Engagement report - Louth town centre

Overview

Executive summary

this was a non-statutory engagement activity carried out on behalf of Louth Transport Board (The Board). It was open for six weeks
it was very widely promoted to identified:
- stakeholders
- news outlets and partners
- social media
- staff
- the public and councillors
there were 1,323 respondents, of which:
- 982 were residents
- 223 were visitors
- 118 other respondents, for example organisation representatives, residents of nearby villages
there were 264 individuals (residents or visitors) with a form of disability which is 20% of all respondents. The percentage of Lincolnshire residents who consider themselves as disabled is 27.6%

Introduction

The Active Travel experimental trial in Louth ran for 18 months to explore different ways to encourage people to take more time when visiting the centre of the town. It concluded in September 2023.

Since then, the Louth Transport Board – made up of councillor and officer representatives from Lincolnshire County Council, East Lindsey District Council and Louth Town Council, discussed various options for alternative uses of the area.

At its meeting of 7 November 2023, the Board discussed results from previous surveys carried out by East Lindsey District Council and Louth Town Council. They also considered options for future alternative use of space in the town centre and decided to engage with the public to hear their views and ideas on them.

A survey and a mapping tool were published on Let’s talk Lincolnshire for anyone that lives, works or visits Louth to share their views and ideas on the future of the Louth town centre.

Stakeholders

Primary stakeholders were the public and particularly those who live, work, or visit Louth. Secondary stakeholders included councillors and partner organisations who could help identify and share the opportunity to respond.

As part of the engagement, equality impact assessments on the Board’s proposed options were carried out to identify those who might be positively or negatively impacted by the Board’s proposed options and promote the engagement activity to them.

Methodology

a survey and an interactive map were open to the public on the homepage of Let’s talk Lincolnshire from 22 January to 1 March 2024
the survey and the map were available:
- on the Let’s talk Lincolnshire website
- in other formats on request via a dedicated telephone line
We received 1,323 survey responses in total of which:
- 1,243 surveys submitted directly on Let’s talk Lincolnshire website
- 80 surveys submitted by post
We received 42 map responses in total of which:
- 27 map responses submitted directly on Let’s talk Lincolnshire website
- 15 map responses submitted by post

Survey

the survey contained 21 questions. Followed by an 'about you' section where we asked in which capacity people were responding. This included:
- residents
- visitors
- business representatives
- organisation representatives
- councillors
- 'other'
for individuals who responded as resident or a visitor we asked additional questions including:
- age
- disability
- overall impact of the options
comments or reasons were sought on the overall impact from those who identified any impacts on themselves or people in their household. We used the results to update the Equality Impact Analysis documents
for those who responded as an organisation or business representative we asked for the name of their organisation or business they represented
for those who responded as a councillor we asked which council they represented
for those who responded as other, we asked to provide more details

Map

The map provided participants with an opportunity to:

place a pin where they would like to see cycle parking facilities in Louth town centre
provide any additional comments on the pins and locations they selected

Engagement promotion

Promotion was carried out via various methods:

leaflet distribution to every household in Louth (about 14,500 households)
news release on Lincolnshire County Council website
news release to local media outlets
social media messages on Facebook, Instagram, X and Nextdoor
social media paid advertising campaign for the duration of the engagement covering Louth and 30 km radius
two articles in the town and parish council newsletter
two email newsletters sent to Let’s talk Lincolnshire registered participants
direct email to identified stakeholders including 80 organisations providing services in Louth, 13 educational settings in Louth and 27 Lincolnshire wide organisations
a poster was available in various locations in Louth town centre
two face-to-face, drop-in pop-up stalls on the Cornmarket on 31 January and 17 February 2024
poster distribution by the project team to local businesses on 31 January 2024
county council internal staff comms messages
Lincolnshire highways newsletter
County Catch up newsletter

Findings

there were 3,709 - page visitors. Of that number, 1,882 people clicked for further information. Page visitors and postal respondents completed 1,323 surveys and provided 42 pins on the map for cycle parking
most respondents came to the page directly (570), from social media (232) or used an email link they had received (109). This reflects the way the survey was promoted
in the survey, the Board outlined a number of their preferred options for Louth town centre.
- 55% of respondents (730) agreed with the Board’s preferred option for Cornmarket - to leave it as existing (space for market stalls on market days and for parking at other times). Comparing to 42% of respondents (559) selecting seasonal scheme or full-time closure as their preferred option
- 45% of respondents (600) preferred to leave Market Place as existing comparing to 40% of respondents (534) who agreed with the Board’s preferred option for Market Place – to use the space differently
further exploration of the Board’s preferred option for Market Place – use the space differently showed that:
- 6 businesses (7%) out of 83 businesses in total, said they would be very likely or likely to use the space on the Market Place to operate a pavement café under licence by Lincolnshire County Council
- 160 of all respondents (12%) said they would be very likely or likely to use this space to hold events
in the survey, the Board asked about parking arrangements for a number of locations in town centre
- 727 (56%) respondents said that they would like to see restricted parking (30 minutes) if the parking was retained in Market Place on non-market days
- Around 60% of respondents were against changing parking in parking bays within the highway to 30 minutes waiting in the following streets:
  - Aswell Street – 784 (59%) were against the change
  - Lee Street - 818 (62%) were against the change
  - Northgate - 812 (61%) were against the change
  - Vickers Lane – 782 (59%) were against the change
  - Nichol Hill – 777 (59%) were against the change
- 595 (46%) of respondents agreed with Board’s preferred option to leave the two large loading bays on Eastgate as existing. Comparing to 279 (23%) of respondents who preferred changing it to limited waiting and 281 (23%) of respondents who preferred a mix of limited waiting and disabled parking

Comments were sought for each of the closed ended questions to provide explanation for the chosen option. Additionally, the survey asked about additional ideas for Market Place use, suggestions for improving on-highway parking bays in the town centre and ideas about Louth town centre that had not been covered in this survey.

Most comments provided support for the chosen option. The comments were grouped and categorised into common themes in addition to those that supported the chosen option. The emerging themes differed from questions to question and are broken down in more details in survey analysis section of the report.

The topmost emerging themes mentioned across all questions in the survey were grouped as follows:

keep current parking arrangements – 267 comments
extend the time permitted for limited parking (the suggestions were between one to three hours instead of 30 minutes) – 206 comments
restrict Market Place parking (time limits, mixed users) – 180 comments
provide more parking for disabled – 131 comments
enhance street scene. The comments covered a range of suggestions including more seating, greenery, and street cleansing - 120 comments
activities and events as ideas on how the Market Place could be used on non-market days - 115 comments
traffic flow issues in town centre specifically Eastgate narrow section. Comments included vehicles parking at the narrowest point and causing an obstruction, pedestrian safety and condition of the footways – 103 comments
encouraging more businesses into town centre - 99 comments
leave Eastgate loading bays for current or future businesses – 92 comments
pedestrianise parts or the whole of town centre. Comments included suggestions for pedestrianising the whole of Mercer Row and Eastgate through to Fish Shambles plus the Cornmarket, Market Place, through to just the Cornmarket or just the Market Place. – 76 comments
close occasionally for events (Market place or Cornmarket) – 75 comments
review parking charges – these included suggestions for free parking in all pay and display car parks (for example first hour free) or parking schemes (parking reimbursement scheme or park and ride) – 59 comments
share space on market days - 54 comments

There were 42 pins placed on the map around town centre with proposed location of the cycle parking. Locations of all pins on the map is listed in the map tool results section in the report. The most common places chosen for additional cycle parking were:

Six pins were put around Market Place

Map of pins placed around market place

Five pins were put around Cornmarket area

Comments included:

consideration for indicated locations and CCTV coverage
capacity of cycle parking
suggestion for cycle parking areas at the hospital (outside town centre) and all car parks
improvement of facilities in Aswell Street and CCTV coverage
replacement of existing cycle racks outside the library

Survey responses - Cornmarket

Question 1:

The Board’s preferred option is option one – leave as existing (space for market stalls on market days and for parking at other times). Which is your preferred option?
Graph showing question 1 results

730 respondents (55%) selected option one – leave as existing as their preferred option
465 respondents (35%) selected option two – seasonal scheme as their preferred option
94 respondents (7%) selected option three – full time closure as their preferred option
29 respondents (2%) selected ‘other’ as their preferred option

Comparison by age, disability respondent type

Age - There was a slight difference in responses when comparing by age.

Respondents aged under 18 and those aged 25 to 49 (121, 47% of respondents within that age group) selected option two – seasonal scheme as their preferred option. Followed by option one - leave as existing (101, 39%), option three - full time closure (32, 12%) and option four - other (6, 2%).

There was no difference in responses when comparing by respondent type or disability.

Question 2:

Please provide any additional comments on why you have answered this way or use the space to share any other ideas you have for the Cornmarket

There were 752 text responses to question supporting the chosen option, including:

402 comments supporting option one – leave as existing
253 comments supporting option two – seasonal scheme
69 comments supporting option three - full time closure
28 comments supporting option four - other

Summary of responses of themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Cornmarket across all options

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvements across all comments for Cornmarket were grouped as follows:

enhance street scene - 30 comments in total. For example, by providing seating or benches for all to use, adding some greenery (flower beds, pots, or trees) and street cleanse
create shared space on market days to allow stalls and pavement cafes - 26 comments in total
offer free parking in pay and display car parks - 17 comments in total
extend time limit for restricted parking – 17 comments in total

Option one – leave as existing (402 comments)

Respondents felt that:

parking was crucial to Cornmarket area as it provided convenient access to local businesses including the shops and banks
free, short-term parking allows a good footfall of residents and visitors which benefits all businesses around that area. It provides easy access for those that are less mobile, disabled or elderly
Louth was a traditional market town and the current mixture for the use of space (for market stalls on market days and for parking at other times) worked well, contributing to the vibrancy of the area

The top three emerging themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Cornmarket, specific to this option, were grouped as follows:

close occasionally for events – 16 comments
extend time for restricted parking – 11 comments
create shared space on market days to allow stalls and pavement cafes – 10 comments

Option two – seasonal scheme (253 comments)

Respondents felt that:

seasonal scheme would provide a good balance of mix use of the area with cafés, events, market in summer months and parking in winter times. The seasonal scheme would bring more people to the area including families, visitors and holiday makers which would benefit local businesses. It would allow to create a community space for all to enjoy
there was ample adequate parking elsewhere in town centre
they felt that if this option was pursued a programme of activities should be established and businesses or organisers would need to commit to prevent it being unused

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Cornmarket, specific to this option, were grouped as follows:

enhance street scene – 18 comments
create a shared space on market days - 14 comments
offer free parking in pay and display in car parks – 12 comments

Option three – full time closure (69 comments)

Respondents felt that:

full time closure could create a traffic free, safer, and more environmentally friendly community space. It would bring more people to the area.
there was ample adequate parking elsewhere in the town centre.

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Cornmarket, specific to this option, were grouped as follows:

enhance street scene – 12 comments
offer free parking in pay and display car parks – 5 comments
provide more disabled parking should be created to offset impact – 3 comments

Option four – other (28 comments)

Respondents felt there is a need for parking in Louth and provided suggestions for improvements, specific to this option, grouped as follows:

condense market stalls into one location to allow more parking on market days – 8 comments
extend time for restricted parking – 6 comments
create a shared space on market days - 2 comments

Survey responses - Market Place

Question 3:

The Market Place is currently used as space for market stalls on market days and for general parking at all other times. This parking is unrestricted. The Board’s preferred option is option three – use the space differently. Which is your preferred option?

Graph showing question 3 results

600 respondents (45%) selected option one – leave as existing as their preferred option
534 respondents (40%) selected option three - use the space differently as their preferred option
127 respondents (10%) selected option two – amend parking area as their preferred option

Comparison by age, disability respondent type

Age - There was a difference in responses when comparing by age groups.

Respondents aged 64 and younger (333, 49% within that age group) selected option three – use the space differently as their preferred option followed by option one – leave as existing (261, 38%), and option two – amend parking area (86, 13%).

Respondents 65 and over (273, 59% within that age group) selected option one – leave as existing as their preferred option, which is the same as the overall results. Followed by option three – use the space differently (155, 34%) and option two amend parking area (33, 7%).

Disability - There was a difference in responses when comparing by disability.

Respondents with disability (141, 57% within that group) selected option one – leave as existing as their preferred option which is the same as the overall results. Followed by option three - use the space differently (77, 31%) and option two - amend parking area (28, 12%).

Respondents without disability (399, 48% within that group) selected option three use the space differently as their preferred option. Followed by option one – leave as existing (345, 42%) and option two - amend parking area (87, 10%).

There was no difference in responses when comparing by respondent type.

Question 4:

Please provide any additional comments on why you have answered this way

There were 550 text responses supporting the chosen option including:

295 comments supporting option one – leave as existing
45 comments supporting option two – amend parking area
186 comments supporting option three – use the space differently
24 comments with no option selected

Summary of responses of themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Market Place across all options

The top themes and, or suggestions for improvements across all comments for Market Place were grouped as follows:

close occasionally for events – 23 comments
provide more disabled parking – 23 comments
share space on market days – 19 comments
enhance street scene (for example seating, greenery or street cleansing)– 16 comments
pedestrianise – 14 comments

Option one - leave as existing (295 comments)

Respondents felt that:

free parking was crucial to Market Place as it provided convenient access to local businesses
current arrangements for Market Place worked well and supported local businesses
there were too many cafés already and a pavement cafés scheme would likely benefit one café only

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Market Place, specific to this option, were grouped as follows:

close occasionally for events – 18 comments
share space on market days– 13 comments
provide more disabled parking – 5 comments

Option two - amend parking area dependent on parking displaced from other locations (45 comments)

Comments generally reflected that this would be dependant on the decisions made in other areas, that parking for disabled badge users is important, and that the Market Place may not be the ideal location for events and pavement cafes due to it being surrounded by roads.

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Market Place specific to this option were grouped as follows:

provide more disabled parking – 7 comments
share space in Cornmarket – 4 responses
pedestrianise – 3 responses

Option three - use space differently for example for events and pavement cafes (186 comments)

Respondents felt that:

Market Place was a central point of the town and could be used in a different way to benefit the community. It could become a destination of its own to attract more people into town
there was adequate parking elsewhere

The top themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Market Place specific to this option were grouped as follows:

enhance street scene – 16 responses
pedestrianise – 11 responses
seasonal closure on Market Place – 11 responses
provide more disabled parking – 9 responses
close occasionally for events – 5 responses

Comments not assigned to any option (24 comments):

The top themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Market Place specific to this option were grouped as follows:

share space on market days – 2 responses
condense market stalls into one location to allow parking – 2 responses
free parking – 2 responses
provide more disabled parking in town centre – 2 responses

Different use of the Market Place

Pavement cafés

Question 5:

Are you a business owner operating in Louth?

Graph showing results for business owners

83 (6%) of respondents were a business owner operating in Louth.

Question 6:

How likely or unlikely, would you be to use the space on the Market Place to operate a pavement café under licence by Lincolnshire County Council?

Graph showing question 6 results

Out of 83 businesses, 6 (7%) said they would be very likely or likely to use the space on the Market Place to operate a pavement café under licence by Lincolnshire County Council.

Question 7:

Please provide any additional comments on why you have answered this way

There were 49 text responses explaining the reasons for choosing the option. 48 comments were from those who would be unlikely or very unlikely to use the space on the Market Place to operate a pavement café. The majority of representatives said operating cafés was not their main business activity.
Main themes in these comments were grouped as follows:

to keep and possibly increase the current parking provision
to facilitate cafes and stalls to share space on market days
to seasonally allow alternative use of the Market Place

Community events

Question 8:

How likely or unlikely would you or the organisation you represent be to use this space to hold events?

Graph showing question 8 results

160 respondents (12%) said they would be very likely or likely to use this space to hold events.

Question 9:

Please provide any additional comments on why you have answered this way

There were 295 text responses explaining the reasons for supporting the chosen option.

Respondents generally supported holding events in Market Place and felt Market Place could become a central community open space.

Over 30% of those who provided additional comments said they would be very likely or likely to hold events in Market Place, expressed their interest in holding them. This included businesses and organisations.

Top themes and, or suggestions were grouped as follows:

close occasionally for events – 36 responses
keep current parking arrangements – 31 responses
share space on market days – 4 responses
increase town centre parking – 3 responses

Your ideas

Question 10:

Please use this space to provide any other potential ideas on how the Market Place could be used on non-market days (Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday).

There were 601 text responses with other potential ideas on how the Market Place could be used on non-market days.

These include 189 comments supporting to keep current parking arrangements.

The top three other potential ideas were grouped as follows:

activities and events, for example live entertainment (theatre, music, concerts, parades), community awareness events or activities (115 comments)
encouraging more businesses into town centre – for example pop ups stalls, themed market days (farmer’s market, craft markets, antiques fairs, street food market or food trucks) (57)
enhancing street scene for example by providing seating and benches for all to use, adding some greenery (flower beds, pots, or trees) (48)

Market Place parking

Question 11:

If parking is retained on days when the market is not in operation, what kind of parking would you like to see?

Graph showing question 11 results

727 (55%) respondents said that they would like to see restricted parking (30 minutes) if the parking was retained in Market Place on non-market days
218 (16%) said that they would like to see unrestricted parking if the parking was retained in Market Place on non-market days
207 respondents (16%) said they would like to see no parking and to use the space differently in Market Place on non-market days
147 respondents (11%) said they would like to see parking for the disabled only if the parking was retained in Market Place on non-market days

Comparison by age, disability respondent type

Age

There was a slight difference in responses when comparing by age. Respondents aged 24 and under selected different first preferred option (unrestricted parking) to overall results (restricted parking). There was no difference when comparing 65 to 75 age group to overall results. Respondents aged 25 to 34, 35 to 49, 50 to 64 and 75 and over selected the same first preferred option, followed by differences between their second, third and fourth choice.

Respondents aged 24 and under selected unrestricted parking (8, 47% within that age group) as their preferred option, followed by restricted parking (4, 24%), no parking (3, 17%) and parking for disabled users only(2, 12%).

Respondents aged 25 to 49 selected restricted parking (113, 44% within that age group) as their preferred option which is the same as the overall results. Followed by no parking (63, 25%) unrestricted parking (48, 19%) and parking for disabled users only (31, 12%)

Respondents aged 50 to 64 selected restricted parking (242, 57% within that age group), which is the same as the overall results. Followed by unrestricted parking (64, 15%), parking for disabled users only (59, 14%) and no parking (57, 14%).

There was no difference when comparing 65 to 75 age group to overall results.

Respondents aged 75 and over selected restricted parking (105, 66% within that age group), which is the same as the overall results. Followed by no parking (19, 12%), unrestricted parking (18, 11%), parking for disabled users only (11, 14%)

Disability

136 (53%) of those with disability selected restricted parking as their first preferred option, which is the same as the overall results. Followed by 45 (18%) who selected parking for disabled only, unrestricted parking 43 (17%) and no parking – use the space differently 30 (12%).

484 (57%) of those without disability selected restricted parking as their first preferred option, which is the same as the overall results. Followed by no parking (146, 17%), unrestricted parking (138, 16%) and parking for disabled only (88, 10%)

Residents

There was a difference in the second, and third preferred option when comparing residents’ results to the overall results for question 11. Restricted parking was the most chosen by resident respondents (572, 59% within that respondent group), which is the same as the overall results. Followed by no parking – use the space differently (154, 16%), unrestricted parking (141, 15%) and parking for disabled only (99, 10%).

Visitors

There was a difference in the third and fourth preferred option when comparing visitors’ results to the overall results for question 11. Restricted parking was the most chosen by visitor respondents (95, 43%) and unrestricted parking (52, 24%) which is the same as the overall results. Followed by parking for disabled only (38, 17%) and no parking – use the space differently (34, 16%)

Organisations (including businesses, organisations and councillors and ‘other’ capacity)

There was no difference in responses when comparing organisations’ and ‘other’ capacity results to the overall results for question 11.

Question 12:

Please provide any additional comments why you have answered this way (Market Place parking)

There were 534 text responses explaining the reasons for choosing the option including:

86 comments supporting unrestricted parking
294 comments supporting restricted parking
63 comments supporting disabled parking only
73 comments supporting no parking
18 with no option selected

Summary of responses of emerging themes and, or suggestions for improvement for Market Place parking across all options

restrict parking in Market Place. Provide free parking but introduce restrictions including time (one to up to 3 three hours) and user restriction (designated disabled bays) – 180 comments
provide more disabled parking – 54 comments
pedestrianise – 13 comments

Unrestricted parking (86 comments)

Respondents felt unrestricted parking provides an opportunity for all to park longer when required. Additionally, free parking brings more people to town centre.

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvements specific to this option were grouped as follows:

restrict parking in Market Place – Provide free parking but introduce restrictions including time (one to up to three hours) and user restriction (designated disabled bays) - 29 comments
free parking - 7 comments
offer free parking in pay and display car parks – 4 comments
introduce a charge after a free period of parking – 2 comments

Restricted parking (30 minutes waiting) to match other limited waiting bays in the town centre (294 comments)

Respondents felt restricted parking would provide a fairer access to shops and services. It would also provide a better turnover of visitors.

The top themes and, or suggestions for improvements specific to this option were grouped as follows:

restrict parking in Market Place – 131 responses. Provide free parking but introduce restrictions including time (one to up to 3 three hours) and user restriction (designated disabled bays)
parking suggestions for various locations in the town centre – 8 responses

Parking for disabled users only (63 comments)

Those who selected this option felt that there was insufficient provision of disabled parking in the town centre. There were also comments that designated disabled parking areas would:

improve access to town centre for disabled users
help reduce congestion (for example blocking traffic flow by parking on double yellow lines in town centre)
improve safety for all

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvements specific to this option were grouped as follows:

provide more disabled parking – 51 response
restrict parking in Market Place. Provide free parking but introduce restrictions including time (one to up to 3 three hours) and user restriction (designated disabled bays) - (7)

No Parking – use the space differently (73 comments)

Respondents felt there was adequate parking elsewhere in the town centre. They felt the historic Market Place was an inappropriate location for a car park and should be pedestrianised.

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvements specific to this option were grouped as follows:

pedestrianise – 13 responses
inappropriate location -12 responses
improve bus infrastructure – 3 comments
provide more disabled parking – 3 comments

Comments not assigned to any option (18 comments)

The top three themes and, or suggestions for improvements specific to this option were grouped as follows:

restrict parking in Market Place. Provide free parking but introduce restrictions including time (one to up to 3 three hours) and user restriction (designated disabled bays) – 13

On-highway limited waiting and parking bays:

The parking available in parking bays within the highway (in other words on-street parking bays) across the town centre has a mix of permitted waiting times, varying from 30 minutes to 2 hours. The survey asked about changes to 30 minutes waiting only for five locations to match the existing arrangements across the town centre.

Would you like to see the parking bays changed to 30 minutes waiting only to match the existing arrangements across the town centre?

Question 13: Aswell Street

Graph showing question 13 results

784 respondents (59%) said they would not like to see the parking bays changed to 30 minutes waiting comparing to 507 (38%) who said they would like to see the parking bays changed to 30 minutes waiting in Aswell Street.