Issue - items at meetings - Parking Tariffs Consultation

skip navigation and tools

navigation and tools

Find it

Issue - meetings

Parking Tariffs Consultation

Meeting: 17/02/2012 - Environment, Transport & Sustainability Cabinet Members Meeting (Item 87)

87 Parking Tariffs Consultation PDF 97 KB

Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

Decision:

That, having taken account of all duly made representations and objections, the Cabinet Member approves as advertised:

· The Brighton & Hove (Off Street Parking Places) Order 2008 Amendment Order No.* 20** (Car Parks) (ref.TRO-9a-2011)

· The Brighton & Hove Various Controlled Parking Zones Consolidation Order 2008 Amendment Order No.* 20** (ref.TRO-9b-2011)

· The Brighton & Hove Seafront (Various Restrictions) Consolidation order 2008 Amendment Order No.* 20** (ref.TRO-9c-2011)

· The Brighton & Hove (Waiting & Loading/Unloading Restrictions and Parking Places) Consolidation Order 2008 Amendment Order No.* 20** (areas outside of Controlled parking zones) (ref.TRO-9d-2011)

Subject to the following amendments:

· To include the far eastern stretch of Madeira Drive in the low tariff zone for the full calendar year.

· That the new cost of Traders Permits be changed to £600 per annum (or £160 per quarter).

· That the new cost of Business Permits will be reduced to £300 per annum (or £85 per quarter).

· That the tariffs for Black Street off street car park are frozen

· That the enforcement hours of the King Alfred Car Park change from 9am-5pm to 9am to 8pm and not 9am-11pm as originally advertised

Minutes:

87.1 Councillor Davey considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place that addressed comments and objections to the draft Traffic Regulation Orders for the changes in Parking Tariffs throughout Brighton & Hove.

87.2 Introducing the report, Councillor Davey explained that the council’s transport strategy which was agreed by all parties - aimed to reduce the negative impacts of vehicles in the city such as air pollution, congestion and delays to journeys. In doing so it endeavoured to create a more pleasant, sustainable and healthy city.

Councillor Davey stressed that health was an important issue in the proposals adding that there was an urgent need to reduce the impact of traffic because in some areas of the city air pollution caused by Nitrogen Dioxide consistently exceeded the legal limit. This was not an issue that could be disregarded.

Councillor Davey added that encouraging walking, cycling, use of the excellent bus network, trains, coaches, taxis or the powered two wheelers, was imperative. Analysis had shown that bus and cycle usage was increasing and since 2001 there had been fewer cars entering the city but more needed to be done and, for that reason, a review of the city’s parking tariffs was necessary.

Councillor Davey highlighted that there was consultation on these proposals between November and January 2011-12. During that period officers deliberately sought and were successful in gaining extensive coverage in the media to generate as much informed discussion as possible. He and the relevant Officers had met with residents and business groups as well as with individual traders when requested to do so.

Councillor Davey explained that responses to the discussions were listened to and in response several changes were made to the original proposals which were detailed in the report.

Councillor Davey explained that the proposal to waive fees for parking suspensions for community groups to hold approved events was still included in the report. This was significant support for groups such as the Kemptown Carnival that would otherwise have to pay significant fees for the suspension of bays. He was sure this would help the group and many more across the city.

Councillor Davey highlighted that it was important to remember that any surplus income from the parking tariffs was reinvested into areas such as providing free bus travel for older people, supporting bus routes, investment in schemes such as the Brighton Station Gateway, improving cycling facilities, making the environment safer for walking and extending travel plans to schools – all of these help to further tackle congestion, air pollution and make our city more sustainable, healthier and a more pleasant place to be.

87.3 The Head of City Infrastructure explained that as was clear from the report, there were two additional changes proposed not itemised in the recommendations, namely that there be no increase at the Black Rock Car Park and that the enforcement hours of the King Alfred Car Park change from 9am-5pm to 9am to 8pm and not the 9am-11pm as originally advertised. The Head of City Infrastructure added that the TRO had been in advertised in the normal way. In addition, the Highways team had extensively used social media and sent the TRO to the Brighton & Hove Economic Partnership, Federation of Traders and the Brighton & Hove Chamber of Commerce. There had also been widespread coverage in the national and local press. The objections to the TRO, the responses to them and the subsequent amendments to the TRO were detailed within the report.

87.4 Councillor Theobald thanked Mr Raggio for his involvement in this issue which he believed had made clear that the proposals were an ideological attempt to force cars off the road and a deliberate attack on businesses. He suggested that many businesses and traders would not be able to afford the annual charge up front which would result in them paying for quarterly tariffs at increased cost. Councillor Theobald stated that he expected many more complaints to be made when the proposals came into force on April 1. Councillor Theobald also expressed his confusion that such a policy would be implemented when the Citywide Parking Review was in process. In addition, he felt that Brighton and Hove would establish a reputation as a ‘rip-off’ town which would deter tourists. Councillor Theobald also believed that the consultation process had been a pretence that had led to token concessions. In sum, he believed the dramatic increases were unreasonable and unfair in a time of economic downturn.

87.5 Councillor Mitchell stated that the proposals were harsh measures in a time of economic recession. Councillor Mitchell expressed her confusion as to why no alternative measures had been provided such as a Park and Ride scheme. She believed if the proposals were accepted, it would lead to a significant decrease in tourism revenue. Councillor Mitchell praised the work of Mr Raggio in highlighting the effect these measures would have upon sole traders who worked for a living and did not make significant profit. It was her opinion that the proposed increase in parking tariffs would result in the cost being passed to consumers at a time of economic hardship.

In addition, Councillor Mitchell believed it disingenuous for comparisons to be made with the tariff prices in London boroughs as there was a notable discrepancy in incomes between the two areas.

Councillor Mitchell explained that she believed the proposals had not been thought through sufficiently. She believed there should have been more dialogue undertaken with businesses and traders at the beginning of the process, that there should be a staged increase to tariff prices to lessen the impact of the rises and that the Council’s £3 million budgetary underspend for 2011/12 be used to facilitate this. She urged Councillor Davey to re-think the proposals.

87.6 Councillor Davey thanked Councillor Theobald and Councillor Mitchell for their comments. Councillor Davey observed that no suggestions on a location for a Park and Ride facility had been forthcoming. He noted that the parking charges for the edge of the city centre including the Regency area were remaining the same. Councillor Davey believed this would in fact benefit businesses on the outskirts of the city via increased footfall. Councillor Davey stated that congestion and air pollution did not support businesses particularly the tourism economy on which the city depended. The proposals would mean that visitors and shoppers would not be queuing in traffic for extensive periods which would certainly be of benefit to the economy.

87.7 RESOLVED- That, having taken account of all duly made representations and objections, the Cabinet Member approves as advertised: