Issue - meetings

The Cabinet is requested to consider the agenda report and its three appendices and to make the following resolutions:

(1)           That following consideration of the representations made in respect of the proposal to amend the Chichester District Council (Off Street Parking Places) (Consolidation) Order 2012, the Chichester District Council (Off Street Parking Places) (Consolidation) (Variation No 1) Order 2017 to include reference to the charges detailed in paragraph 5 below, such changes to come into effect from 1 April 2017.

(2)           That the Head of Commercial Services be authorised to give appropriate notice of any revised charges pursuant to the Off-Street Parking Places (Consolidation) Order 2015 and the Road Traffic Act 1984.

RESOLVED

(1)  That having considered the representations made in respect of the proposal to amend the Chichester District Council (Off Street Parking Places) (Consolidation) Order 2012, the Chichester District Council (Off Street Parking Places) (Consolidation) (Variation No 1) Order 2017 to include reference to the charges detailed in paragraph 5 below (as amended in sub-para (a)) shall come into effect with effect from 1 April 2017.

(2)  That the Head of Commercial Services be authorised to give appropriate notice of any revised charges pursuant to the Off-Street Parking Places (Consolidation) Order 2015 and the Road Traffic Act 1984.

The Cabinet considered the agenda report and its appendices (copies attached to the official minutes).

Mrs Murphy was in attendance for this item.

The report was introduced by Mrs Keegan. She referred to sections 3 and 8 of and appendix 2 to the report, reminding members how this matter had been referred back to the Cabinet and giving a summary of the consultation responses. The city had 17 car parks and the proposed charges (section 5 of the report) reflected the different nature and usage of those car parks. It was recognised that increased car park charges was never an easy matter but it should be appreciated that (a) the income generated thereby was significant in the support of CDC’s key services and (b) insofar as the proposed evening charges were concerned, para 5.1 (a) of the report stated that these would apply only to two car parks for six days a week, leaving the other 15 for free parking after 18:00. It was not considered that the evening charges would have a negative impact on the night-time economy or cause deflection onto adjoining residential roads. Those charges would be for a trial period of one year (not stated in para 5.1 (a)) and the outcome reported to CDC’s Chichester District Parking Forum.

Mr Over advised that a 12-month long trial period was required in order to take due account of seasonal fluctuations.

During the discussion the following points in particular were made.

·       Mrs Plant wished the Cabinet to consider the comparative impact of the evening charges on the two car parks in question in para 5.1 (a). She was concerned that the increase would penalise users of the facilities at both the New Park Centre (NPC) and Chichester Festival Theatre (CFT), particularly NPC. 

·       Mrs Hardwick echoed Mrs Plant’s concerns. She had noted especially what was said in the consultation responses with regard to the impact on users of the New Park Centre (NPC) and was inclined to favour it being treated separately. 

·       Mr Barrow said whilst he understood the points made by Mrs Plant and Mrs Hardwick he felt that the important principle was the customer should pay. This happened during the day at NPC and should do so likewise in the evening. Car parks were a valuable asset and appropriate use should be made of them. The evening charges were for a trial period and would be reviewed.

·       Mrs Lintill inclined to Mr Barrow’s point of view. She wished to know whether if on a review of the trial it was considered successful evening charges would or might then be applied to all city carparks.  

·       Mrs Purnell wondered whether in the light of the point made by Mrs Plant a flat rate evening parking charge could be introduced. She felt that the charge was a significant amount to expect NPC customers to pay in order to use what were community facilities at NPC. She asked whether a fairer rate should be considered for evening parking at NPC.

·       Mrs  ...  view the full minutes text for item 311