0 263.8 103.3 142.5 1,403.3 1,524.0

319.6

271.3 276.5

94.8 132.3

90.2 95.4 117.6 152.2

Information and communication (J) Financial, insurance and real estate activities (K,L) Professional, scientific and technical activities (M) Administrative and support service activities (N) Public administration and defence, compulsory social security (O) Education (P) Human health and social work activities (Q) Other NACE activities (R to U) Not stated All NACE economic sectors Source. CSO

72.2 104.7 111.7 83.1

78.5 101.0 98.0 62.5

92.7 100.4 116.5 72.2

103.4

99.5

100.7

139.7 222.0 98.4 8.1 2,146.4

146.6 158.1 239.6 256.2 98.5 103.1 .. 7.3 1,825.0 2,045.1

Within services, over the 2008 to 2017 period, wholesale and retail employment decreased, accommodation and food services increased substantially. Employment in information and communications also increased substantially as did employment in human health and social work activities and in education. Financial sector employment decreased as did public administration and administrative activities. The sectoral pattern of the Dublin employment change are shown in Table 3.3 for 2008 quarter 1 which is the end of the previous boom, quarter 1 2012 which is around the time when employment started to increase and quarter 1 2017 which is the latest data available.

Table 3.3 Persons aged 15 years and over in Employment (Thousand) , Dublin, NACE Rev 2 Economic Sector and Quarter 2008Q 1

2012Q 1

2017Q 1

Dublin Agriculture, forestry and fishing (A) .. Industry (B to E) 57.9 Construction (F) 58.3 Services (G to U) 516.5 Wholesale and retail trade, repair of motor vehicles and 94.2 motorcycles (G)

.. 40.5 21.0 477.8

.. 49.4 34.1 537.0

75.7

79.6

Transportation and storage (H) Accommodation and food service activities (I) Information and communication (J) Financial, insurance and real estate activities (K,L) Professional, scientific and technical activities (M) Administrative and support service activities (N) Public administration and defence, compulsory social security (O) Education (P) Human health and social work activities (Q) Other NACE activities (R to U) Not stated All NACE economic sectors Source. CSO

35.8 37.4 36.1 57.4 46.9 32.5

33.7 31.3 38.4 51.8 41.3 21.5

37.9 47.1 49.1 55.1 50.7 28.6

34.0

29.1

33.4

37.8 70.5 33.9 2.6 636.3

43.3 75.6 36.0 .. 541.5

42.9 78.9 33.7 3.7 627.2

Overall services employment in Dublin in 2017 is above the 2008 the boom level. Industry and construction employment is still below the 2008 level, especially in the case of construction. Within services, the Dublin sectors which still have lower employment than in 2008 are wholesale and retail, finance, administrative and public administration (slightly). Several sectors have higher 2017 employment than the 2008 level including transport and storage, accommodation and food services, information and communications, professional, education and human, health and social work and â&#x20AC;&#x153;otherâ&#x20AC;? activities. In 2008 there were 58.3k construction jobs in Dublin. The 2017 figure is 34.1k, a decline of 41.5%. The 2017 figure is a substantial increase on the 2012 construction employment of 21k. Wholesale and retail employed 94.2k persons in 2008 in Dublin. The 2017 figure is 79.6k, a decline of 15.5%. Retail has not yet reached its 2007 position despite the good overall economic performance of the recent few years. As shown in Table 3.4 the 2016 retail volume has just about returned to the 2007 level. In value terms 2016 is still below the level of 2007 in both the total retail classification and in retail excluding the motor industry. Retail value in 2016 for the total sector is 14.3% below the 2007 level. In volume terms it is 1.1% below the 2007 level. Excluding the motor industry, the 2016 value is 11.5% below the 2007 level and in the volume terms the 2016 level is 1.2% above the 2007 level. The better performance in value relative to volume is due to the price reductions which have characterised the retail sector over the past several years.

Table 3.4 Retail Sales Index (NACE Rev 2)(Base 2005=100) Year and NACE Group All retail All retail businesses, businesses excluding motor trades Retail Sales Index Value Unadjusted (Base 2005=100) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Retail Sales Index Volume Unadjusted (Base 2005=100) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source. CSO

116.0 110.8 90.9 90.8 88.5 87.9 87.7 91.3 95.8 99.4

115.8 114.9 102.1 99.5 96.0 96.4 96.3 97.8 100.4 102.5

114.2 107.4 92.7 93.9 93.1 92.1 92.7 98.6 106.7 113.0

114.4 111.5 104.1 103.0 100.3 100.1 100.9 104.6 111.0 115.8

As shown below in Table 3.5 consumption measured in constant prices in 2015 was still below the level of 2007, €92.7 billion compared to €93.2 billion. However, the growth rate of 3.3% in 2016 resulted in the 2016 level of consumption of €95.7 exceeding the levels of 2007 and 2008. The consumption growth of the past few years was substantially less than the GDP growth. Consumption volume declined each year between 2008 and 2013 except for 2010. In 2014 it increased by 2.0% and also increased in 2015 (4.2%) and 2016 (3.3%). Table 3.5 Personal consumption expenditure in constant market 2015 prices (Euro Million)

200 7 92. Personal consumption of goods and services t Source. CSO

200 8

200 9

201 0

201 1

201 2

201 3

201 4

201 5

201 6

93,191 93,653

89,27 8

90,11 0

88,62 0

87,83 7

87,24 0

88,98 9

92,72 1

95,74 3

Economic growth projections for both the short and medium-terms are reasonably good. The Government has published short and medium term economic forecasts in the Stability Programme Update and its Summer Economic Statement as shown below in Table 3.6. Table 3.6 Government economic forecasts for 2017-21 % change year on year 2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

(outturn) GDP GNP Consumption Government Investment Exports Imports Employment Unemployment

5.2 9.0 3.0 5.3 45.5 2.4 10.3 2.9 7.9

4.3 4.2 2.8 2.6 -17.1 5.0 -2.0 2.7 6.4

3.7 3.5 2.7 2.1 5.4 5.1 5.3 2.4 5.8

3.1 2.8 2.5 2.0 4.3 4.2 4.5 1.9 5.5

2.7 2.3 2.2 1.9 3.3 3.9 4.2 1.5 5.5

2.5 2.1 2.0 1.8 2.9 3.8 4.0 1.4 5.5

rate % Total

2.020

2.075

2.125

2.165

2.195

2.225

employment million

Source. Stability Programme Update 2017 and Summer Economic Statement 2017. The growth performance will moderate from 2018 onwards compared to the growth rates of recent years but the growth rate will still be good. GDP will grow annually by about 3% between 2017 and 2021 and GNP growth will be about 2.5%. As for previous years the growth of exports and investment will exceed consumption growth. Consumption volume will grow by about 2.5% on average each year from 2017 to 2021 with a slowing to 2% for the last year of the period. Employment will increase by almost 2% each year with a lower growth of 1.5% towards the end of the forecast period. The unemployment rate will fall to below 6% by 2018. The numbers employed will grow from 2.075 million in 2017 to 2.225 million in 2021, an increase of 150k jobs over the five years. Dublin has 30.7% of the

national employment in 2017. Allowing for a more active regional policy over the next few years, if Dublin retained its 30.7% share up to 2021, Dublin employment would increase by 46k. These forecasts take into account the negative effects of Brexit. The forecasts would be higher if Brexit was not occurring. The Department of Finance/ESRI have estimated the medium and long term effects of a hard Brexit. The expectation is: •

Relative to no Brexit. GDP will be 3.5% lower after 5 years and 4% after 10 years

•

Employment will be 2% lower or about 40k after 5 years

•

Unemployment rate will be up 1% point

•

Deficit up by 1% point per year leading to additional national debt of about €20b after 10 years

•

Exports decrease by 4%

•

Exports to UK decrease by about one third, especially bad for food exports

These are very significant negative effects, especially on exports. In assessing the impact it is useful to understand the research methodology. For example, the estimates assume no policy reaction such as measures to improve export competitiveness. It is assumed that the UK will operate the same tariff levels as are currently operated by the EU. This may not be the case. In addition while 3% to 4% is broadly equivalent to one year’s economic growth, some sectors will have a much larger negative effect such as the agri-food sectors. Despite Brexit, as noted above, the Irish economy is expected to grow over the medium to long term by 2.5% to 3% per year. Brexit reduces the rate of growth by the cumulative 4% over the ten years or an average of 0.4% per year. To put it into perspective, in our recent economic decline period, GDP volume declined by 6.9% between 2007 and 2013 and employment declined between Q3 2007 and Q3 2012 by 328k jobs. Dublin’s unemployment rate is the second lowest of the eight regions. The state unemployment rate was 6.7% in Quarter 1 2017. The Mid-East rate was 5.0%. Many of those living in this region work in Dublin. The Dublin unemployment rate was 6.3%. The Dublin maximum unemployment rate in 2011 was 13.1% while the

maximum national rate over the economic crisis period was 15.1%. The regions with the highest unemployment rates were South-East 9.3%, Midlands 7.8% and Border 7.5%. Failte Ireland and the Grow Dublin Tourism Alliance has an ambitious target to achieve a 7% growth in visitor numbers every year over the seven year period from 2013-2020. This would bring the total number of visits to 6.2 million by 2020, with international tourist spending almost doubling to some €2.5billion from the initial base of €1.4 billion. The Grow Dublin Tourism Alliance aims to reposition Dublin as a Top 10 European City destination. This requires many inputs including adequate availability at reasonable prices of Hotel rooms. The July 2017 Dublin Economic Monitor continues with the positive assessment of the Dublin economy of previous monitors. Page 4 states “The latest Dublin PMI data suggest no signs of a let-up in the strong performance of the Capital’s private sector with output growth accelerating from the first three months of the year.” It also notes that…”economic activity in Dublin has continued to gather pace”. (Page 4) The most recent features of the Dublin economy include: 

Unemployment rate in Quarter 1 remaining unchanged from quarter 4 2016 at 6.3%



Moderation in residential rents quarter on quarter



Continued growth in residential property prices



Dublin office rents stable Quarter 2 relative to Quarter 1



Office demand is high in high tech and financial sectors with a decline in the vacancy rate



Public transport trips in Quarter 1 rebounded from a slowing down in Quarter 4 2017 which reflects positive employment and tourism performance



Quarter 1 year on year Dublin Airport arrivals increased by 7.8%



High hotel occupancy rates



High and growing hotel average daily rates

The national economy is continuing to grow and growth is expected for the next several years albeit at a slower rate than previously providing the international

economic and political environment does not deteriorate, despite the expected negatives of Brexit. Dublin is a critical engine of growth in the national economy. As already noted, renewed economic growth over the past few years does not imply that the losses of the economic collapse have already been reversed for all sectors. However, Dublin employment is almost back to peak levels and Dublin services employment is now above pre-economic collapse peak levels. Despite substantial recent improvement and growth in employment and GDP, the retail sector has not fully recovered in value terms overall and in several sub-sectors. Some retail sectors are still substantially below the peak 2007/2008 levels. As indicated in Table 3.7, of thirteen retail categories only one has a higher retail sales in 2016 compared with 2007. Retail sales in non-specialised stores, in which food, beverages or tobacco predominated, increased by 7.2% between 2007 and 2016. The other twelve retail categories have lower sales in 2016 compared with 2007. In some cases the decline is substantial. Books, newspapers and stationary declined by 39.8% as also did electrical goods. Clothing declined by 20.8%. The percentage declines for the twelve sectors are shown below: 

Motor trades -23.9%



Department stores -17.3%



Retail sales of specialised stores which sold food, beverages and tobacco -20.3%



Automotive fuel -14.3%



Pharamaceutical, medical and cosmetic articles -14.6%



Textiles, clothing and footwear -20.8%



Furniture and lighting -39.8%



Hardware, paints and glass -31.6%



Electrical goods -27.4%



Books, newspapers and stationary -39.8%



Other retail sales -31.0%



Bars -21.6%

In more recent years there have been increases in most sectors but these have been insufficient to reverse the earlier declines. The sectoral performances between 2015 and 2016 are shown below: 35



Motor trades: increase



Retail sales of non-specialised stores in which food, beverages and tobacco predominate: increase



Department stores: increase



Retail sales of specialised stores which sold food, beverages and tobacco: increase



Automotive fuel: decrease



Pharamaceutical, medical and cosmetics: increase



Textiles, clothing and footwear: increase



Furniture and lighting: increase



Hardware, paints and glass: increase



Electrical goods: increase



Books, newspapers and stationary: increase



Other retail sales: decrease



Bars: increase

Table 3.7 Retail Sales Index Value Unadjusted (Base 2005=100) by NACE Group and Year Motor trades (45) Retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, beverages or tobacco predominating (4711) Department stores (4719) Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores (4721 to 4729) Retail sale of automotive fuel (4730) Retail sale of pharmaceutical, medical and cosmetic articles (4773 to 4775) Retail sale of textiles, clothing and footwear (4751,4771,4772) Retail sale of furniture and lighting (4759)

2007 2008 116. 96.6 5

2009

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

53.1

61.3

63.0

59.2

58.5

69.0

80.1

88.6

117.7

117.4

116.0

119.0

120.6

122.6

126.2

129.5

90.2

86.4

87.3

85.8

87.8

90.9

92.6

98.0

92.4

87.3

87.0

87.3

84.5

83.9

84.6

100.0

105.9

107.5

111.5

110.5

110.7

102.3

98.5

116.5

110.9

102.4

102.7

99.5

97.5

98.9

101.4

91.7

88.7

85.4

82.4

81.6

83.4

88.3

91.9

66.2

61.8

54.6

51.2

51.1

58.4

65.0

69.3

120. 125.6 8 112. 106.3 0 106. 106.7 1 115. 119.3 0 118. 121.0 8 114. 109.4 8 115. 93.9 2

2010

Retail sale of hardware, paints and glass (4752) Retail sale of electrical goods (4741 to 4743,4754) Retail sale of books, newspapers and stationery (4761,4762) Other retail sales (4753,4763 to 4765,4776 to 4778) Bars (5630) All retail businesses All retail businesses, excluding motor trades All retail businesses, excluding motor trades and bars

118. 108.8 8 115. 102.6 7 107. 102.1 8 116. 112.2 3 105. 101.8 0 116. 110. 0 8 115. 114. 8 9 117. 116. 2 6

88.4

83.1

77.2

72.7

73.5

75.4

78.2

81.2

82.0

79.5

75.6

78.9

77.4

79.6

83.6

84.0

87.0

80.3

72.4

67.9

64.4

63.2

64.8

64.9

91.5

87.5

80.4

76.5

75.1

76.7

81.0

80.2

92.9

82.3

76.4

73.4

73.5

74.7

78.5

82.3

90.9

90.8

88.5

87.9

87.7

91.3

95.8

99.4

102.1

99.5

96.0

96.4

96.3

97.8

100.4

102.5

103.3

100.0

98.6

99.4

100.9

103.4

105.2

Source. CSO The CSO Annual Services Inquiry shows the change in the number of retail and other enterprises nationally since the economic collapse. The latest data refer to 2014. Enterprises are to be distinguished from establishments. An enterprise may operate more than one establishment. Between 2008 and 2014, the number of retail enterprises declined from 25,507 to 24,297, a decline of 1,210 enterprises or 4.7%. The number of enterprises involved in the sale of household equipment declined by 684 or 19.5%. Restaurants and mobile food service activities enterprises increased by 994 enterprises or 16.7%. Legal and accounting activities increased by 9.3%.

Table 3.8 Distribution and Services Enterprises (Number) by NACE Rev 2 Sector. Certain sectors. 2008 and 2014 Retail trade (47) Retail sale in non-specialised stores (471) Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco in specialised stores (472) Retail sale of information and communication equipment in specialised stores (474) Retail sale of other household equipment in specialised stores (475) Retail sale of cultural and recreation goods in specialised stores (476) Retail sale of other goods in specialised stores (477) Retail trade not in stores, stalls or markets (479) Postal and courier activities (53) Restaurants and mobile food service activities (561) Legal and accounting activities (69)

Source. CSO 37

2008 25,507 4,487 3,087 1,040 3,509 1,699 9,303 988 2,889 5,952 10,620

2014 24,297 4,278 3,151 902 2,825 1,516 8,764 1,413 2,757 6,946 11,606

Dún Laoghaire has a substantial number of vacant commercial premises. The DKM GeoView Commercial Vacancy Rates Report provides an overview of commercial vacancy rates in Ireland and in various geographic categories. Vacant commercial property is a national problem and is not confined to Dún Laoghaire. The latest report refers to Quarter 4 2016. The national commercial vacancy rates for Quarter 4 of the four years of the analysis are shown in Table 3.9. The failure of the vacancy rate to decline between Quarter 4 2013 and 2016 is surprising given the substantial economic growth over the period. The vacancy rate was 12.4% in 2013, increased to 12.8% in 2014, declined to 12.6% in 2015 and increased to 13.5% in 2016. The 13.5% rate is the highest of the four years. It would have been reasonable to expect that 2016 would be the lowest vacancy rate of the four years. In absolute numbers the vacant properties increased from 27,585 in 2013 to 28,796 in 2016. Again, in light of the improved economic environment one would have expected a decline in the number of vacancies. It should be noted that the main determinant of the increase in the vacancy rate between 2015 and 2016 is the decline in the number of commercial properties or premises (from 224k to 214k) rather than a big increase in the number of vacant premises (increase from 28,200 to 28,796). The report notes that in 2016…” special emphasis was placed on the small office home office sector resulting in a drop in the overall business premises.” (Page 1)

Table 3.9 National vacancy rates Quarter 4 2013 to 2016 Vacancy

2013 rate 12.4

% Total

2014 12.8

2015 12.6

2016 13.5

223,308

223,107

224,003

213,666

27,585

28,465

28,200

28,796

commercial properties Vacant commercial

properties Source. DKM GeoView Commercial Vacancy Rates Report, Quarter 4 of each year The Dublin (all four Dublin county councils) vacancy rates from this source were 2013, 13.8%; 2014 13.8%; 2015 13.4% and 2016 13.7%. The constancy of the vacancy rate is surprising given the improved economic situation in Dublin over this period. The main implication of the Dublin vacancy rates for this report on parking and retail in Dún Laoghaire is that the high number of vacant commercial premises in Dún Laoghaire is not untypical of the Dublin area as a whole.

The recent Dún Laoghaire BID Business Surveys show indications of improvement. Comparing 2015 with 2014, the 2016 survey reported that 64% of respondents had an increase in turnover, 14% had a decline and 21% had no change. The 2017 survey reported 65% of respondents had an increase in turnover in 2016 compared with 2015. Only 8% had a decrease and 26% were unchanged. There is a large drop in the share reporting a decline between the 2017 and 2016 surveys. 52% of respondents reported an increase in footfall between 2016 and 2015, with 17% reporting a decline and 31% unchanged. However, given the improvement in the economy in 2016 the 48% of respondents not reporting an increase in footfall is surprising as is the 34% not reporting an increase in turnover. In both surveys parking was ranked as the number one problem. Other problems in the 2017 survey were empty retail units, footfall and variety of shops.

Section 4. Context of parking and retail in urban areas Parking in urban areas, especially in the central shopping areas of towns, is a well recognised national and international retail, urban and town planning problem. This arises from the limited availability of parking relative to demand, the cost of parking and the easy availability of, and sometimes free, parking at out of town shopping centres. A Fianna Fail policy document, “Streets Ahead”, proposed as solutions to the parking issue; a flexible parking charges system which encourages short stays, rewards return 39

shoppers and removes disproportionate fines and includes a rebalancing to remove the advantage of out of town centres without disadvantaging shoppers. The policy document proposed a lower parking fee for shorter stays increasing to larger charges for longer periods. Flexibility in charges might include, for example, free periods or “Free Fridays”. As park of the consultation process in 2015 for the county Local Economic and Community Plan the business sector was asked its opinions of issues. One of the objectives in the draft Socio-Economic Staement was to “promote and improve the prosperity of town centres and retail centres”. 90% of business respondents were either very supportive or supportive of this objective. A wide range of issues and possible improvements were raised in the consultation process by the business sector. The top issue, raised by 17.8% of respondents, was the desire for improved consultation and engagement with the local council. Number 10 in the list of issues was improving the availability and cost of parking which was raised by 3.3% of respondents. RGDATA examined the town centre parking issue in a 2012 report. As the report stated, the aim was…”to address many of the challenges town centres are now facing due to restrictive parking regimes” (page 2). These restrictive parking regimes included pay parking, fines and clamping. This was being worsened by the growth of out of town shopping facilities which offered free or cheap parking. The report argues that a vibrant and commercially successful town centre is vital for the success of a town. RGDATA argued for new national Government guidelines for local authorities on the operation of town centre parking regimes and for measures to counter balance the pull of shoppers from town centres to out of town retail facilities. The new guidelines would deal with: 

Innovative and fair pricing measures by local authorities to provide more flexible parking options for customers which would equalise the cost of parking between town centres and out of town facilities.



Local authorities to review the quality, safety and proximity of their parking offering to town amenities and shops.



Flexible payment methods including both payment modes and period of coverage.



Pricing strategies which encourage short stay trips relative to long stay commuter parking.



Graded fines relative to length of overstay.



Standard set of parkers rights.

RGDATA acknowledged the sound rationale behind the introduction of town centre parking charges including, the generation of income for local authorities, management of town centre parking provision to ensure parking spaces are not taken by commuters, the availability of parking spaces for visitors, including shoppers, to town centres and the encouragement of alternatives to car usage. However, RGDATA argued that these objectives were not being realised. In contrast, shoppers were being discouraged from using the proximate town centre and encouraged to out of town retail facilities which increased car usage and threatened many enterprises in town centres and the commercial rates base. Dún Laoghaire Business Improvement District (DLBID) Company published a five year strategy for Dún Laoghaire Town in 2015. It noted the weak position of Georges St which is the main retail location in Dún Laoghaire. It commented that Georges St. was “a mixed quality range of shops and development” and presented “a major negative feature to the resident, the shopper, the visitor and the media.” The main street suffered in terms of” its retail offer, spend and streetscape”. However, despite its retail weaknesses, the large scale of the retail offering of Dún Laoghaire was recognised. The BID strategy reported 139 retail enterprises on Georges St, 48 off Georges St and 26 on the Marine Road and coast, a total of 213 retail enterprises in Dún Laoghaire Town. There was also a significant presence of national and international retail brands in the town including Dunnes Stores, Supervalu, Tesco, Penneys, Boots, Argos, Eason, Specsavers, Lifestyle Sports and Meadows and Byrne. The BID strategy welcomed the fact “that the Council has developed a significant waterfront facility of great merit”.

One of the options considered but rejected in formulating the strategy was to encourage the town into an era where the town centre became “car free”. The ten strategic priorities of the strategy are: 

Revitalisation of Georges St, including dividing the street into distinct quarters



Development of a hyper local economy which would strengthen links between the core catchment population and the retail services of the town and would increase the ease of locals shopping in the town



Improving mobility and permeability and attempting to generate a reputation as a walkable and cycle-friendly town



Increasing IADT integration with the town



Developing Dún Laoghaire as a smart town, including e-signage and apps relating to parking



Encourage retailers to extend their hours through developing a viable night time economy



Enhance Dún Laoghaire as a safe town



Improve connectivity of the town with the county



Establish a property forum and a retail forum



Establish a strategic partnership between the key players

A 2014 UK report on ”In-Town Parking: what works? Innovative practices in parking provision” (ATCM 2014) examined ways to improve town parking. The report concluded that parking in town centres is a complex issue and problem. The problem arises because growth of car ownership has exceeded town centre parking capacity, parking provision is costly and it has to be financed, the presence of out of town facilities with easier and cheaper parking access and the fact that parking involves numerous stakeholders with conflicting objectives. Several key factors were identified for successful parking policy including: 

Integrated transport and accessibility strategy. Parking policy should be a subset of a transport and accessibility strategy, for example, poor investment in public transport can encourage the growth of car use which adds to parking problems.



Information on the determinants of parking demand and the needs of parking customers. For example the UK town of Braintree attempted to attract people into town after 3 pm on Monday to Fridays by charging 10 pence to park. The 10 pence was used as opposed to free to collect data on the demand for and use of parking facilities.



Minimising traffic in the core. Responding to the increase in car use by increasing the supply of parking is not always possible. Hence efficient parking policy should include measures to reduce the amount of traffic in the town centre.



Intelligent and flexible parking tariffs. This refers to a tariff system which, instead of being a single flat rate tariff, varies relating to demand, low and peak periods or using low prices in particular periods such as Christmas.



Modern payment methods. Mobile and card payments facilitate the customer.



Wayfinding . Increased use of technology to provide information to motorists on parking availability



Communication and transparency between all stakeholders

It should be appreciated that these “success factors” do not guarantee success for all or for specific stakeholders. Rather they improve the town centre parking situation from what it would be otherwise. The basic issue of high desired use of cars and limited absorption capacity remains. A 2015 report for the Welsh Government assessed the impact of car parking charges on town centre footfall. (mruk research 2015). It concluded that visitors to town centres felt that general availability of parking spaces was more important than cost of parking. Traffic flow and congestion and parking signage were also as important, or more important, than cost in determining decisions to shop in the town centre. Out of town shopping centres with free parking were major adverse determinants of activity in town centres. “Free” parking strategies in town centres did not encourage footfall and economic activity because spaces were primarily taken by town centre workers on an all-day basis and had a negative impact on customer use of the town centre. It also concluded that local authorities were too focused on parking as a revenue stream with insufficient focus on the impact of charges on footfall and shoppers. It

noted that the large majority of town centre business operators believed that parking charges were a significant negative determinant of football.

Section 5. Overview of parking system and finances in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown and Dún Laoghaire This section presents an overview of, and recent trends in, the parking system in Dún Laoghaire Rathdown and Dún Laoghaire. Sub-section 5.1 summarises the objectives of the council parking scheme. Sub-section 5.2 identifies the main 44

financial aspects of the council managed element of the parking system. 5.3 compares the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown parking finances with other Dublin local authorities and with Cork City Council. Section 5.4 identifies the Council services financed by the parking income. Section 5.5 presents an overview of the parking capacity. In addition to the council pay and display system there are substantial parking facilities provided by other organisations, notably facilities associated with shopping centres. 5.6 summarises the prices of different parking facilities and the relative competitiveness of the council pay and display rates. Section 5.7 examines trends in parking tickets and fines. 5.8 examines the utilisation of the parking spaces in the pay and display system in Dún Laoghaire. 5.9 summarises the proportion of pay and display parking transactions which result in fines. 5.1 Objectives of the pay and display parking scheme According to the 2007 council guidelines for pay and display parking schemes, the main reasons for implementing Pay and Display parking controls are: 

To manage car parking within the County more effectively in areas where there is evidence of excess demand for the available spaces,



To increase turnover of parking spaces both on-street and in off-street car parks in areas that are designated as towns and villages in order to facilitate motorists who park for short durations at the expense of those who park for extended periods,



To improve the prospects of residents accessing parking at or near their homes,



To promote the use of alternative modes of travel (e.g. public transport, cycling and walking),



To discourage extraneous parking in residential areas which has a detrimental impact on the quality of life of residents,



To generate revenue for the Council which can be used to fund expenditure by the Council in the roads/traffic area.

5.2 Financial aspects of the parking system The financial aspects of the council parking system are used to provide an overview of its structure and trends. The data are from the council’s annual financial statements. In 2016, the council spent €3.076 million on the maintenance and management of car parking. The revenue generated was €6.713 million in parking fees and parking fines. Parking fees include the pay and display revenues and the resident permit fees. This generates a net revenue arising from the operation of the pay and display system and the other aspects of parking fees of €3.6 million which is available for financing council services. The fine revenue in 2016 was €1.204 (including on and off street pay and display) and €5.015 was collected as on and off street parking fees or charges. The comparable figures for the past several years are shown in Table 5.2.1. There have been changes in the accounting practices relating to parking finances which influence comparisons. Pay & Display Parking Income and Expenditure were reflected in the Revenue Budget for the first time in 2012. Previously Expenditure went into Capital Codes. Up to and including 2011, the annual income figure is shown/calculated less expenditure. This finance process changed in 2012, when income and expenditure were first reflected in the revenue Budget. The perceived increase in income from €4.4 million in 2011 to over €6 million from 2012 onwards, is a result of this change in the financial reporting process.The data refers to the total county of Dún Laoghaire- Rathdown. The period covered is 2009 to 2016. As already noted, there was a significant change in 2012 where expenditure increased from €802k in 2011 to €2.927 million but this reflects the new system of financial reporting rather than fundamental changes in parking behaviour or policy. Since 2012 the financial reporting and management structure has stayed much the same. Consequently it is more appropriate to use the period starting with 2012 for comparisons of the expenditure and income indicators.

On the earlier 2009 to 2011 financial reporting structure, income from car parking dropped in 2010 to € 4.426 from the 2009 figure of €5.533. The 2011 figure was much the same as in 2010. Expenditure stayed much the same in the three years from 2009 to 2011. As a consequence of these two changes the annual net income from parking to the council decreased from €4.674 million in 2009 to €3.630 million in 2011. Table 5.2.1 Financial aspects of Dún Laoghaire Rathdown parking system 2009 to 2016 € million Expenditure on car parking

Income from car Net income parking charges generated for and fines council

2009

0.859

5.533

4.674

2010

0.805

4.426

3.621

2011

0.802

4.432

3.630

2012

2.927

6.027

3.100

2013

2.791

5.871

3.080

2014

2.647

5.991

3.344

2015

2.795

6.364

3.569

2016

3.076

6.713

3.637

% change 2012/2016

5.1

11.4

17.3

Source. Annual Financial Statements, audited and unaudited. Note that the source gives two figures for car parking income, the Service Division B09 entry and the Appendix 4 Analysis of Income from goods and services. The above data uses the B09 figures. Fr example the 2016 B09 figure was €6,712,618 and the Appendix 4 figure was €6,782,791. Note change in financial reporting procedures in 2012.

As already noted there were significant changes in 2012 with a large increase in both expenditure and income due to financial reporting changes. However, the net effect of these two changes was a decrease in annual council net revenue of €530k.

Since 2012 expenditure has increased from €2.927 million to €3.076 million. However, there has been significant variability year on year. Expenditure declined in 2013 and again in 2014. It increased in 2015 and increased again in 2016. Income from charges and fines decreased in 2013 compared with 2012 but increased in each of the three years of 2014, 2015 and 2016. Between 2012 and 2016 the annual net income for the council decreased slightly in 2013 and increased each year since 2014. Currently (2016) the net income is €3.637 million compared to €3.100 in 2012. Between 2012 and 2016 expenditure increased by 5.1%, income increased by 11.4% and net income increased by 17.3%. The cumulative parking related net income in the 2012-2016 period is € 16.730 million. The breakdown of parking income is shown in Table 5.2.2. This is a useful indicator of the relative roles of fines and parking charges in the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown parking system. There is little difference between the 2016 and 2015 figures. The total parking income generated in 2016 was €6.388 million. Residents’ parking permits provided only €131.9k or 2.1% of this total. Visitor permits provided only €85.5k or 1.3%. Resident and visitor permits generate a very small proportion of the parking revenues. Off street meters (in council car parks) generate €1.1047 million or 17.3%. On street meters generate the largest flow of revenue, €3.9107 million or 61.2% of the total. On street fines generated € 1.0354 million or 16.2% and off street fines generated €169.1k or 2.6%. It is notable that the ratio of fines to meter revenue in the on street category is 26.5% compared to 15.3% in the off street category. This suggests either a higher level of enforcement in the on street category and/or different compliance patterns in the two categories. The main points from the examination of the parking revenue is that 

On street meters provide 61.2% of the revenue or income



Off street meters provide 17.3% of income



On street fines generate 16.2% of income



The ratio of on street fines to meter income is 26.5%



The ratio of off street fines to meter income is 15.3%

Table 5.2.2 Breakdown of parking income 2015 and 2016 Dún LaoghaireRathdown

Off Street Meters Suspensions Off Street Residents Permits On Street Meters On Street Parking Fines Suspension of P&D On Street Rescinding of P&D Bays Visitors Parking Permits Court Costs Off Street Fines Barrier Key Deposit Parking Accrual 23% Debtor AFS Parking Accrual Debtor AFS Parking Accrual Debtor AFS Parking Accrual Debtor AFS Total Income

2015 €958,496.51 €425.00 €148,808.04 €3,905,064.31 €1,081,889.97 €33,999.89 €5,219.51 €79,808.28 €29,620.00 €256,672.61 -€500.00 -€47,678.23 -€193,282.86 -€5,845.00 -€1,074.00 €6,251,624.03

2016 €1,104,715.08 €0.00 €131,922.90 €3,910,714.72 €1,035,371.99 €66,765.00 €18,100.00 €85,485.47 €11,105.00 €169,122.00

-€145,000.00

€6,388,302.16

Source. Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council A range of different payment for parking options are provided by the Council, including coin, credit card, wave and pay (contactless at the smart meters) and Parkingtag (remote/mobile payment option). These increase the ease of making parking charge payments.

Parkingtag was introduced in Dún Laoghaire Rathdown in 2013, and has proven to be popular with customers. The growth of the income from Parkingtag year on year since 2013 is shown below. From €411k in 2014, it grew to €1.107 million in 2016. Table 5.2.3 Parkingtag income 2013 to 2017 € 2013

91,962

2014

411,385

2015

727,636

2016 1,107,414 2017 2017

790,348 (to the end of July) 1,300,000 (projected 2017 income from Parkingtag)

The Parkingtag figure for 2017 is projected to be €1,300,000, a €200,000 increase on 2016 figures. Given that the income at the meters in 2016 was €5.016 million, this means that 22% of parking meter payments were via Parkingtag for the county as a whole. The breakdown of payment methods for the first seven months of 2017 is shown below, coin payments has continued to decline and were 64% of meter income in the Jan-July 2017 period compared with 69% in the same period of 2016: 

Credit card payments at meters (card inserted into the meter and contactless/wave & pay) to end July 2017. €322,111.80 paid via credit card (including contactless/wave & pay) up to the end of July 2017. This compares with €313,148.30 in the same period of 2016.



Parkingtag payments. €790,348.48 collected to the end of July 2017 compared with €615,368.60 in the same period of 2016



Coin payments. €1,980,230.93 collected to the end of July 2017 compared with €2,072,909.25 in the same period of 2016.



Total meter income in 2016 and 2017 (Jan-July). The above collection rates give a total figure of €3,092,691.24 collected so far to the end of July 2017 compared with €3,001,426.15 in the same period of 2016.

5.3 Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown parking finances compared with other Dublin local authorities and with Cork City Council The financial features of Dún Laoghaire and Rathdown parking finances are compared with the other Dublin local authorities and Cork City Council in Table 5.3.1. Different parking systems operate in the councils selected and they do not fulfil the same economic function. For example, Dublin provides substantial national economic roles greatly in excess of its direct population. Cork city provides services to the county Cork area with a population of 416.6k. Therefore exact comparisons are not intended and are inappropriate. However, the value of the comparison is that it shows the relative financial position of each council parking system and it provides useful initial picture of relative positions. The Dublin local authorities are chosen because they are proximate and also urbanised. Cork city is included as a relevant city council.

Table 5.3.1 Comparison of Dún Laoghaire Rathdown council parking system finances with other local authorities. 2016 Dun-

Dublin City

Fingal

Laoghair

South Dublin

Cork City

e Rathdow n Population

217.3

553.2

296.2

278.7

125.6

3.076

11.831

0.879

0.673

4.528

6.713

32.349

1.859

0.695

8.142

3.713

20.518

0.980

0.022

3.614

218.2

273.4

211.5

103.3

179.8

2016 k persons Expenditure on parking €m Income from parking €m Net income €m Expenditure per head of populatio n€ Income per head of populatio n€ Income relative to expendit ure % Source. Various Annual Financial Staements. Cork and South Dublin are for 2015. The others are for 2016.

South Dublin and Fingal parking finances are very different to Dún Laoghaire Rathdown. Both spend much less on parking. The expenditure of each is well

under €1 million. Income is also much lower in these two local authorities especially in South Dublin with an income of €695k. Cork City, with a much smaller population than Dún Laoghaire- Rathdown spends a much higher amount on parking, €4.528 million. Dublin City spends €11.831 million on parking. All except South Dublin generate a substantial income relative to the expenditure. Dublin City generates the highest ratio of income to expenditure. This is followed by Dún Laoghaire Rathdown but its ratio of 2.182 is close to Fingal and Cork City. South Dublin’s parking income is almost the same as its expenditure. On a per head of population basis Dún Laoghaire spends €14 on parking compared to €36 in Cork City and €21 in Dublin City. Fingal and South Dublin are very far behind these levels with €3 and €2 respectively. In terms of income generated per head of population, Dún Laoghaire- Rathdown’s €31 is well behind the Dublin City figure of €58 and the Cork City figure of €65. Overall, Dún Laoghaire- Rathdown’s pattern of parking finances is close to Dublin City and Cork City and very different to Fingal and South Dublin. However, Dublin City and Cork City each collect more parking revenue per head of population than Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown. 5.4 Council services financed by parking income As shown below in Table 5.4.1, benefits flow from the generation of the parking income. Section 36 (11) (a) of the Road Traffic Act, 1994, specifies that parking fees from a Pay Parking Scheme shall be disposed of in such a manner as the Road Authority may, by resolution, determine. The County Council determines that income in the sum of €6,275,000 from the pay and display scheme be included in the annual budget for the financial year ended 31 st December 2017 and that this sum be used for works in Division B including the Footpath Improvement Programme as set out below: The 2013 and 2016 allocations are shown to illustrate both the current structure of use of the income and the trend over the past few years. The 2017 budget provision is also shown. Of the 2013 total gross income of €5.840 million, €2.484 million was spent on the provision of the parking service. The remaining €3.356 was spent on 53

a range of services including footpath improvement, road maintenance materials, public lighting, signing, traffic management, school warden service and grass cutting. The 2016 pattern of allocation shows some changes from the 2013 pattern. Allocation to the footpath improvement programme increased greatly from €350k to €780k. Public lighting’s allocation declined substantially. Road maintenance’s allocation also declined. Grass cutting was not included in 2016. Signing and lining, traffic management signal maintenance and the school warden service broadly maintained their levels. The 2017 overall income is projected to increase and this has facilitated a substantial allocation increase for traffic management signal maintenance.

Table 5.4.1 Expenditure of parking income 2013 and 2016 and projected 2017 Item of expenditure Maintenance & Management of Car Parks Operation of Street Parking Parking Enforcement Footpath Improvement Programme Road maintenance - materials Public Lighting Signing & Lining Contract Traffic Management Signal Maintenance School Warden Service Grass Cutting TOTAL

2013 388,700 1,048,200 1,047,100 350,000 486,100 1,185,000 240,000 400,400 579,400 115,100 5,840,000

Source. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council 5.5 Overview of the parking capacity and prices There are about 4500 parking spaces in Dún Laoghaire town available to the public between private and council parking spaces including on street spaces and off street car parks. In addition there are private parking facilities for both residents and businesses. Parking on street in the county costs either €1.00 or €1.50 for hour plus the 15 minute's grace period and there is a maximum stay of 3 hours. Some few locations have a shorter maximum stay period and some locations allow all-day parking. Most 54

2016 355,900 1,109,000 1,218,700 780,000 329,100 859,000 259,000 410,000 579,300

360,1 1,099,2 1,220,1 780,0 250,0 904,2 259,0 796,3 606,1

5,900,000

6,275

of Dún Laoghaire is on the €1.50 tariff but some locations are on €1 and some are allday locations. The all-day parking is available for between €3 and €10. There are 2,012 on street parking council pay and display bays in Dún Laoghaire Town and the council has issued about 1,400 permits to Dún Laoghaire residents (there are about 3,700 resident permits countywide and 6,110 on street pay and display council parking spaces in the county). In addition the council provides 268 off street pay and display parking spaces in Dún Laoghaire. Parking permits are not issued to businesses in Dún Laoghaire. Residents parking permits may be used by residents to park all day, even on a 3 hour maximum stay street. However in the business centre of Dún Laoghaire, some parts of the streets off Georges Street are also designated 'permits not valid'. Residents permits may not be used to park on these streets. The aim is to prevent all day parking by holders of resident’s permits in the business heart of the town which would prove detrimental to business. 'Permits not Valid' locations: Georges Street Lower & Upper Cumberland Street (1 side permits not valid) Sussex Street Marine Road Patrick Street (the lower half of the street is permits not valid) Northumberland Avenue (the lower half of the street is permits not valid) Corrig Avenue (lower half of the street is permits not valid) Clarinda Park West (lower half of the street is permits not valid) Up to 2011 Dún Laoghaire was one large zone where resident permit holders could park anywhere in the zone. The Council assessed that this resulted in large numbers of permits being used all-day or for prolonged periods in the centre of the town, including those working in the town who lived on the outskirts. To resolve the issue the Council split the Dún Laoghaire zone into 9 smaller zones during 2011. A resident’s permit is valid only for the allocated zone. The range of car parks is outlined below with their main charges.



LexIcon

Opening hours: 7am – 11pm 

Rate: €2.40 per hour



All day parking rate of €6.00 + €4.00 for overnight



Number of spaces: 100



Pavilion



Special rates: o

€4.20 (18:00hrs – Close), Overnight: €6.20 (18:00hrs – 08:00hrs)

Weekly, Monthly & Student Rates available. Contact car park.

Special Saturday & Sunday rate from opening until 7pm- max charge €6.00.



Opening Times o

Monday to Thursday: 07:00 to 23:00

Friday & Saturday: 07:00 to 00:00

Sunday: 10:00 to 22:30



Charges: €2.40 per hour/€12.00 more then 5 hours



Number of spaces: 322



Dún Laoghaire Shopping Centre



350 Parking Spaces



Mon – Sat: 8am – 9pm



Sun & Bank Holidays: 9am – 7.30pm



Rates: o

Hourly Rate: €2.00

Daily: €8

Weekly evening rate €3 (from 6pm to 9pm), minimum charge €2 per hour

Weekend all day rate €3

Weekly ticket €20

Monthly ticket €70



Quarterly €200

Yearly €750

Overnight €48

Callout fee afterhours €120

Lost tickets €8

If a customer spends over €30 or more at SuperValu Dún Laoghaire, SuperValu will deduct the cost of one hours parking from the ticket.



Bloomfield Shopping Centre



524 Parking Spaces



Mon – Fri: 8am – 10pm



Sat: 8am – 9pm



Sun: 10am – 8pm



Rates:



Hourly Rate: €2.40

Max 24hr Charge: €15

Prebook online 

Day Parking (9am – 7pm): €7



24 Hour Parking €12



Evening/Overnight (4pm – 9am): €4

Spend over €30 in Tesco and they will validate your parking ticket for up to 2 hours



IMC Cinema Car Park



207 parking spaces



Hourly Rate: €2



Daily: €8



The IMC Car Park offers 2 hours 30 minutes free parking when visiting the cinema.



Old Harbour



Hourly Rate: €2 (minimum payment is €2)



Daily: €4 Carlisle Pier Car Park

  



Hourly Rate: €2 Daily: €5 Dún Laoghaire Harbour Underground Car Park o

Hourly Rate: €2

Daily: €5

Council parking charges in the other council areas in Dublin are shown below. The standard on- street parking charge in Dublin City very high demand areas is €2.90 per hour. However, there are zones with lower charges down to the lowest rate of €0.60 per hour in some suburban villages. €2.90 refers to the very high demand zones. High demand zones are €2.40 per hour. Medium demand zones are €1.60 per hour and low demand zones are €1.00 per hour. South County has rates of €1.00 to €1.50 per hour. The Fingal rate is usually €1.00 per hour. Rates in adjacent shopping centre car parks are referred to below. Dundrum shopping centre operates a rate of €3 for the first hour, with the next two hours free and €3 per hour after 3 hours. Between 6pm to 11 pm there is a flat €3 fee. The cost therefore depends on the length of time. One hour or less costs €3 which is high compared to Dún Laoghaire. Two hours costs €1.50 per hour which is the same as Dún Laoghaire and three hours cost €1 per hour which is cheaper than Dún Laoghaire. Four hours would cost €1.50 per hour. There are expenditure related parking charge concessions in the Tesco car park in Dundrum shopping centre. Frascati shopping centre car park charges €1 per hour.

5.7 Trends in parking tickets and fines The long term trend in parking tickets is shown in Table 5.7.1. The current operator of the parking service began operations in February 2013. In 2009, there were 41,109 parking tickets issued. This dropped to 34,096 in 2012. There were large decreases in 2010, 2012 and 2013. The lowest annual number in the 2009-2016 period was 32,025 58

in 2013. There were small increases in each of 2014 (a total of 32,635 tickets), 2015 (33,116) and 2016 (33,149). The current (2016) parking tickets total of 33,149 is significantly less than the 2009 total of 41,109. There was a decline of 19.4% between 2009 and 2016. Between 2013 and 2016 there was an increase of 1,124 tickets or 3.5%. The contract Terms with DLR Parking Services include a requirement of 2,700 valid parking tickets per calendar month which is 32,400 per year. The average achieved in the three years 2014, 2015 and 2016 is 32,967. Table 5.7.1 Parking tickets issued each year 2009 to 2016 Dún LaoghaireRathdown year Parking

2009 41109

tickets Change

2010 37711

2011 37317

2012 34096

2013 32025

2014 32635

2015 33116

2016 33149

-3398

-394

-3221

-2071

+610

+481

+33

relative to previous year Source. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council There was also a substantial decrease in the number of tickets issued in Dún Laoghaire over the past few years, as shown in Table 5.7.2. In 2011 there were 12,112 parking tickets in Dún Laoghaire. By 2016 this had declined to 8,902 tickets, a decrease of 26.5%. However, the decrease has not been continuous over the period. The lowest annual total was in 2013, with 8585 tickets. Since 2013 the number of Dún Laoghaire tickets has remained much the same. The total increased to 9150 in 2014 and increased again in 2015 to 9218. There was a decline in the 2016 level to 8902. Dún Laoghaire’s share of the total county parking tickets declined from 32.5% in 2011 to 26.9% in 2016. The 2016 share is much the same as the 2013 share of 26.8%. The share has decline slightly in 2015 and 2016. Table 5.7.2 Parking tickets in Dún Laoghaire 2011-2016 Parking

2011 12112

2012 11026

2013 8585

tickets

2014 9150

2015 9218

2016 8902

Dún

32.5

32.3

26.8

28.0

27.8

26.9

Laoghaire share

total county % Source. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council The parking fines are for a variety of offences. While the largest single category is pay and display/permit offences, these accounted for only 61% of parking fines in 2016. This is similar to the pay and display proportion in 2011 but there were significant changes within the period. The maximum pay and display share was in 2013 when it reached 73.6%. Thereafter the share declined to 66.3% in 2014, remained at 66.1% in 2015 and dropped again to 61.0% in 2016. The next largest category is parking in prohibited places such as on yellow lines and it was 18.3% in 2016. This compares with a 2011 share of 18.6% and a 2015 share of 15.9%. The “other” category including bus lanes and cycleway parking was 12.5% in 2016 and this category’s share has increased substantially since 2013. Disabled bay parking offences has stayed around 2%. Parking on footpaths was 6.2% in 2016 compared with 9.0% in 2011. The key point from the data is that pay and display offences which includes both on and off street parking made up 61%, less than two thirds of all the parking offences in 2016 and this share has declined since 2013.

Table 5.7.3 Breakdown of parking offences. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown % Parking 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 offence (Feb to Dec) Footpath, 9.0 6.3 7.5 5.5 5.9 6.2 grass margin, median strip 60

Prohibited places (loading bay/ SYL,DYL Pay and display/permit area Disabled parking bay Other (bus stop, bus lane, cycle track, school entrance, clearway, traffic signals)

18.6

15.6

13.9

18.2

15.9

18.3

59.3

72.6

73.6

66.3

66.1

61.0

2.5

1.5

1.7

1.9

1.7

2.1

10.7

4.0

3.2

8.2

10.4

12.5

Source. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council The distribution of parking offences within the county is not included in parking annual reports since the change of operator but such data are available for Dún Laoghaire from the 2011 annual report and were also provided on request for the 2016 structure. These are reported on below. As noted above there were 12,112 parking offences in Dún Laoghaire in 2011. 7,065 of these were pay and display offences. This was 58.3% of the total. The next highest categories in 2011 were: 

Parking a non-goods vehicle in a loading bay



Parking on a double yellow line

708



Parking on a footway

584



Wrongful use of a disabled persons parking bay

349



Parking a goods vehicle in a loading bay for over 30 minutes 295



Parking in a taxi stand

2813

125

The 2016 structure is reported below. There were 8902 fines issued in Dún Laoghaire in 2016 of which 5916 were pay and display offences. This was 66.5% of the total offences. The other categories in 2016 were: 

Parking a non-goods vehicle in a loading bay



Parking on a double yellow line

544



Wrongful use of a disabled persons parking bay

340

1351



Parking on a footway

307



Parking in a taxi stand

168



Parking a goods vehicle in a loading bay for over 30 minutes 113

In 2016, in Dún Laoghaire, a third of parking fines were for offences other than pay and display. Between 2011 and 2016, in Dún Laoghaire the total number of parking offences decreased from 12112 to 8902. Pay and Display offences declined from 7065 to 5916 but their share of total increased from 58.3% to 66.5%. In the other main offences, wrongful use of a loading bay decreased from 2813 to 1351, parking on a double yellow line decreased from 708 to 544, parking on a footway decreased from 584 to 307, wrongful use of a disabled persons space decreased from 349 to 340, parking in a taxi stand increased from 125 to 168 and overstaying in a loading bay decreased from 295 to 113.

It is informative to further disaggregate the pay and display offences in Dún Laoghaire. There are five such offences: 

On-Street Pay and Display offence. 15 minute Grace period observed by the warden before the fine was issued. Usually this is where there is no P&D ticket displayed on the vehicle at all. In 2016 there were 3521 such fines in Dún Laoghaire.



On-Street Pay and Display offence. Instant fine issued. This is where the vehicle in question has a P&D ticket displayed which has expired by more than 15 minute grace period allowed. In 2016 there were 2075 such fines in Dún Laoghaire.



Overstaying the 3 hour max stay designation. In 2016 there were 129 such fines.



Off Street (Car Park) Pay and Display offence. 15 minute Grace period was observed by the warden before the fine was issued. Usually this is where there is no P&D ticket displayed on the vehicle at all. In 2016 there were 153 such fines.



Off-Street (Car Park) Pay and Display offence. Instant fine issued. This is where the vehicle in question has a P&D ticket displayed which has expired

by more than the 15 minute grace period allowed. In 2016 there were 38 such fines. Of the 5916 total Dún Laoghaire pay and display fines in 2016, 5725 or 96.8% were on street. 61.5% of these related to situations where there was no parking ticket displayed allowing for the grace period. 36.2% related to expired tickets. In short, the much bigger source of fines relates to situations where tickets have not been purchased and the smaller proportion of fines relate to expiry of paid time. The very small number of fines relating to overstaying the three hour limit is notable.

5.8 The utilisation and turnover of the on-street parking spaces in the pay and display system A guiding principle for urban shopping area/town centre parking is a pricing system and regime which encourages short term parking and high turnover of parking spaces and discourages long term or commuter parking. The aim is to facilitate frequent short occupancy stays in parking spaces which support retail and other business transactions in the town or centre thereby maximising the number of customers for retail and other business enterprises and maximising the number of uses of a parking space. There are various pricing systems and regimes which could be used to support this objective. The Dún Laoghaire parking regime imposes a three hour limit on stays and prohibits immediate (within one hour) occupation of a proximate space. This ensures, subject to compliance, that an occupant of a parking space must move on within the three hours. This ensures turnover every three hours at minimum. However, the pricing regime charges the same rate of €1.50 per hour for each of the three hours without allowing for the two 15 minute grace periods. An alternative pro-turnover pricing regime would include an upward movement in charge for each additional period, for example, first hour free, second hour €2 per hour, third hour €3 per hour. Of course, depending on the pattern of parking length, a pricing regime like this could result in significantly lower revenue. The issue of turnover of parking spaces was examined through two data sources.

A survey of space occupation and utilisation was undertaken by the parking service supplier as part of the research exercise. In addition, data on the number of meter transactions was obtained from the parking service provider to further examine the utilisation pattern. This was based on a sample of parking transactions. Due to data constraints the sample of transactions relates to transactions paid for by Parkingtag. The first sample relates to April to June 2017 and covers the DH zone of central DĂşn Laoghaire, Blackrock and Dundrum. A second sample covers the full 2016 Parkingtag transactions. One of the recommendations of this report is that the overall payments database should be developed to facilitate additional information on the behavioural aspects of the pay and display parking sector. There are data constraints in identifying the exact pattern of utilisation even with the data which was collected for the report.. For example, a car might park for, or about, the maximum three hour period and then swop with a car in, or independently move to, a nearby (legally acceptable) bay. This would be counted as two exits and two arrivals whereas it is really not a turnover but a continuing occupancy of the two spaces. The occupancy survey was undertaken over eight days in February 2017. Despite the interpretation issues, the findings give some indication of bay occupancy, if not of turnover. The turnover issue is examined by the transactions data. However, it is reasonable to assume that, in general, stays did not exceed the legal limit, due to the high level of enforcement. The details of the streets covered are shown below. A total of 16 streets and 363 spaces were each surveyed eight times. The streets are ranked according to occupancy level as shown in Table 5.8.1. The data should be interpreted as being derived form each street being surveyed once per day on eight different days, the total number of bays was identified and the percentage of those occupied were reported. For example, Mulgrave St has 23 spaces. Over eight days this is 184 bays, of which 163 were occupied, giving an occupancy rate of 88.59%. There are high occupancy rates, which indicate a high level of demand. However, there is also some capacity as eight streets had occupancy rates of below 85%. These eight streets accounted for 237 spaces. Four streets had an occupancy rate of more than 90% and two of these were above 97%. Overall, on average, each day at the time of survey, 326 spaces were occupied of the 385 available, or an almost 85%

occupancy rate. On average there were 59 street spaces available each day, at the time of survey. Table 5.8.1 Occupancy of pay and display parking spaces, various streets in Dún Laoghaire, February 2017 No spaces Georges street Lower Cross Avenue Haigh Terrace Wellington Street York Road Mulgrave Street Northumberland Ave Convent Road Georges Place Georges st Upper Marine Road Corrig Avenue Adelaide Street Patrick Street Eblana Avenue Convent Lane Total

12 18 20 19 11 23 17 28 32 33 29 11 38 50 27 17 385

No. Cars over 8 day survey

Spaces x 8 days

95 140 149 140 79 163 119 191 216 222 195 72 244 320 166 94 2605

Busiest Street

96 144 160 152 88 184 136 224 256 264 232 88 304 400 216 136 3080

98.96% 97.22% 93.13% 92.11% 89.77% 88.59% 87.50% 85.27% 84.38% 84.09% 84.05% 81.82% 80.26% 80.00% 76.85% 69.12% 84.58%

Source. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council The eight days of the survey are ranked by occupancy rate below in Table 5.8.2. One of the two Wednesdays, one was the busiest with 80.40% but the other Wednesday was 74.06%. Saturday was the lowest at 67.13%. On any particular single day, of the survey, between a third and a fifth of the street spaces were available. Table 5.8.2 Occupancy rate by day, Dún Laoghaire, February 2017 Day Wednesday 22/02/2017 Friday 17/02/2017 Monday 13/02/2017 Monday 20/02/2017 Wednesday 15/02/2017 Tuesday 14/02/2017 Thursday 16/02/2017 Saturday 18/02/2017

Percentage Occupied 80.40% 80.20% 77.03% 75.05% 74.06% 73.66% 70.69% 67.13%

Date 22nd Feb 17th Feb 13th Feb 20th Feb 15th Feb 14th Feb 16th Feb 18th Feb

Source. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council Finally, the survey collected data on the maximum occupancy rate by street observed over the period of the survey. These are reported in Table 5.8.3. Five streets had occupancy maximums of 95% or above. Three had 100% occupancy. Seven streets had occupancy maximums below 85%. The data indicates high levels of occupancy

but, with a few exceptions, occupancy rates which were well below 100%. This indicates that in many streets parking spaces were generally available.

Table 5.8.3 Individual street maximum occupancy during survey Feb 2017 Street No spaces Max Occ Max Occupancy Convent Lane 17 13 76% Patrick Street 18 14 78% Northumberland Ave 28 22 79% Mulgrave Street 27 22 81% Eblana Avenue 17 14 82% Georges St Upper 29 24 83% Convent Road 32 27 84% Corrig Avenue 16 14 88% Adelaide Street 50 45 90% Georges Place 33 30 91% Wellington Street 11 10 91% Haigh Terrace 19 18 95% Cross Avenue 20 19 95% Marine Road 11 11 100% York Road 23 23 100% Georges Street Lower 12 12 100% Source. DĂşn Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council The transactions sample is outlined in Table 5.8.4. The sample is determined by the available data which reflects the design of the parking meter database. It is a large sample of 67,540 transactions paid for through Parkingtag. There is a three hour limit for a single transaction. We have seen that a very small number of parking fines are given for exceeding the three hour limit. The three hour limit forces turnover of parking spaces. However, it is of significant policy interest to know the time distribution of the parking transactions. If the dominant period was three hours it would indicate a lower level of turnover than if the distribution is weighed towards shorter periods. Table 5.8.4 Time distribution of a sample of pay and display parking transactions, April to June 2017 zone DH (central DĂşn Laoghaire, Blackrock and Dundrum) Time in hours Under 1 1 to 1.5

Transactions 40649 16998

% of total sample 60.2 25.2

Over 1.5 to under 2 2271 2 to 2.5 3779 Over 2.5 to 3 3813 All 67540 Source. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council

3.4 5.6 5.6 100

The most notable aspect of the time distribution of the sample of parking transactions is that the large majority are of short duration. 60.2% of parking stays are under one hour. Another 25.2% are between one and one and a half hours. A total of 85.4% of parking stays are up to 1.5 hours. The maximum legal period is three hours. Only 5.6% of parking stays are over 2.5 hours to three hours. Another 5.6% are in the 2 to 2.5 hours category. 3.4% of parking stays in the sample are in the over 1.5 hours to under two hours category. This time distribution indicates a high degree of turnover of parking spaces. The data indicate a pattern of high occupancy rates allied with relatively short durations (defined as up to 1.5 hours). Actual durations will be longer than the data above suggest due to the grace periods at the start and end of paid stays. In summary, 60.2% of stays are under one hour and only 5.6% of stays are over 2.5 hours to three hours.

5.9 Parking offences relative to parking transactions In 2016 on street parking generated a meter income of €3.911 million. The average transaction value in the Dún Laoghaire sample was €1.37. To avoid bias in the calculation we have assumed a rate of €1.50 for the county as a whole. This results in 2.607 million on street pay and display transactions in the county as a whole. There were 16,455 parking detected offences/fines in categories 10A, 10Z and 10G in 2016. This results in an offence/fine to parking transaction of 0.63%. This means that for every 100 parking transactions in the on street pay and display system in the county there is 0.63 of a fine or for every 159 parking transactions there is one fine, on average. Meter income for Dún Laoghaire is not available to derive the same indicator.

Section 6. Survey of residents and non-residents in and near DĂşn Laoghaire

The survey covered residents of Dún Laoghaire, residents of the rest of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown and visitors to Dún Laoghaire who were resident outside the county. This was done to assess the views of residents who are the most immediately available cohort of customers for businesses in the town and to assess the attractiveness of the town and its shopping facilities to, and attitudes to parking, of people from outside the town including both county residents and others. In short the aim was to examine how the three groups of people felt about the town’s shopping facilities and its parking system.

The interviews of non residents were undertaken in a variety of different locations around the county to avoid a bias in assessing only those who are already in DĂşn Laoghaire for a particular reason.

This first section of the survey asked people what were their main reasons for visiting the town and their perception of the town.

People were asked to identify the three main reasons for visiting or being in the town. The three main reasons were asked as opposed to the single top reason to reflect the fact that a second or third reason could also be a significant determinant of behaviour. It should be noted that the number of reasons are broadly speaking three times the number of respondents because each respondent generally identified three reasons. Some small number identified only one or two reasons. Consequently, the percentage of reasons is not equivalent to the percentage of respondents. For example, if leisure amounts to 32% of the 1149 reasons, it has been identified 368 times from the 383 respondents or by 96% of the respondents. To arrive at the approximate number of respondents who mentioned an activity as one of their top three, the percentage share of mentions should be multiplied by three. It is clear from the data that recreational activities are the main reason why people come to DĂşn Laoghaire. Leisure is 32% of all the mentions meaning 96% of respondents included it as one of the top three reasons. Combining leisure 32%, hospitality 13% and entertainment 7% we get a combined share of 52% of all the reasons. One could also include the â&#x20AC;&#x153;buying an ice creamâ&#x20AC;? as part of the leisure group. In contrast, grocery shopping has only a 7% share or is mentioned by 21% of respondents. The combined shopping activities of grocery 7%, minor shopping 5% and major purchases 2% gives a combined shopping share of 14%. Overall, 96% of respondents mentioned leisure while only 21% of respondents mentioned grocery shopping and only 15% mentioned minor shopping in their top three.

Of course, it would be expected that visitors who come to Dún Laoghaire for leisure activities would be unlikely major grocery shoppers. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the different responses from the three groups of respondents.

The responses across the three groups for purpose of visit are shown above. Grocery shopping is 17% of the Dún Laoghaire resident responses meaning that 48% of residents had included it in their top three reasons for visiting the town. This compares with 7% of responses or 21% of respondents for other county residents and a very small 3% of visitors to Dún Laoghaire or 9% of visitors including grocery shopping as a top three item. While the 48% for Dún Laoghaire residents is much higher than the other two categories, it means that 52% of residents do not include grocery shopping as a top three reason for being in the town. Major purchases get a very low and similar rating across the three groups. Only 2% of responses for both town and county residents, or 6% of respondents, include it in the top three reasons. The visitor category was only 1% of reasons for major purchases. Overall, only 48% of the town’s residents put grocery shopping as one of the top three reasons for being in the town. Only 5% of town residents put major purchases in their top three reasons and only 19.8% of residents, and the same for county residents, put minor shopping as one of the top three reasons. The Sunday Market is mentioned by only 9% of town residents and by 18% of county residents and by 21% of visitors.

Recreational activities are high for the visitors, 52% (combining leisure, entertainment and hospitality) compared to 40% for town residents. The breakdown by respondents is shown below: % of respondents in three groups putting activity in top three, DL = DĂşn Laoghaire residents, DLR =county residents, V = visitors Entertainment DL 19.8, DLR 24.0, V 18.0 Grocery shopping DL 48.1, DLR 29.7, V 18.0 Minor shopping DL 19.8, DLR 18.0, V 5.5 Major purchases DL 4.9, DLR 6.0, V 1.8 Professional services DL 4.9, DLR 10.8, V 3.6 Hospitality DL 21.0, DLR 41.3, V 35.5 Education DL 6.2, DLR 4.2, V 2.7 Work DL 16.0, DLR 12.0, V 14.5 Healthcare DL 2.5, DLR 2.4, V 10.0 Transport DL 2.5, DLR 4.5, V 2.7 Sunday market DL 8.6, DLR 16.8, V 19.1 Live nearby DL 46.9, DLR 14.4, V 2.7 Ice cream DL 7.4, DLR 16.8, V 37.3

The extent of overall satisfaction on a range of issues was sought in the survey. The parking issue response is notable. It should be emphasised that these are the views of the respondents. These views may or may not be justified by evidence and facts. Transport performs very well with only 10% either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied compared to 67% dissatisfaction with parking. Dissatisfaction with the range of shops is also very high with 62%. Dissatisfaction with appearance of town excluding seafront is 60% and with atmosphere of town excluding seafront it is 54%. At the other end of the scale the very satisfied and satisfied ratings were transport 77%, range of shops 22%, appearance of town excluding seafront 23%, atmosphere of town excluding seafront 32% and parking 19%. The breakdown by the three groups of respondent is shown in the following pages

74% of DĂşn Laoghaire residents are either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the appearance of the town excluding the seafront. Only 13% were satisfied and 14% were indifferent. County residents also had a high level, 68%, of dissatisfaction with only 15% satisfied or very satisfied. 15% were indifferent. The visitor result was better with only 38% being dissatisfied or very dissatisfied and 40% were satisfied or very satisfied. 22% were indifferent. The visitor result is not very surprising because the primary motivation for visiting DĂşn Laoghaire is the seafront and hospitality activities and less attention would be paid to the town centre aspects.

56% of residents are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the atmosphere of the town compared with 26% who are satisfied. County residents have a more negative view with 61% being dissatisfied compared to 23% who are satisfied. The visitor performance is much better with 39% being dissatisfied and 47% being satisfied.

We already reported that 62% of respondents were dissatisfied with the range of shops. On the respondent category basis the figures were residents 64%, DLR county 69% and visitors 46%. In terms of satisfied and very satisfied the figures are residents 19%, county 14% and visitors 35%. Overall, almost two thirds of residents are dissatisfied with the range of shops in DĂşn Laoghaire. Almost 70% of county residents have the same view.

The top choices for shopping by residents are (based on share of top three mentions) Dundrum 26%, city centre 23% and Dún Laoghaire 22%. Dún Laoghaire does not appear in the most popular three locations for county residents, which are Dundrum, city centre and Blackrock. Visitors do not include Dún Laoghaire in their most popular three locations for retail shopping. If we examine the responses as mentions by individual respondents the following arises. 57% of residents mentioned Dún Laoghaire in their top three; 65% mentioned Dundrum and 58% mentioned the city centre. In terms of county residents, only 29% mentioned Dún Laoghaire, 53% mentioned the city centre and 71% mentioned Dundrum. Only 14% of visitors mentioned Dún Laoghaire, 72% mentioned the city centre and 68% mentioned Dundrum. The aggregate survey response measured as share of the total responses with respondents identifying up to three locations were Dundrum 27% (the top answer), city centre 24% and well back in third place was Dún Laoghaire at 12%. Blackrock and Carrickmines were each 8% with Stillorgan 6%.

Proportions of retail spending in Dún Laoghaire Respondents were asked to identify if they engaged in retail shopping in Dún Laoghaire and, if yes, to identify the proportion of their retail spend that was spent in Dún Laoghaire. The full details are shown below. The data should be interpreted as giving broad indications. Generally, respondents would not have known with accuracy the proportion of their ongoing retail spending which is done in the town. However, they did have approximations. The classification of the proportions which was asked was, “below one quarter”, “around one quarter”, “around one half”, “more than one half but not all”, and “all spending done in Dún Laoghaire”. There is a very high level of leakage of Dún Laoghaire originating expenditure from the local retail establishments. A large proportion of Dún Laoghaire originating retail spending is spent outside Dún Laoghaire. The results follow the expected relative pattern. The highest proportion with spending in Dún Laoghaire is residents followed by county residents and followed with a small proportion of spending by visitors. A very large majority of residents engage in some retail spending in the town, 88% compared to 12% who do not spend in the town. 48% of DLR residents engage in some retail spending in the town but 52% do not. 76% of visitors do not engage in retail spending in the town while 24% do. It is notable that the visitors are present in the town but spend relatively little on retail spending. The proportion of retail spend directed to Dún Laoghaire even by residents who do shop there, is relatively small. Only 40% of residents who shop in Dún Laoghaire spend half or more of their retail spending in Dún Laoghaire. 34% spend less than one quarter of their retail spending in Dún Laoghaire. 25% spend around one quarter. The half or more share for county residents who have some shopping in Dún Laoghaire is 22%. The visitors figure is 12%. Only 26% of residents spend more than half of their total retail spending in Dún Laoghaire. Overall, despite reservations with the data, the responses indicate a substantial leakage of the retail spend of Dún Laoghaire residents from retail establishments in Dún Laoghaire. Of course, there are many reasons for the leakage such as the quality

and range of competing locations, internet shopping, the quality and range of the Dún Laoghaire retail offer, as well as factors such as parking. It should be noted that a large majority of residents engage in some retail spending in Dún Laoghaire. The parking system does not prevent 88% of residents in the survey undertaking retail spending in Dún Laoghaire. However, the volume of spending is relatively low with only 26% of residents with more than half of their total retail spending in Dún Laoghaire. However, it could be argued that the low proportion of their total retail spend directed at Dún Laoghaire reflects dissatisfaction with aspects of the parking regime such as availability of spaces, enforcement and/or price. % of Retail spend spent in Dún Laoghaire, % of respondents and % of spending respondents No retail

Some

Below

About

spending

retail

one

half

spending

quarter

spenders

Dún

Laoghaire

Dún

Laoghaire

spenders

More than

All

half

spenders

Total

50.4

49.6

survey Residents County

12 52

88 48

34 56

25 23

14 15

18 4

8 3

residents Visitors

% of

Equivalent information was obtained for grocery shopping.17% of residents said they did no grocery shopping in Dún Laoghaire and 83% did grocery shopping in the town Of those who did some grocery shopping 32% did all of their grocery shopping in the town, 28% did more than half but less than all and 13% did half of their grocery shopping in the town. 19% spent less than one quarter of their grocery shopping in the town. Compared to overall retail, the grocery spending is much more localised. This might be expected because Dún Laoghaire has major grocery outlets such as Dunnes, Tesco and Supervalu. The comparison between grocery and retail is shown below.

% of Retail and grocery spend spent in Dún Laoghaire, % of residents

no yes % of yes responses Under one quarter Around one quarter Around one half More than one half All

Grocery 17 83

Retail 12 88

19 7 13 28 32

34 25 14 18 8

32% of residents, who do grocery shopping in Dún Laoghaire carry out all their grocery shopping in Dún Laoghaire compared with 8% for retail. 73% of residents carry out one half or more of their grocery shopping locally compared with 40% for retail. Despite the higher local role for grocery compared with all retail, there is still a substantial shortfall between the locally-originating grocery spend and the local grocery spending.

Frequency of shopping in Dún Laoghaire While there is a substantial leakage of local originating spending from Dún Laoghaire there is also a high incidence of shopping visits in the town by residents. 63% of resident respondents shop in the town “multiple times per week”, 15% shop once per week in the town, 9% shop twice per month, 2% shop once per month, 5% shop less than once per month and 6% said never. Overall, 78% of residents shop once per week or more in the town. Note there is a contradiction between the earlier findings that 12% of residents said they never shop in Dún Laoghaire while in this question 6% said they never shop in Dún Laoghaire. The responses are reported as given. The high incidence of shopping trips suggests an extensive use of the town and that parking does not dissuade residents from patronising the town. However, despite this there is a large leakage of local originating spending from the town which would indicate a greater reluctance to spend as opposed to visit by residents. It is possible, however, that the parking regime makes residents reluctant to stay longer in the town

and therefore reduces the duration of shopping trip and also spending. 23% of DLR respondents shop in Dún Laoghaire multiple times per week.

Transport mode for getting to Dún Laoghaire The usual mode of transport in accessing shops in Dún Laoghaire by residents is 

Car 33.3%



Bus 7.4%



Dart 3.7%



Foot 49.4%



Cycle 6.25

There are two possible interpretations from these responses. Parking is not an issue for the majority of residents in shopping in the town because only 33.3% of residents use a car as the usual means of accessing the shops and 67% use other means of transport. Alternatively, it could be argued that many residents are so disenchanted with the parking regime that two thirds will not use their car which may influence the volume of shopping. Cars are mainly used by 67.1% of DLR residents and by 66.7% of visitors.

As noted earlier there is a high level of dissatisfaction with parking. The breakdown between the three different respondent groups is shown below. Satisfaction with parking classified by location of respondents % DĂşn Laoghaire DLR Visitors Very dissatisfied 47.5 45.5 34.9 Dissatisfied 27.5 16.8 16.5 Indifferent 8.8 12.6 12.8 Satisfied 5.0 16.2 22.0 Very satisfied 2.5 3.0 0 Not applicable 8.8 6.0 13.8

75% of residents are either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with parking. Only 7.5% are satisfied or very satisfied. DLR residents have a 62% dissatisfaction rating and visitors are 51%. There is a 19.2% satisfaction rating by DLR residents and 22% by visitors. Overall there are very high levels of dissatisfaction. Of course, it may be the case that surveys of parking in other urban locations would also generate high levels of dissatisfaction. Specific aspects of parking were also examined including price, proximity and enforcement.

74% of residents are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the price of parking. The DLR figure is 71% and the visitor figure is 56%. As noted in the report, this is surprising because an objective examination of the DĂşn Laoghaire pay and display council parking charge indicates it is competitive with competing locations. Of course, this could reflect a dissatisfaction with the principle of paying for parking. 8% of residents are satisfied or very satisfied. The DLR figure is 15% and the visitor figure is 17%. 84% of residents in the 40-49 years age group are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the price of parking.

Parking availability performs better than price. 52% of residents are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with parking availability. The DLR share is 43% and the visitor share is 36%. 38% of residents are satisfied with the availability of parking as are 40% of DLR residents and 42% of visitors. Once again, this is a little surprising given the objective assessment of availability where relatively high occupancy rates were experienced in many streets, especially in the central business district.

There is substantial dissatisfaction with parking enforcement among residents. 72% of residents are either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied compared with 55% of DLR residents and 45% of visitors. The satisfaction shares are 8% residents, 15% DLR and 17% visitors. There is a high degree of satisfaction with the proximity of parking to locations in DĂşn Laoghaire.

63% of residents are satisfied with the proximity of parking relative to locations. Only 23% are dissatisfied. The satisfaction level for DLR residents is 64% and for visitors it is 68%. The dissatisfaction ratings are 17% DLR and 14% visitors.

Respondents were asked to compare various parking factors in DĂşn Laoghaire to those in other retail locations. Overall, parking enforcement was rated as worse (defined as implemented more stringently) by 42% and the same by 51%. Proximity was ranked as 26% worse and 56% the same. Price was 54% worse and 38% the same. Availability was ranked 50% worse and 37% the same. 6% ranked enforcement as better in DĂşn Laoghaire than elsewhere, 17% ranked proximity as better. 9% ranked price as better and 12% ranked availability as better.

The responses for residents in comparing the parking experience in Dún Laoghaire with elsewhere were:  Availability, worse 57%, same 37%, better 6%  Price, worse 57%, same 39%, better 4%.  Proximity to locations, worse 27%, same 63%, better 10%  Enforcement, worse 49%, same 48%, better 4%

Section 7. Survey of businesses in DĂşn Laoghaire A survey of 94 retailers in the central commercial district was undertaken. The main findings are presented below.

There is a reasonable incidence of new businesses with 40% of the sample having started operations since 2008. 60% of the respondents were in operation in DĂşn Laoghaire in 2007.

61% of enterprises have had an increase in turnover since 2015 while 39% had a decrease.

The ranking of various factors which affect business are shown above. The two response rates for each factor refer to number one factor and number two factor. 39% of respondents ranked the pay and display system as the number one factor and 32% ranked it number two. The quality of the townâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s shopping facilities was ranked number one by 28% and number two by 32%. The proximity of competing locations was ranked number one by 20% and number two by 15%. The general economic situation was ranked number one by 13% and number two by 19%. Overall the pay and display system was ranked number one by 39% and other factors got a combined 61%.

Of the Georges St enterprises, 26% identified cost as the ain parking issue. 18% identified availability of parking and 15% identified enforcement. 35% identified all the listed factors. For enterprises from other street, cost was number one with 31%, enforcement was next at 24%. Availability was 20% and all of the above was 18%.

52% of Georges St enterprises say the pay and display system had a significant negative effect on their business. 34% identify â&#x20AC;&#x153;someâ&#x20AC;? negative effect and 8% say minor negative effect.13% said no negative effect. Other enterprises were 42% significant negative effect, 34% some negative effect, 13% said minor negative effect. 9% said no negative effect.

The comment on free parking on Sundays does not take account of the fact that the pay and display system does not operate on a Sunday.

Impact on turnover Enterprises were asked to quantify the impact of the pay and display system on their turnover. 27% were unable to estimate the impact. 32% of respondents identified a decline of 10% or under. 19% identified a decline in turnover of within 11% to 20%. 21% of respondents identified a decline of more than 20%.

In general, enterprises have not recovered the pre-economic collapse level of turnover.48% of enterprises in operation in 2007 were still on a lower turnover than 2007 while 18% had a higher turnover. 35% did not know.

Section 8. Conclusions, assessment and recommendations Summary of empirical findings and conclusions 1. Urban and town centre parking problems are a national and international phenomenon. The problem is not confined to Dún Laoghaire. 2. The difficulties facing town centre shopping areas are a national and international problem and are not confined to Dún Laoghaire. 3. The retail sector in Dún Laoghaire has suffered substantially over the past several years. However, the national retail sector has also performed badly since the economic collapse in 2007/08. 4. Many retail sectors nationally are still below the 2007 level of sales. 5. Wholesale and retail employed 94.2k persons in 2008 in Dublin. The 2017 figure is 79.6k, a decline of 15.5%. 6. Retail value in 2016 in Ireland is 14.3% below the 2007 level. In volume terms it is 1.1% below the 2007 level. Excluding the motor industry, the 2016 value is 11.5% below the 2007 level and in the volume terms the 2016 level is 1.2% above the 2007 level. Retail value has not yet returned to the 2007 level. 7. Dún Laoghaire, as a shopping centre, faces very intensive competition due to its proximity to two of the state’s largest and most attractive shopping facilities, Dublin City centre and Dundrum shopping centre. 8. Dún Laoghaire, through the Dart service, has very good access to Dublin City centre which facilitates shopping there by Dún Laoghaire residents. 9. As a town shopping facility, Dún Laoghaire also faces competition from other adjacent shopping facilities such as Blackrock and Frascati shopping centres. 10. The overall “traditional” retail sector is facing increased threats to its volume of business from internet sales. 11. The “main street” shopping facilities within Dún Laoghaire have also faced competition from adjacent town centre shopping centres such as Dún Laoghaire Shopping Centre (opened in 1977) and Bloomfield Shopping Centre (opened in 1997), each with its own car park. 12. Other aspects of economic development such as tourism and hospitality have done well in recent years in Dún Laoghaire. 13. High vacancy rates in commercial property including retail are a national problem and are not confined to Dún Laoghaire.

14. Based on a review of the research no town or urban area has resolved the parking and car issues in a way that is satisfactory to all stakeholders. 15. Dún Laoghaire (local electoral area), in common with most other areas, has a high level of car ownership with only 18% of its 16,395 households not having a car. The remaining 13,442 households have an estimated 20,297 cars. 16. There are approx 2,000 on street parking bays in Dún Laoghaire Town and at the last count the council had issued about 1,400 permits to residents 17. Between 1990 and 2015 the number of private cars in Ireland increased from just below 800k to almost 2 million. The precise increase was 1.189 million or 149.3%. 18. Dún Laoghaire has a large consumer base with a large population concentration and a relatively high socio-economic profile to its population which is a solid base for a strong retail sector 19. A large proportion of the available purchasing power of the local population is spent elsewhere. This is due to several factors of which parking is only one. 20. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council generates a relatively high level of both gross and net revenue from its car parking and enforcement operation. It also spends a relatively large amount on its car parking and enforcement operation. 21. The annual net revenue from the council car parking is used for the benefit of the county and its citizens in the provision of various services. This was €3.6 million in 2016. 22. The €3.6 million was spent on a range of services including footpath improvement, road maintenance materials, public lighting, signing, traffic management and school warden service. 23. The total parking income generated in 2016 was €6.388 million. Residents’ parking permits provided only €131.9k or 2.1% of this total. Visitor permits provided only €85.5k or 1.3%. Resident and visitor permits generate a very small proportion of the parking revenues. 24. Off street meters (in council car parks) generate €1.1047 million or 17.3%. On street meters generate the largest flow of revenue, €3.9107 million or 61.2% of the total. 25. On street fines generated € 1.0354 million or 16.2% and off street fines generated €169.1k or 2.6%. 97

26. It is notable that the ratio of fines to meter revenue in the on street category is 26.5% compared to 15.3% in the off street category. This suggests either a higher level of enforcement in the on street category and/or different compliance patterns in the two categories. 27. A range of different payment for parking options are provided by the Council, including coin, credit card, wave and pay (contactless at the smart meters) and Parkingtag (remote/mobile payment option). 28. From €411k in 2014, Parkingtag revenue grew to €1.107 million in 2016. 29. Coins as a means of parking payments has continued to decline and were 64% of meter income in the Jan-July 2017 period compared with 69% in the same period of 2016. 30. In addition to the council pay and display capacity Dún Laoghaire has a substantial supply of non-council parking facilities including car parks in the town’s two shopping centres. Public car parks at other town facilities and the Harbour Company car park which also includes pay and display street parking. 31. There is a very high occupancy rate of pay and display spaces in the towns centre area streets. 32. The current (2016) county parking fines total of 33,149 is significantly less than the 2009 total of 41,109. There was a decline of 19.4% between 2009 and 2016. Between 2013 and 2016 there was an increase of 1,124 tickets or 3.5%. 33. In 2011 there were 12,112 parking tickets in Dún Laoghaire. By 2016 this had declined to 8,902 tickets, a decrease of 26.5%. However, the decrease has not been continuous over the period. 34. The lowest annual total was in 2013, with 8585 tickets. Since 2013 the number of Dún Laoghaire tickets has remained much the same. The total increased to 9150 in 2014 and increased again in 2015 to 9218. There was a decline in the 2016 level to 8902. 35. Dún Laoghaire’s share of the total county parking tickets declined from 32.5% in 2011 to 26.9% in 2016. The 2016 share is much the same as the 2013 share of 26.8%. The share has decline slightly in 2015 and 2016. 36. The parking fines are for a variety of offences. While the largest single category is pay and display/permit offences, these accounted for only 61% of parking fines in the county in 2016. The next largest category is parking in prohibited places such as on yellow lines and it was 18.3% in 2016. 98

37. The “other” category including bus lanes and cycleway parking was 12.5% in 2016. Disabled bay parking was 2.1%. Parking on footpaths was 6.2% in 2016. The key point from the data on type of offences is that pay and display offences which includes both on and off street parking made up 61%, less than two thirds of all the parking offences in 2016 on a county wide basis and this share has declined since 2013. 38. In 2016, in Dún Laoghaire, a third of parking fines were for offences other than park and display. Between 2011 and 2016, in Dún Laoghaire pay and display offences declined from 7065 to 5916 but their share of total increased from 58.3% to 66.5%. 39. In the other main offences in Dún Laoghaire, wrongful use of a loading bay decreased from 2813 to 1351, parking on a double yellow line decreased from 708 to 544, parking on a footway decreased from 584 to 307, wrongful use of a disabled persons space decreased from 349 to 340, parking in a taxi stand increased from 125 to 168 and overstaying in a loading bay decreased from 295 to 113. 40. The time distribution of the sample of parking transactions indicates a high degree of turnover of parking spaces. The data indicate a pattern of high occupancy rates allied with relatively short durations (defined as up to 1.5 hours). Actual durations will be longer than the actual paid time suggests due to the grace periods at the start and end of paid stays. In summary, 60.2% of stays are under one hour and only 5.6% of stays are over 2.5 hours to three hours. 41. For every 100 parking transactions in the on street pay and display system in the county there is 0.63 of a fine or for every 159 parking transactions there is one fine, on average. 42. The council has implemented various parking innovations in recent years, including reduction of the central rate from €2 per hour to €1.50 per hour, free hour in the Christmas period, suspension of pay and display regulations for various days/holidays, fifteen minutes grace period (increase from ten minutes), reduced rate associated with Blackrock road works and alternative non-cash payments methods. 43. Based on the survey undertaken as part of the project, recreational activities are the main reasons why people come to Dún Laoghaire. 99

44. However, 51% of Dún Laoghaire residents include grocery shopping as one of their three reasons for being in Dún Laoghaire town. Of course, this implies that 49% of residents did not include grocery shopping in their three reasons. 45. Consumers are attracted to Dún Laoghaire for particular shops such as Shaws, Scrumdiddly’s, Tierney’s, Sostrene Grene and Penneys. 46. 62% of the respondents to the project survey were either dissatisfied (40%) or very dissatisfied (22%) with the range of shops in Dún Laoghaire. This contrasts with 22% who were satisfied (19%) or very satisfied (3%). 47. Younger people are more satisfied with the range of shops which partly reflects their narrower range of purchasing. The indifference level is high with the younger age group. 48. Some of the older age groups are particularly dissatisfied, which is a particular problem as their purchasing power is greater. 49. The dissatisfied/very dissatisfied percentages for different age groups are 3039 years 50%, 40-49 years 79%, 50-59 years 57%, 60 years and over 75%. 50. Dissatisfaction with range of shops was 64% among residents and 69% among those who were resident in other parts of the council area. Visitors had only a 46% dissatisfaction rating which partly reflects their lower expectations on shopping as the main reason for being in Dún Laoghaire was hospitality and leisure. 51. The top retail destinations based on respondents selecting their top 3 were Dundrum 27%, Dublin City Centre 24% and Dún Laoghaire 12%. While the first two are substantially ahead the 12% Dún Laoghaire figure is equivalent to 36% of respondents including Dún Laoghaire as one of their top 3 locations. 52. When the focus is on Dún Laoghaire residents the top three retail locations are close together, Dundrum 26%, Dublin City Centre 23% and Dún Laoghaire 22%. The 22% is equivalent to 66% of Dún Laoghaire residents including the town as one of their top three retail locations. Dún Laoghaire does not appear as one of the highest three locations in either of the other two groups. 53. There is a high level of satisfaction with transport (77%) and a high level of dissatisfaction with the parking situation (67%). 54. There is a high level of dissatisfaction with the price of parking, the dissatisfied percentage for the three groups are, residents 74%, rest of council area residents 71% and visitors 56%. 100

55. There is less dissatisfaction with the availability of parking, residents 52%, rest of council area 43% visitors 36%. 56. There is a high level of dissatisfaction about enforcement among residents. The figures are residents 72% rest of council area 55% and visitors 45%. 57. There is a low level of dissatisfaction with proximity of parking locations, the dissatisfaction figures were residents 23%, rest of council area 17% and visitors 14%. 58. In terms of comparisons with parking in other retail locations Dún Laoghaire was considered relatively poor. 59. There is a very high proportion of leakage of potential Dún Laoghaire retail spend from Dún Laoghaire retail establishments to elsewhere. Of the residents who do spend in Dún Laoghaire 59% spend a quarter or less and only 26% spend more than half. 60. There is a high proportion of leakage of potential Dún Laoghaire grocery spend from Dún Laoghaire grocery establishments but it is much less than for retail overall. 61. While there is a substantial leakage of local originating spending from Dún Laoghaire there is also a high incidence of shopping visits in the town by residents. 63% of resident respondents shop in the town “multiple times per week”, 15% shop once per week in the town, 9% shop twice per month, 2% shop once per month, 5% shop less than once per month and 6% said never. Overall, 78% of residents shop once per week or more in the town. 62. The high incidence of shopping trips suggests an extensive use of the town and that parking does not dissuade residents from patronising the town. However, despite this there is a large leakage of local originating spending from the town which would indicate a greater reluctance to spend as opposed to visit by residents. 63. The usual mode of transport in accessing shops in Dún Laoghaire by residents is car 33.3%, bus 7.4%, dart 3.7%, foot 49.4%, cycle 6.2%. 64. The survey of retailers asked respondents to identify the top two negative impacts on business. Pay and display parking was ranked number one by 39%, quality of Dún Laoghaire shopping facilities was ranked number one by 28%, proximity of competing locations was ranked number one by 20% and the

101

general economic situation was ranked number one by 13%. In all 39% placed parking as the number one negative and 61% identified other factors. 65. 21% of retailers believe that the parking system has caused a decline of more than 20% in turnover, 19% believe the decline is between 11% and under 20% and 32% believe the decline is less than 10%. 27% are unable to quantify. 66. 89% of Georges St retailers think the pay and display parking system has some negative impact on business and 84% of other retailers think the same. 67. As improvements in the parking system 50% of retailers suggest a free period of one hour, 33% suggest lower hourly rates, 6% suggest the abolition of the pay and display system and a combined 10% suggest grace periods, less rigid enforcement or free parking on a Saturday or Sunday. Assessment of objectives The overall assessment and the assessment of the specific objectives are presented below: Overall Assessment As identified in the summary of empirical and qualitative conclusions, town centre parking and shopping problems are not unique to DĂşn Laoghaire; they are widespread international issues. DĂşn Laoghaireâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s retail problems are intensified by the close proximity of high quality competing shopping locations in Dublin City Centre and Dundrum Shopping Centre. In addition there are several smaller competing shopping locations in close proximity. Some retail sectors have not fully recovered from the economic collapse of 2008. In addition there is a growing volume of internet purchasing. The main issue with parking in town centre areas is the allocation one of matching high levels of demand with a limited supply of parking spaces. Retail and other town centre enterprises, internationally, generally believe that the parking regimes discourage footfall in the centre, through high prices, tough enforcement and inadequate and uncertain availability of parking space. The international policy prescriptions for these problems tend to include measures to discourage car transport as a mode and a pricing structure which reflects the level of demand. This would imply a reduction in the use of cars to access the town centre and higher prices for parking on the busiest streets compared to streets in lower demand in the area. At 102

present, this is directly opposite to what the local retail sector wants. The busier streets tend to be those closest to the commercial centre and the retail sector wants prices to be reduced to encourage increased usage, rather than use a higher price to match supply and demand for parking places. In addition the retail sector desires to increase the number and spend of customers including increasing the numbers of those using cars. Naturally it is a concern of the commercial sector that making car users very unwelcome, will encourage car users to patronise alternative car-friendly locations. One can readily see where an unsympathetic parking regime would discourage use of a particular shopping facility and divert local shoppers and potential visitors elsewhere. An unsympathetic parking regime would include relatively high prices, uncertain availability and active enforcement leading to a high incidence of fines or high possibility of a fine. The latter situation may be perceived or real. It is useful to distinguish between the basic parking problem relating to supply and demand and the regime which is used to mange the parking situation. The basic parking problem, where there is a limited availability of suitably located parking places relative to possible demand levels, does not disappear whatever parking regime is used. Within that overall supply/demand constraint there are alternative ways of managing the system to meet the needs of the retail sector and other users. Of course, the supply issue could be improved by additional parking capacity in multi-story parking facilities close to the centre. The physical supply of street spaces is very or perfectly inelastic. A particular concern by town centre enterprises internationally is the availability of free parking at shopping centres outside the town. While, in the Dún Laoghaire situation, there are some examples of free parking at proximate shopping facilities, most significant competing locations charge for parking, especially Dundrum and Dublin City Centre. The latter is more expensive than Dún Laoghaire council parking and also has an active enforcement operation which, unlike Dún Laoghaire, includes clamping. Dundrum’s pricing structure depends on the length of stay; a one hour stay here would be more expensive than Dún Laoghaire but a three hour stay would be cheaper. As shown in the report there are substantial parking facilities in Dún Laoghaire in addition to the council pay and display parking facilities. Several of these are in close 103

physical proximity to the main commercial centre and these have to be included in any consideration of Dún Laoghaire parking facilities. These are more expensive than the council pay and display parking charges except in the cases where a specific level of purchases generates a free hour. Overall, however, on a standard hourly charge, the council rates per hour are lower and the time charged (hour or part thereof) regime generally improves the competitive position of the council charge. Traffic management is also an important function of the parking regime in addition to providing parking to serve the needs of the town. For example, double parking or parking on double yellow lines blocks, inhibits and slows the free flow of traffic through and in the town. Incorrect use of loading bays by cars creates difficulties in supplying the retail sector and increases the cost of distribution. Parking on a footway or too close to a school imposes costs, risks and inconvenience on citizens. Incorrect use of a disabled parking space imposes unfair burdens on those with disabilities. Enforcement which facilitates traffic management and improved flow generates benefits. As shown in the report in 2016, in Dún Laoghaire, a third of parking fines were for offences of the type referred to above. Enforcement to prevent or minimise these types of offences would generally be considered to be desirable. Dún Laoghaire rightly has a reputation for effective enforcement. Clearly, a contract with a provider could include a lower target level of fines but this would lead to a reduction in the efficiency of the parking system. Lower risk of being caught would encourage longer stays and less rotation of parking spaces. It should be emphasised that a fine only applies when the rules have been broken, Fuller compliance with pay and display rules by users would ensure that the number of fines would decrease. The charge of €1.50 per hour plus the grace periods represent a reasonable approach to users, and in that context, effective enforcement should be maintained. One possible additional measure would be a slightly longer grace period at the end of a ticket because people can reasonably be unexpectedly delayed on shopping trips relative to the planned time within the three hour limit. This is not the case at the start of a ticket. However, pending assessment of the impact of the change to the resident permit and the improved parking information flow we do not recommend this change and instead recommend the maintenance of the two fifteen minute grace periods. It can be revisited in the future.

104

Two thirds approximately of the parking fines in 2016 in Dún Laoghaire were for pay and display offences. It is useful to briefly consider what might happen to parking behaviour if park and display enforcement was absent or if there were no pay and display regulations. It is likely that there would be substantial increased use of on street parking places by those working in the town or using Dún Laoghaire to access the Dart. Spaces would be filled early in the morning and many spaces would be occupied by the same car throughout the day. The average length of stay would increase and rotation of spaces would drop substantially. Dún Laoghaire, to a large extent, would become a free car park for Dart users and for those working in Dún Laoghaire. Visitors or shoppers would find it much more difficult to obtain short duration parking spaces and the town would become less attractive for shopping and visiting. There would not be a return to a past golden age of low car usage and easy access for car using shoppers. Locations around other dart and Luas stations and at specific bus stop locations, throughout Dublin have become car parks for commuters. This, in turn, has encouraged residents to apply for pay and display parking regimes. Alternatively, the parking regime could be free but with length of stay regulations such as maximum period of two or three hours and effective enforcement. Effective enforcement requires significant financial resources. With a free system, the cost of enforcing the system would be borne by whatever fines are collected and by the general council revenue. Ratepayers and the central exchequer would not appreciate this financial burden. From the viewpoint of the town retail sector, the ideal parking regime would be free parking, substantial turnover of parking spaces to facilitate newly arriving customers and to facilitate availability of spaces, effective enforcement to prevent long duration blocking of spaces and strict enforcement of what might be called anti-social parking behaviour. This parking regime would still have to cope with the capacity issue or the limited number of spaces relative to demand and, of course, the loss of substantial income from parking charges. This would divert money from the other council services which are supported by the net parking income. Ongoing investment in cashless systems and other parking related technology would also have to be funded from non-parking income. It would also be expected that with a free system, the average length of stay might move more towards the maximum period instead of the 105

current dominant period of under one hour. Of course, an alternative regime, which would be close to the free one, would be where the first hour is free and thereafter charges are imposed, or if charges are kept very low as to be nominal. This would cause a significant drop in parking charges income because 60% of current stays are under one hour. As part of the project the author visited Dún Laoghaire on many occasions to test the parking situation. On all daytime visits except those on Sundays, a street parking space close to the centre was obtained (but very rarely on Georges St. On the Sundays, all street spaces were filled with apparently very little short duration rotation. Of course, the spaces are free of charges on Sundays as the pay and display system is not operated on Sundays. Equally, on evenings after the pay and display period, it was difficult to get a street parking place. The current average hourly charge in the council parking regime is €1.50. There is a single price as opposed to a variable pricing regime where levels would be determined by demand and duration objectives. For example, if the duration objective is to keep stays below one hour, one could charge 50 cent for the first hour, €2 for the second hour and €3 for the third hour of the maximum period, or some variant of this graduation. Of course, if the duration objective is realised, the bulk of durations will generate 50 cent as opposed to €1.50 and income from parking will be reduced. A low or zero price for the first period in the central business area would suit the retail sector by encouraging shoppers to come but is directly opposite to the general pricing principles for parking prices. These principles suggest that high demand locations should attract the higher price of a graduated price system with lower prices being charged in lower demand locations. This is done in Dublin City where the highest demand zones are charged the highest price (these are around the city centre) and lower prices are charged for lower demand locations. In response to earlier requests from the business sector, the council reduced the hourly rate from €2 to its current €1.50 per hour. Unfortunately, there was no “before and after” assessment of this change. However, given the current attitude of the business sector to the parking regime the €1.50 rate has not transformed or significantly enhanced their commercial situation. There is always the possibility that their 106

perception of the current situation would be much worse if the price had remained at €2. In light of the overall circumstances we do not recommend any reduction in the standard parking charge of €1.50. A reduction in the price, on the realistic expectation that demand is price inelastic will be associated with the significant negative of a loss in revenue from parking. This has consequences for the services funded by the net income. Dún Laoghaire Rathdown County Council has introduced several consumer-friendly parking initiatives including: 

Reduction of standard price from €2 to €1.50



Fifteen minute grace period at start and end of parking stay



Promotion of cashless payment mechanisms



Parking promotion for Christmas period

The net income generated by the parking regime supports various council services which benefit the general population. On the other hand the restriction of resident parking rights from the full town to specific smaller zones significantly worsened the benefits associated with the resident parking permit. Any improvement or easing of Dún Laoghaire parking conditions will have to take geographic equity within the overall council area into account. A fundamental part of this report’s conclusions is that there are several factors influencing the perceived weak performance of the Dún Laoghaire retail sector. The most significant cause is the nearby presence of very substantial alternative shopping facilities. One of these, Dublin City has a comparable or more difficult parking situation with higher prices, active enforcement and clamping. As seen in the survey there is a high level of dissatisfaction with the shopping offer in the town compared to alternative locations. The retailer survey also acknowledged the issue of the weakness of the Dún Laoghaire shopping offer. The current state of the local shopping offer may itself be partly due to historic parking issues.

107

There are definite limits to the capacity of the on -street and off –street pay and display parking system to absorb large increases in demand. At present there is a high rate of turnover, relatively short durations and relatively high occupancy levels, especially on certain streets. An improvement in the parking situation such as wider free access for resident permit holders will improve the retail situation to a small degree but it will not transform the situation. Indeed none of the alternative parking regimes discussed above would remove the difficulties associated with town centre parking. We recommend a limited liberalisation of the resident parking permit free parking eligibility. If accepted, this measure should be assessed as an input to additional possible customer-friendly parking measures. We believe that the price of the resident parking permit is low relative to the flow of benefits associated with it. The finances of the parking regime are interesting, notably the substantial net income derived from its operation. It is a policy consideration for the councillors to decide on the level and use of the net income. As a general comment we would argue that the level of net income is sufficiently large to facilitate the financing of the recommendations as well as maintaining its contribution to other council services. Clearly there is a strong enforcement operation and we consider this to be a good feature of the system. As required by the terms of reference this project included a survey of approximately 380 persons. This was the first such survey related to parking matters in Dún Laoghaire. It provided much useful information on attitudes to parking and retail behaviour. Of necessity, much of the information is of a “headline” nature and it would be desirable to obtain more data of a deeper nature on the parking and retail behaviour of the local population and shoppers to guide future policy development. For example, it would be useful to know the reasons for and type of shopping of shoppers in Dún Laoghaire, what would increase their spend in the town and how parking measures would directly influence this? The average spend per shopping event would also be useful. The recommendations include a suggestion of additional research. This could be carried out on a very cost effective way by the UCD Marketing Development Programme.

108

The Urban Framework Plan for Dún Laoghaire involving reconnecting the town centre to the waterfront, creating vitality and strengthening links with other adjacent areas will enhance the overall commercial viability of the town and should be actively pursued. Assessment relative to sub-objectives assess the negative perception of the Town of Dún Laoghaire generated by the operation of the parking regulations. There is a negative perception of Dún Laoghaire’s parking situation. 67% of the shopper/visitor survey respondents were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with parking in Dún Laoghaire. Only 19% were satisfied or very satisfied. 75% of Dún Laoghaire residents are either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with parking. Only 7.5% are satisfied or very satisfied. DLR residents have a 62% dissatisfaction rating and visitors are 51%. The visitor dissatisfaction level is substantially lower than that of residents of Dún Laoghaire. There is a 19.2% satisfaction rating by DLR residents and 22% by visitors. Overall there are very high levels of dissatisfaction. Of course, it may be the case that surveys of parking in other urban locations would also generate high levels of dissatisfaction on the part of local users and visitors. 74% of residents are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the price of parking. The DLR figure is 71% and the visitor figure is 56%. This is surprising because the objective comparison of prices shows that Dún Laoghaire pay and display parking rates are comparable with other areas, are lower than Dublin and are cheaper than non-council parking facilities in Dún Laoghaire. Of course, the €1.50 per hour is high relative to free parking which is available in some locations. It also has to be compared with the previous resident parking scheme in which residents had free access to the whole Dún Laoghaire area. Now, there is only free resident parking in one’s own zone. In effect, a benefit has been removed by the multi-zonal resident parking system. Parking availability performs better than price. 52% of residents are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with parking availability. The DLR share is 43% and the visitor share is 36%. 38% of Dún Laoghaire residents are satisfied with the availability of parking as are 40% of DLR residents and 42% of visitors.

109

There is substantial dissatisfaction with parking enforcement among residents but the dissatisfaction is lower in the other two respondent categories. 72% of residents are either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied compared with 55% of DLR residents and 45% of visitors. The satisfaction shares are 8% residents, 15% DLR and 17% visitors. 63% of residents are satisfied with the proximity of parking to locations. Only 23% are dissatisfied. The satisfaction level for DLR residents is 64% and for visitors it is 68%. The dissatisfaction ratings are 17% DLR and 14% visitors.

The responses by residents of Dún Laoghaire in comparing the parking experience in Dún Laoghaire with elsewhere were: 

Availability, worse 57%, same 37%, better 6%



Price, worse 57%, same 39%, better 4%.



Proximity to locations, worse 27%, same 63%, better 10%



Enforcement, worse 49%, same 48%, better 4%

110

regime. Some respondents to the questionnaire referred to clamping as an issue. However, private on-street parking provided by the harbour company, and which includes clamping and higher cost, is often assumed to be council provided parking. Examine whether there is a disincentive for residents to shop locally due to the multiple zonal nature of the parking. Our conclusion is that the current multi zonal nature of resident parking permits is a disincentive for some Dún Laoghaire residents to shop locally. The multi-zonal aspect is one of the factors generating the high resident dissatisfaction with local parking. A notable feature of the information generated through the project was the often strong feeling of residents with permits having to pay to shop within what they would describe as their local area or town. One can see various scenarios which result in the multi-zonal nature of the resident parking permit parking regime having a negative effect on local shopping such as feelings of double payment, loss of a previous entitlement and after school shopping patterns. Quantify the potential loss in revenue to local businesses by residents shopping elsewhere due to the parking charges. The evidence from the survey indicates that there is substantial leakage of Dún Laoghaire- originating retail spend from the local retail operations. In addition there is a relatively low propensity of non-residents to undertake retail purchases in Dún Laoghaire. The cause of the leakage of local originating expenditure is multi-faceted. The parking situation contributes to the leakage but other causes include the availability of high quality alternative shopping facilities including Dublin City and Dundrum as well as several more smaller proximate shopping locations, the quality and range of Dún Laoghaire’s shopping facilities, consumer tastes and online purchases. Aldi and Lidl together account for 23.5% of the overall grocery market nationally. Neither chain has a presence in the central commercial area of Dún Laoghaire but both are located near the town. On the assumption that one fifth of Dún Laoghaire residents wish to shop at these chains, there will be a leakage of potential expenditure from the town. Of course, the more favourable parking regime at these locations would also result in a larger leakage of potential expenditure from the town.

111

As shown from the survey responses only 35 % of residents do half or more of their retail shopping locally. 34% of residents undertake less than one quarter of their retail shopping locally. Visitors have a very low propensity to shop in Dún Laoghaire. We first estimate the level of retail expenditure which is leaked from Dún Laoghaire to other shopping locations. We then estimate the impact of the parking regime on this leakage as it is only one of determining factors. The estimation of leaked revenue is based on the average household expenditure from the CSO Household Budget Survey; this is adjusted for non-retail and locational factors; the number of households in Dún Laoghaire; the local expenditure proportions reported in the survey and the local business estimate of the impact of the parking system on turnover. This is a broad estimate which is subject to a large margin of error. However, in terms of broad indicative impact it is reasonably robust. It should be noted that lost retail expenditure is not all lost to the county. Dundrum is one of the main beneficiaries of Dún Laoghaire- originating expenditure. The values of the main variables are shown below. 

Average weekly household expenditure in State €837.47



Estimated average weekly household retail expenditure in State €450.00



Adjusted estimated weekly average household retail expenditure in Dún Laoghaire €500.00



Number of households in Dún Laoghaire Town (approx) 3,800



Locally weekly arising total retail expenditure from Dún Laoghaire €1.9 million



Estimated average retail proportion spent locally (from survey) 40%



Retail weekly expenditure by local residents €760 k



Leaked retail weekly expenditure from Dún Laoghaire €1.14 million



Retail expenditure weekly displaced from residents due to parking; (based on survey data) €91k

112

would be, in our view, relatively small at about a quarter of the figures estimated above, or €23k. The major parking problem would be enforcement and concern over possibility of a fine. It is necessary to emphasise that the parking situation refers not only to the specific management and implementation of the Dún Laoghaire parking system but to the wider parking problems which arise in town centres internationally and are not confined to Dún Laoghaire. Consequently, incremental adjustments to the parking scheme will not restore the system to what it was when car users could have easy, quick and free access to town centres.

Examine the sustainability of a scheme that has the local authority competing with businesses for the time of their customers. This situation arises in town centres generally. The volume of cars and impact on traffic management has generally led to a situation of paid and regulated parking. Indeed, the Dún Laoghaire system is more “friendly” to shoppers in terms of price than what is usually recommended in the economics of parking. The economic development of the town depends on sectors other than retail, including office facilities and hospitality. For the town to thrive there must be good quality traffic management and parking availability. The present system provides these to a reasonable extent. None of the potential improvements to the parking system will solve the basic allocation problem of many cars relative to parking spaces. However, as recommended below, there is scope for the parking system to be more customerfriendly but this will not remove the basic supply/demand problem. The population and car ownership levels will continue to increase and the long term solution for town centres will be increased regulation of car usage and ultimately probable pedestrianisation if bypasses are possible and are developed. The Council planning efforts to enhance the non-car accessibility of the central district should be continued. Dún Laoghaire has a strong future as a hospitality centre and as a retail centre for the local catchment population subject to the quality and mix of retail facilities meeting market demands and as a location for specific niche retail operations attracting a 113

wider demand. Geographically and physically it will be impossible to rival either Dublin City centre or Dundrum. It is perfectly reasonable in the current supply/demand situation for car use and car parking to be managed and regulated. We believe that DĂşn Laoghaire can thrive even with the current parking regime with its high level of enforcement. Ideally, as the system is made more customer-friendly the volume of fines will decline and the future problem will be adjusting for a significant loss of revenue. Assess whether the scheme results in rotation of on- street parking spaces. The evidence suggests that substantial rotation takes place. This is mainly due to the behavioural characteristics of the users of the pay and display regime, the three hour maximum period and the enforcement system rather than due to the pricing structure of the pay and display regime. For example, the pricing structure charges the same rate per unit of time regardless of the length of stay. Pricing theory suggests that to encourage short stays, the price per unit of time (per hour or per half hour) should increase with length of duration. A sample of parking transactions covering 67,540 transactions shows that 60.2% were under 1 hour, 25.2% were 1 hour to 1.5 hours, 3.4% were over 1.5 hours and less than 2 hours, 5.6% were 2 hours to 2.5 hours and 5.6% were over 2.5 hours to 3 hours. This contrasts with a situation where a large proportion of the stays would be for the maximum period of one hour. More extensive and location specific data of this type should be utilised in future management and assessment of the parking scheme. Of course, it should be noted that a large proportion of stays which are under one hour does not support the more time- consuming types of shopping such as clothes. Instead it facilitates the quick â&#x20AC;&#x153;in-and-outâ&#x20AC;? type of shopping. Undertake an empirical analysis of the parking trends and structure through the availability of council data. This is presented in Section 5. Undertake a survey of, and consultations with, the relevant stakeholders such as business bodies, businesses, residents, shoppers, officials and councillors. The survey of shoppers/residents/visitors is presented in Section 6 and the survey of retailers is presented in Section 7. Other consultations inform the discussion and assessment throughout the report. 114

Recommendations 1. The DLR pay and display parking scheme should continue to be operated to generate a net income flow which is used for various road and footpath maintenance and traffic management activities and for investment in the parking system. 2. The grace period of 15 minutes at start and end of parking period should be retained. 3. The current general parking charge of â&#x201A;Ź1.50 per hour should be retained. 4. Holders of DĂşn Laoghaire resident parking permits, regardless of their zones, should be allowed a free one hour parking period (plus grace periods) in the central business district to improve access of the resident population to local shopping facilities. 5. There should be an improved flow of information to the council and councillors, general public and local DĂşn Laoghaire commercial entities, on the parking system in terms of performance, finances, enforcement, use of net income, number and length of transactions and absolute price and price compared to other areas and entities. The parking payments information system should be developed to improve the availability of relevant information. 6. There should be a continued investment in and increased promotion of the various cashless methods especially Parkingtag. A Parkingtag promotion should consider a time constrained preferential parking rate for new users. 7. The Christmas period parking promotion of a free hour available to all users should be continued. This initiative should be assessed to identify its impact. There should be consideration of a longer promotional period for 2017. 8. Measures should be taken to counter the unjustified negative perception of DL parking emphasising positive features such as grace period, price, payment methods, availability of spaces and absence of clamping in Council parking bays. 115

9. There should be a target to increase consumer satisfaction with the DL parking system and to adopt a more consumer-oriented focus. 10. Signage should clearly identify the geographic demarcation between Council on-street parking and the Harbour Company onstreet parking which includes clamping and has higher prices. 11. The commercial sector in DĂşn Laoghaire should develop a shared validation scheme for part of shoppersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; parking costs. 12. In consultation with the commercial sector, the Council should consider occasional and periodic time-limited parking initiatives such as low priced periods. These should be considered following an assessment of the effect of the Christmas promotion. 13. Alongside parking initiatives, there is a need to enhance and promote the DL shopping experience and shopping offer and to implement an integrated town centre development strategy. 14. Ongoing efforts to develop retail in DL and to reduce the negative impact of parking on local retail must acknowledge the underlying constraints

associated

with

traffic

management,

necessary

enforcement, the imbalance between supply and availability of parking capacity and the potential demand and the universal problem of parking in town centres and traditional main street retail activity. 15. There should be additional in-depth primary research on the behavioural patterns of shoppers in DĂşn Laoghaire. This should be a co-operative effort between local businesses and associations, BID and the council. 16. The overall parking situation and perception would be improved by the council taking charge of the harbour area street parking.

116

References ATCM, association of town and city management. In-Town Parking: what works? Innovative practices in Parking Provision. ATCM 2015. Dún Laoghaire Business Improvement District Company. Dún Laoghaire Town 2020 Vision. 2015 Dún Laoghaire- Rathdown County Council. Guidelines for the implementation of pay and display parking control scheme. 2007. Fianna Fail. Streets Ahead. A New Vision For Keeping Irish Towns Alive. Fianna Fail Policy Document Indecon International Economics Consultants. Summary of Responses to Consultations with Business re Dún Laoghaire- Rathdown Local Economic and Community Plan. 2015 Mruk research. Assessing the Impact of Car Parking Charges on Town Centre Footfall. March 2015. Prepared for the Welsh Government RGDATA. Nightmare on Every Street. Town Centres, car parking and smart travel. An RGDATA Report. 2012

117