Appendix A: Retail Strategy

A.1   Capacity Assessment

The capacity assessment is the mechanism used to estimate the amount of additional expenditure that will occur in the County over the period of the Strategy to 2020. The 2007 Review considered capacity to 2020 but this review does not extend the period beyond 2020 (the life time of the next development plan). 

The key inputs and outputs to the capacity assessment are a derivation of the following:

• Step 1: Population and Expenditure Estimates; Population projections and per capita expenditure estimates – estimating the total amount of expenditure by the resident population of the county to 2020.
• Step 2: Turnover Estimates; estimating the total amount of turnover for retail outlets in the county to 2020.  This includes inputting information from household and shopper surveys to determine leakage and trade draw. 
• Step 3: Turnover Ratios; Calculating turnover ratios – turnover divided by floorspace.  This includes a floorspace assessment - a quantitative analysis of all available floorspace (trading and vacant) in the main centres within the catchment area.
• Step 4: Gross Additional Expenditure Potential – using the turnover estimates to 2020 to estimate the growth in spare expenditure capacity through the strategy years
• Step 5: Future Sources of Retail Sales; calculating the amount of expenditure that may occur through new retail developments (extant planning permissions) and increases in turnover efficiency. 
• Step 6: Capacity Potential – adjusting the gross additional expenditure potential by subtracting the future source of retail sales to result in net expenditure capacity.  The amount of floorspace that is required to accommodate this anticipated increase is calculated using turnover ratios.  This results in a figure for net floorspace potential available in the county, broken down by convenience and comparison. 

Step 1: Population and Expenditure Estimates

The first step is to calculate the total amount of expenditure on convenience and comparison goods by the resident population of the County up to 2020.  To derive this, the estimated per capita levels of expenditure are multiplied by the County population forecasts. 

Population forecasts have been outlined in the section on demographics and the Core strategy within this plan. These provide projections for County Kilkenny’s population to 2020.  This estimates that the population of the County in 2020 will be 109,802.

The per capita expenditure estimates for comparison and convenience goods are derived from the CSO’s 2006 Annual Services Inquiry (ASI), the latest year for which information is available in the format required.

The analysis of retail expenditure is only concerned with expenditure that occurs within retail outlets; i.e. expenditure related to floorspace only.  As a result the per capita expenditure figures exclude expenditure that does not occur in retail outlets – e.g. via the internet.  The impact of internet shopping has not been subject to conclusive research. As such and for the purposes of this Assessment, it is assumed that the further growth in internet shopping will not be at the expense of retail floorspace.

Resident Population

ASI 2006 Section G table 1 page 16

Convenience

(,000) Table CA1

* Table entry with 10% reduction and 5% added from comparison spend

Vat is included as it is part of the shoppers spend.

 

Some adjustments to the data set out in Table CA1 above of the Services Inquiry are also necessary in order to ensure that goods are correctly categorised between comparison and convenience. Firstly, it is estimated that approximately 10% of retail sales in non specialised stores is in department stores and other comparison goods. The remaining 90% is categorised as convenience sales.

Population

Population of the state 2006 was 4,239,848. Source: CSO census of population

As the ASI 2006 is based on returns in 2007 the base year is 2007.

In 2007 the population the population of the state was estimated at 4,340,000 by CSO (Source: Irish Times 19^th Dec 2007)

Therefore per capita convenience spend for the state at 2007 is €6,413,005/4,340,000 = €3,781

 

ASI 2006  Section G table 1 page 16

Comparison turnover

(,000) Table CA2

* Expenditure with 10% of non specialised stores added and 5% reduced

 

Background studies to the Retail Planning Guidelines provides that the category “other retailing in specialised stores” should be taken as comparison expenditure, with the exception of a small element of forecourt sales. An allowance has been made for this. A 10% adjustment for department stores and comparison goods as identified in the convenience figures.[1]

Total spend in the state on comparison goods € 14,196,602 x10³

Therefore per capita spend for state is 14,196,602  x10³/4,340,000 = €3271

For the purposes of this study expenditure on pharmaceutical goods and medical articles have been omitted from the comparison expenditure estimate as many medical or pharmaceutical products that would not constitute either convenience or comparison goods by normal definition.

Based on the 2006 Annual Service Inquiry we have estimated that the total expenditure per capita in 2006 on convenience goods was €3,248 and €3,056 on comparison goods.

These figures need to be adjusted to reflect expenditure levels in 2012 by taking account of the Consumer Price Index.

Table CA3

 

The figures set out within Table CA3 illustrate convenience and comparison expenditure per capita prices in 2006 adjusted to a 2012 price year. No growth in expenditure per capita has been assumed between 2006 and 2010 having regard to the recent economic downturn.

This approach is in accordance with the results of the Retail Sales Index which illustrates growth in expenditure between 2006 and 2008 and a decline in available expenditure from 2008 to 2010.

It was also considered necessary to make a further adjustment to the comparison expenditure figure having regard to the trends observed from the Retail Sales Index. An adjustment is made to provide for a reduction in comparison goods expenditure per capita from 2006 to 2012.

While the Retail Sales Index shows that “high street” comparison goods, such as clothing and footwear remain at or above 2006 levels there has been a reduction on the overall comparison figure between 2006 and 2012.

Having reviewed the figures for comparison goods expenditure as set out in Retail Sales Index it is considered that a reduction of 4.1% in expenditure per capita from 2006- 2012 can be justified. The revised figures are illustrated in Table CA3b below. 

Table CA3b

Price year 2012

Capacity Assessment

Expenditure per capita up to 2020

Since 2008 disposable incomes have fallen and both direct and indirect taxes have and will affect disposable income into the immediate future.

Taking this into account and reviewing the projected growth in the economy in the short to medium term a conservative view is taken in relation to expenditure growth per capita into the future.

It is assumed that expenditure growth in convenience spend will be zero between 2013 and 2015. This is because most household’s requirements in respect of convenience products have been largely satisfied.

It is also assumed that expenditure growth in comparison spend will be zero between 2013 and 2015. This is because of the low level of projected economic growth in the next two to three years. 

The Central Bank of Ireland in Feb 2013 quarterly review predicts a fall in consumer spending of 0.4% this year (2013) and a rise of 0.2% next year.

ERSI in its Quarterly Economic Commentary (winter 2012) sees domestic demand contracting further due to continued fiscal adjustment and deleveraging.

From 2015 onwards it is anticipated that there will be modest growth in the national economy of the order of 2 – 3 per cent per annum.

From 2015 to 2020 therefore it is assumed that convenience growth in expenditure will be 0.5% per annum and 1.5% in comparison spend.

The projected per capita expenditure using these growth rates are given in Table CA4 below.

 

Table CA4

 

Total Available Expenditure

This is calculated by multiplying the population by the expenditure per capita in CA4 above for each category.

Population

The population estimates for the county are as follows using the Regional Planning Guideline targets adjusted to take account of the CSO 2011 census of population.

Table CA4a

Source: Population projections Chapter 2 Kilkenny Draft County Development Plan 2013

 

Table CA5

 

Table CA6

 

Table CA6 sets out the total available comparison expenditure available within the administrative boundary of county.  In considering the above expenditure levels it is important to note that significantly different levels of turnover will apply to comparison goods such as clothing and footwear and smaller household durables than would apply to bulky household goods sold in retail warehouses. Retail warehouses have a distinct function and are generally located outside of a city or town centre.

As such it is necessary to split the available comparison expenditure between bulky and non bulky comparison goods.

Having regard to the Household Budget Survey and experience elsewhere in this respect, it is estimated that approximately 20% of comparison expenditure will be accounted for by bulky household goods in retail warehouse type premises.

Therefore the total available bulky goods expenditure (using 20%) can be calculated as follows.

Table CA7

Total available comparison expenditure excluding bulky goods

Table CA8

 

Adjustments for inflows and outflows

From the household and shoppers surveys carried and reviewed it was established as follows:

From the 2010 shoppers surveys carried out it was recorded that:

Convenience % inflow = 8%

Convenience % outflow = 29%

Comparison % outflow = 31.6%

Comparison % inflow = 58%

Table CA9

 

For the 2014 year it is assumed that the inflows and outflows will remain the same as at 2010. From 2015 onwards it is assumed that convenience inflows and outflows will remain the same as at present there is no proposal to bring forward a significant convenience proposal for the city and environs.

Table CA10

Existing Floorspace in County Kilkenny

The estimated existing floorspace within the county is given below in table CA11 and was derived from the Council’s own floorspace survey carried out in 2010.

Table CA11

Source 2010 planning department survey updated to 2012

Table CA11 above does not take into consideration retail floorspace which has been permitted post 2012 or constructed and not trading. (Adjustments for these are made later in the assessment.)

2. Turnover Estimates

The total available expenditure available for 2012 set out in Table CA9 above is an estimate of the amount of expenditure that is currently being sustained by the estimated amount of floorspace in the County.

For example in 2012 the county has approximately 20,531 m² of convenience floorspace that was generating €280.88m.

This gives a turnover ratio of €13,680/m²

Similarly approximately 40,966m2 of comparison floorspace was generating €243.35m

This gives a turnover ratio of €5,940/m².

For bulky goods approximately 31,030m² of space was generating €57.38m. This gives a turnover ratio of €1,849/m². This is a sign of underperforming space.

Industry norms would suggest that convenience turnover ratio should be of the order of €10,000/m²

The generally accepted turnover ratio for existing comparison floorspace is of the order of €5,000 per sq.m.

For bulky goods the industry norm suggests a turnover ratio of the order of €2,500/m²

 

3. Turnover ratios

The assumed turnover ratios for existing floorspace in 2012 set out in table CA12 below are an estimate of the amount of expenditure that can be sustained by the estimated amount of floor space in the county at the beginning of the retail period. They are consistent with industry norms.             

Table CA12 Assumed Turnover Ratios

 

These figures show the average turnover per sq metre of existing floor space overall in County Kilkenny. They disguise significant differences in turnover for different shops. In general, multiple branches of national and international shops are located within purpose built shopping centres or other prime locations. Prime town centre shop units will have substantially higher turnover per square metre than shops which are less well located or situated in older inefficient premises and are operated as independents. In particular, it is likely that smaller units have substantially lower turnover per sq. metre than these averages whilst the largest supermarket operators have substantially higher turnover rates per square metre.

The turnover of existing retail floorspace within the County in 2012 is obtained by multiplying the existing floorspace estimates set out in Table CA11 by the turnover per sq. metre estimates set out in Table CA12 above. This is illustrated in Table CA13 below.

Table CA13

The residual surplus for additional retail floorspace within the county  is obtained by subtracting the turnover of existing convenience, comparison and bulky goods expenditure (for 2012) as set out in Table CA13 from the total available expenditure set out in tables CA9  and CA10.

Table CA14 below sets out the available expenditure.

Table CA14

 

Floorspace Capacity

In order to calculate the requirements for additional retail floorspace within the County, the turnover per sq. m. of new retail floorspace should be divided by the surplus spend available set out in Table CA14

For the purposes of this assessment a turnover per sq. m. of €13,000 is assumed for new convenience floorspace, €5,500 for new comparison retail floorspace and €2,500 for new bulky goods floorspace in 2012 prices.

Table CA15

 

Assumption: 1% increase in turnover efficiency per annum for comparison and bulky goods in considered reasonable, and no increase in turnover efficiency for convenience goods.

Future Floorspace Requirements

Table CA16

 

It should be noted that the floorspace capacity figures outlined in Table CA16 above are indicative figures of the scale of new floorspace required to meet the needs of existing and future population and expenditure in the City and County. The key consideration is the scale and location of new floorspace.

Additional new floorspace may be proposed and this could replace some existing outdated or poorly located retail floorspace.

The quantum of retail floorspace only becomes a critical consideration where new convenience and comparison floorspace is proposed outside of the defined retail core of the city and the issue of likely impact on the city centre arises

 

Convenience

Since the compiling of the floorspace figures used in this analysis the following significant convenience retailing space has been granted in the City and Environs of Kilkenny.

• Two Aldi discount stores with 1,125m² and 1,144m^{2 of} net retail space. A discount store of Lidl was granted with 1,274m² of net retail space.  These are all trading and the total net retail space provided is 3,543m².
• A further Aldi store of 990m2 net retail area is under construction in Callan and will open in 2013.
• A further point to note is that the Ferrybank District centre has 4,577m2 of convenience floorspace granted and has not yet opened. It is assumed that the Ferrybank shopping centre will not open until 2014 at the earliest.

Therefore the indicative floor space requirements must be reduced by these amounts as follows:

2012                     7,040- 1,125 -1144 -1274 =                                            3,497m²

2014                     7,701 – 1,125 -1144-1274- 4577 -990 =                       - 1,409m²

2020                     10,709 – 1, 125,-1,144-1,274-4,577-990=                   1,599m²

 

Comparison

There has been no significant comparison floorspace granted permission within the county since the floorspace survey was carried out in 2010.

At that time extant floorspace is permitted  at the Kilkenny Retail Park and vacant was 2991m².(bulky goods) and McDonagh Junction had 1,549m2 vacant and in Ferrybank  4,341m2 is constructed and is anticipated will not trade before 2014.

Therefore the estimated indicative floor area for comparison is

 

2012    13,136 – 1,549 = 11,587m²

2014    14,415 – 1,549-4,341 =   8,525m²

2020     22,392 – 1549-4341 =  16,502m²

 

Bulky Goods

There is a clear oversupply of retail space for bulky goods comparison shopping.

It is assumed that the Kilkenny Retail Park floorspace will trade post 2014.  Factoring these figures into the derived figures, as set out in Table CA17 gives a final adjusted floor space requirement.

 

Table CA17

 

The effect on capacity when the Ferrybank shopping centre is included is of concern. It has the potential to impact on the development of additional significant convenience floorspace being developed over the period of the strategy.

Having regard to the population growth within the City and Environs and the shopping patterns within the county as evidenced by the household and shoppers surveys, it is considered that there is room for additional convenience capacity within Kilkenny City and environs during the plan period notwithstanding the build out capacity of the Ferrybank shopping centre.

The extent of that floorspace would need to be verified and justified through any planning application by means of a detail retail impact statement.

Recommendations

From the household surveys, it can be seen that an estimated 71% of convenience expenditure (market share) by the resident population is spent in retail units located in the county (29% outflow).  This compares with 69.5% and 73% in the 2007 and 2004 reviews respectively. 

The comparison market share of residents’ expenditure is 68.4% which is a small increase compared to 67.7% in the 2007 Review (31.6 % outflow).

From the shopper surveys, persons living outside the county account for an estimated 8% of total convenience turnover (trade draw) and 58% of the total comparison turnover of the County’s retail outlets. 

29% of the convenience exp goes outside the county

8% of convenience expenditure is from people outside the county

31.6% of comparison exp goes outside the county.

58% of comparison expenditure is from people outside the county.

Convenience market share should be higher than 71%.

It is reasonable to have the following targets as planning objectives to be achieved post 2020.

• Convenience market share improving to 80% post 2020[3]
• Comparison market share improving to 75% post 2020
• Convenience trade draw increasing from 8% to 15% post 2020.
• Comparison trade draw to remain at 58% post 2020

 

A.2   Household Surveys: Approach and Analysis

(Date of report: March 2011)

Introduction

The overall objective of the household survey was to provide an insight into the shopping patterns of the resident population of Kilkenny city and county.  For this reason only people normally resident in the City and County were interviewed. 

A total of 517 household surveys were carried out on various dates during November and December 2010.  During November 2010 a household survey was conducted, mainly through online survey forms.  This survey was advertised in the Kilkenny People, which directed people to the Council’s website, where they could then complete a short online questionnaire.  Hard copies of the survey form were also made available in all the Area Offices and the libraries.  A total of 157 online surveys were completed and a total of 9 postal surveys were received.  Following this, a number of households in Thomastown were randomly selected using the Eircom online phonebook, and a total of 29 surveys were completed by this means.

Finally a total of 322 door-to-door surveys were carried out by staff members of the Planning Department.  These were conducted in Callan, Castlecomer, Kilkenny city, South Kilkenny (Ballyhale, Mullinavat and Ferrybank) and Northwest Kilkenny (Urlingford, Johnstown and Freshford). 

 

For the purposes of analysis the county was divided into six study areas denoted by the principal town in each area.   Table 1 below lists the origin of respondents. 

 

Respondents’ Profile

 

The survey obtained personal information regarding the gender and age of the 517 respondents.  The majority, 67% were female.  Almost 24% of the respondents were aged 35-44 and 21% were aged 25-34.  The 15-24 age group recorded the lowest response rate at 5%, 15% were aged 45-54, 16% aged 55-64, 12% aged 65-74 and 5.2% aged 75 or over. 

Survey Analysis

The key questions posed by the household survey relate to the following topics:

• Main Food Shopping;
• Top Up Shopping;
• Clothing and Footwear Shopping;
• Bulky Goods Shopping;
• Shopping in Kilkenny City

 

Main Food Shopping

Main food shopping destinations as identified through the household surveys are set out in Table 2.

 

Dunnes Stores (both branches) in Kilkenny was the most popular destination for main grocery shopping by 21.8% of respondents, followed by Lidl with 13.6% of respondents.  Just over one quarter (26.9%) of respondents travelled to a destination outside the County for their main food shopping.  Tesco in Waterford accounted for 6.6% of this leakage. 

Table 3 provides a breakdown of shopping destinations and the area from which the respondents originated.  It can be seen from the table that the top destinations for main food shopping corresponded with the area from which households set out from.  In the South, the northwest, and the north, it is clear that a significant number of households are conducting their main shop in locations outside the county.

 

 

For those respondents travelling outside County Kilkenny for their main food shopping, Waterford city was the most popular destination.   Table 4 below lists the most popular shops outside of the county by town and by shop.

 

 

 

 

Table 5 below provides information on the level of expenditure on main food shopping amongst respondents.  The highest proportion, 21.5%, spent between €76 and €100 on their last main food shopping trip.    

                               

A point of note is that shopping for the main food shop on the internet accounted for only 2 of the households surveyed, which forms a mere 0.38%. Both of these households used Tesco’s online service. 

Top Up Shopping

Table 6 below illustrates that a wide range of top up shopping locations are used by shoppers in the County with no centre being predominant.  This would be expected as it is a trip which is generally undertaken at the most local level.  At the County level, Supervalu in Callan was found to be the most popular top up shopping destination with 9.7% of all respondents going there.  This was closely followed by Supervalu in Kilkenny. 

 

By its nature expenditure on top-up shopping is considerably less than spent on main food shopping.  Over three-quarters of respondents spent €25 or less on their last shopping trip. 

Clothing & Footwear Shopping

Table 8 shows the main clothing and footwear shopping destinations as derived from the household surveys.  62.3% identified Kilkenny City, as where they did their clothing and footwear shopping. 

Centres outside of the County where comparison expenditure was leaking to were identified as:

• Waterford City:  13% of respondents conducted their last clothing shop in Waterford
• Dublin: was identified as only a significant clothing and footwear destination for the respondents, accounting for 6.5% of households surveyed.
• Carlow: accounted for 5% of respondents    
• Internet usage: accounted for 2.3% of respondents
• Other locations cited included: Portlaoise (3), Kildare (10), Cork (3), Limerick (2) and Rathdowney (3).    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As indicated in Table 9 below, expenditure on clothing and footwear is spread across a number of ranges.  The majority, 20.7%, spent between €76 and €100 on their last trip.

 

Bulky goods

Table 10 identifies the main places where people do their bulky goods shopping. 

 

 

The table illustrates that Electro City in Kilkenny City was the main destination for bulky goods shopping (16.3%), with DID Electrical being the second most popular location (14.7%) for respondents. 

A total of 23.6% of the households travelled outside the County to purchase bulky goods.  A total of 5 respondents bought their last bulky goods item on the internet. 

 

Additional Key Findings

The following provides a summary of the additional key findings found from the household survey:

1. Over 61% of respondents carry out their main grocery shopping once a week while 24% conduct main food shopping twice a week or more;
2. Some 25% of households surveyed revealed that they undertake top up shopping everyday. An interesting finding was that some household’s patterns are to do daily or more frequent top-up shopping, and no main shop at all;
3. The category for which internet purchases was the most significant was for clothes and shoes shopping, and even this was recorded as forming only 2.3% of a response;
4. Being located close to home (31.6%), a good choice of shops (27.2%), and value (14.3%) ranked as the key attractions for clothing and footwear shopping destinations in the survey;
5. Some 27% of respondents visited Kilkenny City for shopping purposes once a week or more.  3.9% of respondents declared they had not visited in the last six months and 4.3% stated they never visit for shopping purposes. 

 

Comparison of Household Surveys 2000, 2004, 2007 and 2010

The key findings from a comparative analysis of the 2000, 2004, 2007 and 2010 household surveys are highlighted in Table 11.  The table compares the expenditure outflows within the County for 2000, 2004, 2007 and 2010.

 

Convenience Expenditure Leakage

The table illustrates that from 2000 to 2007 convenience expenditure leakage had increased from 19.8% to 30.5%.  This reflected the fact that there was no significant level of new modern format convenience floorspace delivered in the County in the interim period and as a result people were increasingly going to other centres such as Waterford, Carlow and Thurles.  Since the last surveys in 2007, the level of convenience expenditure leakage has decreased by over 1%.  This is reflective of the new offer throughout the County, including a new Dunnes in MacDonagh, two Lidls in Kilkenny city, Aldi in Ferrybank and a Lidl and improved Supervalu in Thomastown. 

 

As it is generally accepted that convenience shopping is undertaken locally, with leakage in urban areas being more of the order of 10%, the level of convenience expenditure leakage is still significant.  The opening of a large modern format convenience floorspace in the Ferrybank District Centre and the opening of additional discount retailers in the city will serve to help redress the issue but, even with these emerging developments, the facts indicate that the City and County require further enhancement and strengthening of their main food convenience offers.

 

Comparison Expenditure Leakage

Table 11 indicates that, in contrast to patterns in convenience shopping, since 2000 the County as a whole has witnessed a relatively small decrease in comparison expenditure leakage.  It can be accepted that, given that Kilkenny City is the only major comparison shopping centre in the County, people will travel to other centres – although this will be on a less frequent basis – to undertake their comparison shopping.  The role of the Retail Strategy is, therefore, to provide the framework for enhancing the City and County’s comparison offer and maximising the retention of spend.

A.3 Shopper survey: Approach and Analysis

(Date of report: November 2010)

Introduction

A total of 343 shopper surveys were conducted in five locations throughout Kilkenny City on two dates in October 2010.  Table 1 below lists the centres and the number of people surveyed at each centre. 

Table 2 provides information on the time and day of responses to the shopper survey.  The majority, 53% of respondents were interviewed between 12-4 pm and more surveys were undertaken on the Saturday.  

 

Survey Information

The key questions posed by the shopper survey relate to the following topics:

• Shopper origin
• Mode of transport
• Reason for visiting Kilkenny city
• Actual/expected expenditure on goods or services
• Main stores/areas visited
• Principal attractions of Kilkenny City
• Principal improvements to Kilkenny City

Shopper Origin

Table 3 below provides an indication of the origin of respondents to the shopper survey.  The majority, 70%, of respondents were from Kilkenny City and county. 

 

A breakdown of the origin of respondents from outside Kilkenny City and County is provided in Table 4 below.  The neighbouring counties of Carlow, Laois, Tipperary, Wexford and Waterford account for 13% of respondents.  A further 5% travelled from abroad.  

Mode of Transport

Table 5 provides a breakdown of the modes of transport. 

 

Reasons for visiting Kilkenny City

 

Respondents were asked to provide information on the primary reasons for travelling to Kilkenny on the day of their visit.  Among Kilkenny residents it was found that 47% were in the city to do some form of grocery shopping.  Only 6% of non-Kilkenny residents were in the City for grocery shopping.  Among Kilkenny residents, 34% cited clothes/footwear as a reason for visiting, whilst among non-residents 45% cited this as a reason.  Of the total respondents, only 6% cited Furnishing/household/electrical as a reason for visiting.  

 

Note: Totals add up to more than 100% as in most cases shoppers gave two or more reasons

 

Shopper spend

Table 7 indicates the level of expenditure among respondents to the shopper survey. 

 

 

 

Table 8 provides a percentage breakdown of the respondents’ spend between residents and non-residents.  Only 8% of expenditure on convenience goods is accounted for by non-residents.  On the other hand, non-residents accounted for 58% of comparison goods expenditure.  Clearly respondents from outside the county are more likely to travel to the city for comparison goods than convenience goods.  

 

 

Main stores/areas visited

 

Respondents were asked to indicate the primary streets, shopping centres, or areas that they visited or intended to visit in the city.  Table 9 indicates that the majority, 34% travelled or intended to travel to High Street.  Kieran Street was the next most popular destination. 

 

 

 

Frequency of visits

Respondents were asked to indicate the frequency with which they visit Kilkenny City.  As indicated in Table 10, 91% of Kilkenny residents visit Kilkenny city at least once a week.  Just 10% of respondents from outside County Kilkenny visit Kilkenny City once a week or more. 

 

 

 

Main attractions

Table 11 below indicates the principal attractions shoppers cited for Kilkenny City.  The most often cited attraction was that it was ‘close to home’.  ‘Attractive shopping environment’ and ‘Good choice of clothing & footwear shops’ were the next most popular reasons. 

 

 

Principal Improvements

Table 12 provides an indication of the principal improvements respondents considered important for Kilkenny City.  Cheaper/free parking and more parking provision were the two most often cited reasons. 

 

 

Comparison of Shopper Surveys 2007 and 2010

As part of the review of the Retail Strategy in 2007, 230 face-to-face on-street shopper interviews were conducted at four locations in the city centre.  One additional survey point of Mac Donagh Junction shopping centre was added to the surveys for this study. 

This section provides a comparative analysis of the shopping expenditure inflows into County Kilkenny from the surrounding areas.  Table 13 below illustrates the changes that have occurred in expenditure inflows between 2000 and 2010. 

 

 

From the table it can be seen that convenience expenditure inflows have dropped from a peak of 19.8% in 2004 to 8% in 2010.  Although inflows remain above their 2000 level (6.3%), they would be anticipated to be higher. 

 

In contrast, comparison expenditure inflows can be seen to have steadily grown since 2000.  This is reflective of the increased comparison floorspace which has come on stream.  The offer and attraction of mainstream comparison shopping is also an important factor in the equation and has played a key role in the increase in comparison inflows.  The figures confirm that the Retail Strategy’s objective in sustaining the competitiveness of the City and County in the regional and national retail economies has been achieved. 

Table 14 below provides a comparative breakdown of the 2004, 2007 and 2010 shopper expenditure patterns by residents and non-residents of the County.    

 

The table illustrates that convenience expenditure by non-residents has dropped between 2007 and 2010.  However, comparison spend has risen by over 16% during the same period.  In terms of overall non-resident expenditure, there has been an increase of 24% as a proportion of total spend.