Agenda item

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)

 

Report of the Head of Environmental Services

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Environmental Services to consider the annual review of parking fees and charges for 2013/14.

 

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

 

Option 1(a)

 

This option was aimed at achieving the budgetary target of £45.6K that had been included in the 2013/14 Draft Budget.

           

Short Stay and Long Stay Car Parks	Current Tariff	Proposed Tariff	Additional Income
Increase Up to 1 hour tariff	£1.20	£1.30	£46,000

 

Advantages	Disadvantages	Risks
This option meets the budgetary target and ensures that car parking makes a contribution to a balanced budget.   This option avoids the need for additional savings or income from other functions of the Council.	Although this option only seeks to increase one tariff, this accounts for 42% of all ticket sales and the first hour’s tariff often influences customers’ perceptions of the overall level of all parking charges.	This option requires the County Council to implement increases to its 1 hour charges to maintain the required differential.   If the County Council does not increase its charges and this option is approved, charges would be further misaligned and this could lead to longer term tariff issues and County needing to make significant increases in the future.   There is always the risk that customer resistance would be greater resulting in budgetary issues.

 

 

Option 1(b)

           

This option was aimed at making a contribution of £33K to the budgetary target of £45.6K resulting in a budget shortfall of approximately £13K.

           

 

 

 

 

Option 1(c)

 

This was to consider approving Options 1a and 1b resulted in a range of increases covering both short stay and long stay car parks meeting the budgetary target of £45.6K and making a further contribution of approximately £33K.

 

The advantages, disadvantages and risks associated with this option were similar to those for Option 1(a) and 1(b) with a significantly increased risk of not actually achieving the levels of estimated additional income. This would have the potential to complicate further reviews of parking charges and potentially limit the tariffs that could be increased in 2014/15.

 

 

Option 2

 

This option was not to implement any parking fees and charge increases in 2013/14 resulting in a budget shortfall of £45.6K.

 

 

 

Option 1(a) was the officer preferred option as this limited increases to one tariff and the estimated additional income of £46K met the budgetary target. However, this option should be linked to a positive response from the County Council to raise the on-street charges otherwise car park charges would be higher than on-street charges and this would not maintain the required differential as outlined in this report.

 

In the event of the County Council not increasing their charges the officer preferred option would be Option 1(b). This would result in a budgetary shortfall of approximately £13K. Increasing the long stay charges even higher to meet this shortfall would require significant increases that were not considered to be acceptable.  As a result further savings would need to be identified or a growth item submitted to meet the shortfall.

 

   The officer preferred options set out in this report would meet or make a contribution to the required inflationary increases already built into the latest 2013/14 draft budget.  They took on board the need to generate income in line with the requirements of the Medium Term Financial Strategy and the Fees and Charges Policy, whilst endeavouring to minimise the impact on customers.

 

Councillor Hamilton-Cox proposed, seconded by Councillor Blamire:-

 

“(1)      That Cabinet's recommendations for car parking charges are put forward to  underpin the intended outcomes of the Council's parking strategy for this District; and in particular recognise the potential impact of disruption that may be caused by the upcoming works in Lancaster by United Utilities.

 

(2)        In the event of the County Council increasing on street parking charges the preferred option for increasing parking fees remains based around option 1a. 

 

(3)        In the event that County Council decides to freeze on street parking charges as part of its 2013/14 budget the next best option is for the City Council to do likewise for 2013/14.

 

(4)        That work takes place to develop options to catch up any budgetary shortfall in 2014/15, including reducing operating costs.

(5)        That in the event that 3) above applies, the proposal be included as part of Cabinet's overall budget proposals for next year, subject to Council approval.”

By way of amendment, Councillor Barry proposed and Councillor Hanson seconded:-

 

“That option 1(a) – a 10p increase up to 1 hour on short and long stay car parks be approved.”

 

Councillors then voted on the amendment – 7 Members voted in favour of the amendment and 1 against whereupon the Chairman declared the amendment to be carried.

 

Councillors then voted on the substantive motion.

 

Resolved:

 

(7 Members (Councillors Barry, Blamire, Bryning, Hanson, Leytham, Sands and Smith) voted in favour, and 1 Member (Councillor Hamilton-Cox) voted against whereupon the Chairman declared the substantive motion to be carried. 

 

 

(1)        That Cabinet's recommendations for car parking charges be put forward to underpin the intended outcomes of the Council's parking strategy for this District; and in particular recognise the potential impact of disruption that may be caused by the upcoming works in Lancaster by United Utilities.

 

(2)        That option 1(a) – a 10p increase up to 1 hour on short and long stay car parks be approved.”

 

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Head of Environmental Services

Head of Resources

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The decision is consistent with the Parking Strategy to set charges to meet the Council’s transportation policy objectives and budget commitments.  Fees and charges form an integral part of the budget setting process, which in turn relates to the Council’s priorities. Under the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS), income generation is a specific initiative for helping to balance the budget.