Agenda item

Councillor Williams introduced the report and explained that the approach of this review was slightly different to previous years as it wouldn’t usually come to an overview and scrutiny committee before going to Cabinet. The report covers several options but also includes his recommendations as the Portfolio Holder.

Councillor Barrett asked why we didn’t apply an RPI to parking charges annually rather than having to review them. Councillor Williams advised they used to review them annually, then every two-three years because they took a decision to freeze car parking charges. He said it was difficult to charge a RPI on car parking charges due to the coin acceptance on the machines. He said it was up to members what they would like to do but he didn’t feel increasing parking charges every year was a good approach.

Councillor Hollinghurst asked if there was a large variation in popularity on certain days of the week and if there was scope to vary the charge. Councillor Williams felt that would be extremely confusing for customers and he also wasn’t sure it the technology of the machines allowed it. He added that the most popular day for parking was Saturday. Councillor Hollinghurst asked about the possibility of making Sunday a free parking day like it used to be. B Hosier said that was a member decision.

Councillor Claughton asked if we had considered offering a free one hour of parking in each of the car parks like we do in Tring. Councillor Williams said it wasn’t an option they were considering due to the big loss of revenue and the free hour in Tring was a historic decision.

Councillor Townsend asked if the figures could be provided for how much the public actually pay for car parking. B Hosier drew attention to paragraph 3.3 which details the expenditure and income for each year but said he could break that down further if required. Councillor Williams advised that the £2.3m was the total of everything included in the parking service. Councillor Townsend felt that a breakdown would be beneficial.                                                                                                 Action: B Hosier

Councillor Stevens said thank you for letting the committee have sight of this document before it goes any further. He said it would be discussed at the Parking Forum next Tuesday and a few questions had already been raised regarding the proposed plans in Berkhamsted, in particular the multi-storey car park. He asked if it was fixed that season ticket holders would be on the upper floors. B Hosier advised that the upper floors must be closed by a particular time and the logic behind it was that season ticket holders and local businesses would have left the car park earlier than other members of the public.

Councillor Stevens felt that £4 for 10 hours parking was very competitive and attractive for commuters. He asked how we would police that. B Hosier replied that they want people to use the car park so they wouldn’t be trying to put anyone off of parking there. Councillor Stevens asked what times the charges were valid between. Councillor Williams replied 8am to 6pm.

Councillor Mahmood queried if we could give priority to local businesses. B Hosier said the intention was to offer the season tickets to local businesses first, however local businesses will have to pay for those permits and then decide whether to reclaim that money back off of their members of staff.

Councillor Adeleke said he was mindful that we haven’t increased our charges for several years but asked if we had considered one free parking day over the Christmas period. Councillor Williams explained it would have to be considered as part of the charging structure. He added that the car parks are full around Christmas anyway so people would struggle to make use of that benefit. Councillor Adeleke felt it would help local businesses but also show good will and PR. Councillor Williams said as the car parks were already full it wouldn’t achieve anything. B Hosier added that people that work in the town centre would arrive for work before shoppers so they would probably benefit more from the free parking.

Councillor Taylor referred to B Hosier’s earlier comment that the upper levels of the Berkhamsted multi-storey car park would be closed earlier and asked for more details. B Hosier advised that as part of the planning conditions there was a restriction on how long the car park would be open for. He said there would be a shutter used to restrict access and the stair doors would be locked. He added that there was a help button that linked to the CCTV unit should anyone need to gain access after closing.

Councillor Taylor queried if we would consider giving local businesses a discount. B Hosier advised that the costs were yet to be determined. He explained that there were 8 floors; 4 short stay, 2 long stay and 2 for annual season ticket holders. The annual season ticket holders would have to demonstrate that they were part of a local business within the area in order to qualify. He said discounts could be considered to help local businesses but it would have a financial impact on the council. Councillor Taylor suggested we could charge commuters more rather than offer discounts to local businesses. B Hosier said that was something that could be looked at.

Councillor Claughton asked what had been considered in regards to the climate emergency and the parking charges for electric vehicles. B Hosier explained it had been reviewed slightly but was in its infancy and needed to be investigated further. He felt it could also add to the confusion of parking charges. Councillor Claughton asked when it had been looked at and if it was since the Motion had been agreed at Full Council.  B Hosier said it could be looked at again but it would have an impact on the consultation and costs etc. Councillor Williams said it would need to be looked at as a separate project.

Councillor Townsend said he wanted it noted that he felt a 60% increase for residents was excessive.

The Chairman said the report was well written and easy to follow. He thanked the officers and Portfolio Holder for the report.

Outcome:

The Committee noted the report and supported option 1 as recommended within the report.