Report To: Scrutiny Committee Date: 1 March Claire Onslow Head of Tourism & Economic Development

Similar documents
VISITSCOTLAND ICENTRE UPDATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. 5 December Report by Executive Director

PERTH AND KINROSS COUNCIL. Housing and Health Committee. 25 May Perth and Kinross Local Housing Strategy

LINCOLNSHIRE PARKING POLICY DRAFT

TO AGREE TO CONSULT ON SCHOOL TERM DATES CABINET MEMBER FOR CHILDREN S SERVICES

Regulatory Committee

Agenda item no 7. Strathclyde Bus Alliance - Proposal. Committee. Strategy and Programmes. Date of meeting 20 May 2016 Date of report 25 April 2016

CORNWALL VISITOR SURVEY 06/07. Final report. Produced by South West Tourism Research Department For and on behalf of Visit Cornwall.

PERTH AND KINROSS COUNCIL. 22 June 2016 DEVELOPING THE CULTURAL OFFER IN PERTH AND KINROSS UPDATE AND NEXT STEPS

Destination Performance 2012

LINCOLNSHIRE PARKING POLICY DRAFT

Ian Saxon Assistant Executive Director, Environmental Services

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

HERNE BAY AREA MEMBER PANEL 16 TH JANUARY This report is open to the public.

Report of Commissioning Director, Growth and Development. Wards Child s Hill, Golders Green and West Hendon. Summary

Events Tasmania Research Program Hobart Baroque Festival

East Lancashire Highways and Transport Masterplan East Lancashire Rail Connectivity Study Conditional Output Statement (Appendix 'A' refers)

Open Report on behalf of Richard Wills, Executive Director for Environment & Economy. Nettleham Village Centre - Proposed Parking Restrictions

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

Self Catering Holidays in England Economic Impact 2015

Summary Report. Economic Impact Assessment for Beef Australia 2015

The Economic Impact of Tourism Brighton & Hove Prepared by: Tourism South East Research Unit 40 Chamberlayne Road Eastleigh Hampshire SO50 5JH

Consultation on Draft Airports National Policy Statement: new runway capacity and infrastructure at airports in the South East of England

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

FOR CONSIDERATION BY The Executive on 30 October Angus Ross, Executive Member for Environment

Performance Criteria for Assessing Airport Expansion Alternatives for the London Region

The Strategic Commercial and Procurement Manager

Calderdale MBC. Wards Affected: Town. Economy and Investment Panel: 20 October Halifax Station Gateway Masterplan

PERTH AND KINROSS COUNCIL. Environment Committee. 7 September Household Waste and Recycling Public Satisfaction Surveys

YORKSHIRE DALES NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY ITEM 10 CHARGING FOR THE USE OF AUTHORITY OWNED PUBLIC TOILETS

2009 Muskoka Airport Economic Impact Study

Ancillary Revenue On-Site Consulting Package

Economic Impact of Tourism. Norfolk

Consideration of application to change cash, Leap and pre-paid fares including monthlies and annual fares from Dublin Bus for 2017

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

SANDY BAY RETAIL PRECINCT STREETSCAPE REVITALISATION - PALM TREES AND BANNER POLES - RESPONSE TO PETITION

The Economic Impact of West Oxfordshire s Visitor Economy 2015

The Economic Impact of West Oxfordshire s Visitor Economy 2016

Guidance on criteria for assessing the financial resources of new applicants and holders of operating licences

Report of the Strategic Director of Place to the meeting of Executive to be held on 11 September 2018

An Evaluation of the impact

Transport Delivery Committee

Ryeish Green and Grays Fruit Farm Sports Hub Projects. Shinfield South and Wokingham Without. Heather Thwaites, Director of Environment

Coventry - Visitor Accommodation Growth Study Brief. Invitation to Tender. Introduction

Economic Development Sub-Committee

Commissioned by: Economic Impact of Tourism. Stevenage Results. Produced by: Destination Research

Economic Impact of Tourism. Hertfordshire Results. Commissioned by: Visit Herts. Produced by:

This report is PUBLIC [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED] Board Meeting. Councillor Roger Lawrence Transport

CITY CLERK. Toronto International Festival Caravan (Various Wards)

Employment Characteristics of Tourism Industries, 2011

Economic Development Sub- Committee

The Economic Impact of Tourism on Calderdale Prepared by: Tourism South East Research Unit 40 Chamberlayne Road Eastleigh Hampshire SO50 5JH

Economic Impacts of Campgrounds in New York State

Transforming Intra-African Air Connectivity:

Chairman and Members of the Planning and Development Committee. Edward R. Sajecki, Commissioner of Planning and Building

The Economic Impact of Tourism on Scarborough District 2014

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

The Challenges for the European Tourism Sustainable

T O U R I S M P L A N 2020

MAXIMUM LEVELS OF AVIATION TERMINAL SERVICE CHARGES that may be imposed by the Irish Aviation Authority ISSUE PAPER CP3/2010 COMMENTS OF AER LINGUS

THIRTEENTH AIR NAVIGATION CONFERENCE

Water Industry Commission for Scotland Integrating customer perspectives in a regulatory setting

West Sussex Local Authority Parking Enforcement Agreement

in Southwark: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY a survey and report

Comparing Domestic and Foreign Tourists Economic Impact in Desert Triangle of Rajasthan

Inland Queensland Roads Action Plan

The Economic Impact of Tourism on Oxfordshire Estimates for 2014

Gold Coast. Rapid Transit. Chapter twelve Social impact. Chapter content

The Economic Impact of Tourism on Oxfordshire Estimates for 2013

(905) , Extension 2725

Finchley and Golders Green Area Committee 27 April 2017

1.1. The purpose of this report is to seek approval for the adoption and publication of the Sports Pitches Strategy for East Dunbartonshire.

National Rail Passenger Survey Autumn 2013 Main Report

Terms of Reference: Introduction

Llandudno Junction. Regeneration Proposals for the Future. December 2009

REVALIDATION AND VALIDATION: PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES

Tourism Industry Council Tasmania Community Survey 2018 Research Report. May 2018

CHL Consulting Company Ltd.

Cabinet 16 December Cabinet, 16 December At a Special Cabinet Meeting of North Ayrshire Council at 2.30 p.m.

1. Overview and Key Issues

Report of the Executive

The 35 th AMERICA S CUP POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT. Prepared by the Bermuda America s Cup Bid Committee October 2014

Commissioning Director - Environment

MOURNE & SLIEVE CROOB AONB. VISITORS SURVEY Summary Report

SOUTH CAMBRIDGESHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL. Executive Director / Senior Planning Policy Officer

Customer Satisfaction Tracking Annual Report British Columbia Ferry Services Inc.

POLICE AND FIRE & RESCUE SCRUTINY SUB-COMMITTEE. Consultation, Annual Review of Policing 2017/18 by Scottish Police Authority (SPA)

The Economic Impact of Tourism Brighton & Hove Prepared by: Tourism South East Research Unit 40 Chamberlayne Road Eastleigh Hampshire SO50 5JH

The Bus Services Bill and Municipal Bus Companies

Local public consultation

Rushmoor Local Plan 6 July 2017 Louise Piper Planning Policy & Conservation Manager Richard Ward Environment & Airport Monitoring Officer

The Economic Impact of Tourism on the District of Thanet 2011

Shepway Parking Strategy

CAIRNS RECTANGULAR PITCH STADIUM NEEDS STUDY PART 1 CAIRNS REGIONAL COUNCIL DRAFT REPORT SEPTEMBER 2011

AIR TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT Universidade Lusofona January 2008

National Passenger Survey Spring putting rail passengers first

GIPPSLAND TOURISM MASTER PLAN

TRANSPORT FOR GREATER MANCHESTER COMMITTEE REPORT FOR RESOLUTION

Bartlett Square Welcome. Investment Framework. London Airport Ltd

Report of the Strategic Director, Regeneration to the meeting of Bradford South Area Committee to be held on 28 January U

Transcription:

Agenda Item No: Report Title: Report No: Benchmarking Tourist Information Centres Report To: Scrutiny Committee Date: 1 March 2012 Lead Councillor: Ward(s) Affected: Report By: Cllr Tony Nicholson All Corporate Head Communities & Enterprise Contact Officer(s)- Name(s): Post Title(s): E-mail(s): Tel No(s): Claire Onslow Head of Tourism & Economic Development claire.onslow@lewes.gov.uk 01273 484401 Purpose of Report: To consider benchmarking data (comparison with other local authorities) for the Tourist Information Centre service. Officers Recommendation(s): 1. That Scrutiny Committee examines the benchmarking data and considers whether the Lewes District Council (LDC) Tourist Information Centre Service (TIC): (a)offers Value for Money (b) makes a contribution to the local economy in meeting the Council objective Creating Prosperous & Vibrant Communities 2. That Scrutiny Committee identifies any areas for improvement or requiring further analysis, within the TIC service. Reasons for Recommendations: 1. Benchmarking studies can help to identify areas of council service delivery that have the potential to yield additional income or reduce costs, improve services to the public or contribute to the economic vitality of the District. 2. Information Lewes District Tourist Information Centre Service 2.1 The Tourism & Economic Development Service operates the Lewes & Seaford TICs. The provision of TICs is part of the overall delivery of the tourism service which is an important business sector making a significant contribution to the economy of the Lewes District. The latest Page 1 of 8

Economic Impact of Tourism Study (2010) produced by Tourism South East, estimates that tourism contributes 155m pa to the local economy and supports 2300 jobs. 2.2 The primary aim of the TIC service is to provide high quality information and support service to visitors, local residents and businesses to support the area as a visitor destination. Each centre delivers this service in a different way to reflect their specific locations but the overriding principles are to support private enterprise in the local economy and meet the national standards of the TIC Network. 2.3 Both TICs offer retail as a secondary function, which has been introduced to make a contribution to offsetting operational costs but the TICs are still fundamentally providing an information service. Lewes TIC 2.4 Lewes TIC is the Districts busiest centre, located in a prime high street position with a high pedestrian footfall. The service operates Monday Friday 9am 5pm, with seasonal opening hours at weekends, April September Saturday 9.30am 5.30pm & Sunday 10am 2pm; October March Saturday 10am 2pm, closed on Sunday. 2.5 Whilst a visitor destination in its own right, Lewes town is also the largest population within the South Downs National Park which is estimated to contribute to the high visitor footfall at the TIC but the service also has a strong patronage from local residents which particularly supports the retail services. 2.6 Lewes TIC offers a wide range of services for visitors & local residents which can be summarised into the following main areas: Free visitor information service for the town, District and surrounding area via leaflets, information and face to face services, meeting National TIC Standards Accommodation booking service for Enjoy Sussex advertisers & NQAS rated accommodation (subject to commission) Large Retail operation Ticket agency service eg. for local events, transport, oyster cards 2.7 In addition to the information service, Lewes TIC operates a large retail operation to offset operating costs. The range of merchandise includes special interest books, gifts and souvenirs but also a wider range of locally produced cards and gifts developed in partnership with local traders. The TIC also acts as an agency to support local event ticket sales and transport tickets taking a commission on sales. The retail operation maximises the location to trade as part of the high street and in the last 3 years income turnover has increased by almost 50%. Page 2 of 8

2.8 In 2010/11 Lewes TIC welcomed 99,091 visitors and responded to 62,812 specific enquiries. Retail turnover was 125,650 with an estimated spend per head of 1.27. 2.9 The operational budget for Lewes TIC in 2010/11 is 140,150, which includes a 13,500 annual contribution to the Peacehaven Information Point. Seaford TIC 2.10 In 2008, Seaford TIC relocated to 37 Church Street, Seaford to become part of the multi agency facility with Sussex Police, CAB and Seaford Town Centre. The service operates Monday Friday 9am 4.45pm with additional Saturday opening between April September 9am 4,45pm. Seaford TIC has a high year round community patronage with a more noticeable seasonal visitor usage. 2.11 Seaford TIC offers a wide range of services for users which can be summarised into the following main areas: Free community & visitor information service for the town, District and surrounding area via leaflets and face to face service meeting National TIC Standards Accommodation booking service for Enjoy Sussex advertisers & NQAS rated accommodation (subject to commission) Limited book & souvenir retail sales Ticket agency service eg for local events, transport, oyster cards Reception service for Seaford Town Council and the other represented agencies Supporting LDC services including Housing Benefit Verification service. 2.12 Seaford TIC is unable to offer a large scale retail operation due to the limitations of space and operating restrictions within the Police Station. Thus income generation activities are restricted to a small line of souvenirs and commissionable items such as local event and transport tickets. 2.13 In 2010/11 Seaford TIC welcomed 30,739 visitors and responded to 22,987 specific enquiries. Retail turnover was 75,333 with an estimated spend per head of 2.30. 2.14 The operational budget for Seaford TIC in 2010/11 is 80,520 2.15 In addition to the specific services highlighted above, the TICs play an important role in supporting specific aspects of the local economy. As part of the service, our staff are required to have a detailed knowledge of the local environment, businesses and activities that take place in the local area and wider District. An interaction with the TIC service should inspire a visitor to widen the perspective of a visit which has a direct impact on local businesses from direct tourism providers (such as visitor attractions & accommodation) to ancillary services such as retail, Page 3 of 8

hospitality and entertainment businesses which all contribute to a buoyant visitor economy. 2.16 In 2010, Lewes TIC participated in a pilot study (carried out by Tourism South East) to assess the economic impact of the TIC service to the local area. The indicative results showed that as a direct result of visiting the TIC and having activities suggested, visitors went on to directly contribute 992,013 into the local economy. At the time this equated to a 9 spend per head per visitor and for every 1 invested by Lewes District Council in Lewes TIC, 6 was spent in the local economy. 3.0 Background to benchmarking studies 3.1 TIC services are not statutory, and services vary some are included in the budgets of Museums or other shared services, and some LAs offer a grant towards operation costs to a third party and thus the range of costs and TIC services varies significantly. Even our own TIC services vary significantly in service provision due to their location and operating circumstances which makes it difficult to benchmark. 3.2 To assist the Council in benchmarking of the TIC service, we have tried to compare our services with our nearest geographic neighbours providing a TIC service. Unfortunately not all neighbours were able to provide the range of data we required to benchmark our services so we have tried to review our services in the most comparable way with the data we were able to gather. 4.0 The Review Process 4.1 A breakdown of the following statistics (shown in the Appendices): Appendix 1: Visitors to TICs Appendix 2: TIC Operating Costs Appendix 3: Net Cost per visitor Appendix 4: Income Generation Appendix 5: LDC expenditure & Visitor Activity in TIC services over the past 3 years. The figures provided can be summarised as follows: Review of Lewes & Seaford TIC Services 4.2 Lewes TIC was the third busiest TIC in the area after Brighton and Battle Abbey both of which are located in prime tourist locations and in shared service buildings. It was also the second highest income generator after Guildford, and where data was available significantly out performed other TIC retail operations offsetting costs. 4.3 The cost per visitor of both our TICs is considerably higher than that of other authorities. However as highlighted above there is no set standard for a TIC service and neighbouring authorities have different Page 4 of 8

business models to share costs with other services or offer grants which reduce the net cost of their TIC service. 4.4 In terms of Lewes TIC, it is a stand alone service in a prime high street location and therefore does record one of the highest operating costs at 1.67 per visitor. Significant efforts have been made over the last 3 years to maximise the location to generate income to offset the costs by almost doubling retail turnover and spend per head from 0.51 to 1.27 over the last 3 years. 4.5 However, the intrinsic value of the TIC to the local economy also needs to be considered. As highlighted above for every 1 invested by LDC in the Lewes TIC service visitors went on to spend 6 in the local economy and supports the 155million local tourism economy. This highlights the important role the TIC plays in supporting local businesses. 4.6 In recognition of the need to continue to reduce overheads without compromising service delivery or the impacts on the local economy, the TED team are currently drafting a proposal for the SDNPA to consider a shared visitor service provision at 187 High Street for an annual contribution. 4.7 At Seaford TIC, premises costs were significantly reduced with the relocation to Church Street in 2008, but the cost of the service to the Council still remains high at 2.45 per visitor. However these costs are on par with those of Burgess Hill TIC which is the nearest comparable business model. However it is recognised that Seaford TIC does offer a wider range of services over and above that of a TIC to the local community, economy and the partners of 37 Church Street in exchange for a subsidised premise rental. 4.8 In the 2010 efficiency savings process, it was suggested that consideration be given to the devolution of Seaford TIC to Seaford Town Council which would reduce the Councils expenditure over an agreed devolution period but this was rejected and no further consideration was given to this. 5. Summary 5.1 The figures shown in the Appendices below do show that the net service costs have been variable over the last three years some of which relates to year end carry forward stock. The combined budget for the TIC service (2010/11) was 220,670 which translated into an overall cost per visitor of 1.70. 5.2 Whilst costs of the Lewes TIC service are appearing to be quite high, it is one of the few stand alone services providing a high quality TIC service and generating high retail turnover. Many comparable services are showing a lower cost per service as their budgets do not include recharges and building costs so it is not a true reflect of service costs. Page 5 of 8

5.3 The cost per visitor at Lewes TIC has increased over the last 3 years and whilst positive efforts have been made to increase retail turnover, the Tourism & Economic Development team are looking at future delivery partners and business models to reduce the cost to the Council. 5.4 The cost per user for Seaford TIC has reduced over the last 3 years as community patronage increases. However the services provided by the TIC are recognised to provide a wider community support role for the town. 5.5 Having scrutinised the data provided, the Committee is requested to consider the following criteria: 5.5.1 Is the service providing value for money? 5.5.2 Is the service high performing? 5.5.3 Are there any identified areas for improvement or further analysis? 6. Financial Implications There is provision in the base budget each year for a number of detailed benchmarking studies. However, this particular report has not incurred any external costs. 7. Environmental Implications I have completed the Environmental Implications Questionnaire and there are additional significant effects as a result of these recommendations. no 8. Risk Management Implications Risk Service Managers may not deliver high performing, high satisfaction, and low cost services. Mitigation Chief Officers should benchmark their service areas, understand the market for their services, and the provider market for delivering those services. 9. Background Papers None 10. Appendices Appendix 1: Visitors to TICs Appendix 2: TIC Operating Costs Appendix 3: Net Cost per visitor Appendix 4: Income Generation Appendix 5: LDC Expenditure & Visitor Activity in TIC services over the past 3 years. Page 6 of 8

Appendix 1: Visitors to TICs (2010/11) Lewes Seaford Brighton Battle Rye Horsham Burgess Hill Guildford Visitors 99,091 30,739 371,365 130,000* 55,034 68,756 34,828 69,405 Notes: To the building *To the whole site not just TIC To the building Appendix 2: TIC Operating Costs (2010/11) Lewes Seaford Brighton Battle Rye Horsham Burgess Hill Guildford Operating Costs 165,898 75,333 148,120 30,000 75,000 358,411 72,427 n/a Location & Notes: *inc 13000 contribution to Peacehaven Info Centre Within 37 Church Street shared services Within Brighton Pavilion. Costs do not include any building costs / recharges etc Within English Heritage reception area. Costs shown are just the LA grant given to TIC and don t include other costs Within Horsham Museum combined budget Within BH Town Centre Info Points shared service. Total costs Appendix 3: Net Cost per visitor (based on information provided) Lewes Seaford Brighton Battle Rye Horsham Burgess Hill Guildford Cost per visitor 1.67 2.45 0.40p n/a n/a Page 7 of 5.21* 8 2.08 n/a

Appendix 4: Income Generation (2010/11) Lewes Seaford Brighton Battle Rye Horsham Guildford Income / Turnover 116,632 70,804 33,000* n/a n/a 30,638 125,676 Commission Sales only Appendix 5: Net cost per visitor Lewes & Seaford TIC Over 3 years Seaford Visitors Turnover Spend per head Budget Cost per visitor 2010/11 30,739 70,804 2.30 75,333 2.45 2009/10 29,641 40,315 1.36 86,530** 2.91 2008/09 27,641 21,890 0.79 76,982 2.79 Lewes TIC Visitors Turnover Spend per head Budget Cost per visitor 2010/11* 99,091 125,650 1.27 165,868 1.67 2009/10 111,935 98,594 0.88 177,428** 1.58 2008/09 122,797 62,984 0.51 145,038 1.18 * 2010/11 budget includes extra budget for renovation works and visitor numbers impacted by closure for renovation works and severe weather. ** Higher costs reflect year end stock. Page 8 of 8