|
(This report is 99 pages long, and as displayed on screen is not suitable for printing, since it was adjusted for screen display.
If you wish to print a hardcopy of this report e-mail a request to Barry Woods, using this link ,
specifying whether you wish a Word or PDF version. Be aware both are quite large files)
Harleston and District Car Parks Group
Car Park Charges Review
EVIDENCE to Scrutiny Committee
3 March 2008
Belting down the Thoroughfare, on the way to school
Baby's in the pram, sisters looking cool
Cruise past the bakers, suck in the smell of bread
Dash in to the grocers, lunch box apples shining red
Brakes on the pram, wave across the road
Chat to a friend, local shopping by the load
Pick up the speed, can't be late
What! Mum's gossiping to another mate
Kids charge in the school gates, spot a running friend
Badgers, Brownies, swimming, topics without end
Back down the thoroughfare, head to the market square
Go with the vibe, hear bargains calling there
Local traders, local people, visitors should abound
Enjoy the buzz, soak up the feel of what is all around
This not the 50's, or any time long gone
This is Harleston Thoroughfare, singing its song.
Kate Chenneour 2005
Harleston - published in 'My small World' an Anthology of poems by local
people about local places. United Press Limited. London. 2006
Harleston and District Car Parks Group 3 March 2008
South Norfolk Council - Car Parks Reviews
Harleston and District Car Parks Group:
Summary: Part 1
___________________________________________________________________
Key points
- Each community is uniquely different, with its own individual
opportunities and problems
- All residents benefit from healthy and vibrant market towns,
which critically depend on car users to support the economic
and social structure of the community
- Urgent, focussed and agreed research is needed to enable car
parks management to play a full part in sustaining and
improving the individual communities and their collective
contribution to South Norfolk's quality of life.
About this submission
Extensive research has been carried out by skilled volunteers in line with the principle set out
in the Renaissance in Market Towns report, which identifies 'knowing your town' as the key
starting point for any evaluation of parking provision and its management.
The Harleston and District Car Parks Group however wish to emphasise that this study has
conducted against great time pressures and within a confused and inconsistent context. Its
authors present it as an indicative contribution to the debate, not as substitute for coordinated
research with the Council, although it would significantly inform such a process.
The Group also wishes to point out that while it has looked at other towns to provide a
context for Harleston's own position, it does not seek to have a view on the needs of others,
as this lies properly with those communities. There will be mistakes, but we are confident
that the fundamental messages and pointers are sound.
South Norfolk Council - Car Parks Reviews
Harleston and District Car Parks Group:
Introduction -----------------------------------------------------------
1 This submission is presented by The Harleston and District Car Parks Group
(The Group), which comprises representatives of Harleston Town Council,
Harleston Businesses Car Parks Group and the Save Harleston Group.
2 The Group was established to provide an efficient, single point of contact for
the Community to work with South Norfolk Council to seek the 'right answer'
for Harleston, which could then be presented as appropriate for approval and
adoption.
3 The submission is in three parts:
Part 1 Summary
Part 2 Topics
Part 3 Preliminary Technical Assessment Reports
4 Of particular relevance in the Topics are the examples of reports from
Newport, Shropshire and Camelford, Cornwall, where a District and Town
Council respectively, found it necessary to remove charges following adverse
effects of their introduction. They show that in certain circumstances there are
real risks associated with the introduction of car parking charges.
5 Additionally, car park charging information from Local Authorities within
Yorkshire Forward's area of activity, an organisation referred to by Officers of
the Council, shows that differential charging to suit local needs is also an
accepted practice elsewhere.
Background -----------------------------------------------------------
6 At its Cabinet meeting on 10 September 2007, with no apparent background
research and unbeknown to many who might be affected, South Norfolk
Council introduced proposals to modify the Car Parking Charges Regime.
The decision by Cabinet unacceptably narrowed and defined the debate
before the public had had a proper opportunity to contribute to or comment on
the issue. The proposals, were framed by a set of key Drivers emanating
from the Councils' Corporate Policies, and supported by four principles. A
report on these proposals was forwarded subsequently from Cabinet to the
South Norfolk Alliance for comment, but not at the outset to communities they
might affect.
7 The South Norfolk Alliance did not support the report, but raised numerous
questions, many of which remain unanswered, as set out in the Alliance’s
approved minutes.
8 On the 30 January 2008 The Scrutiny Committee subsequently suggested
amendments to the original principles. Meanwhile suggestions have been
made through the media, and reiterated by leading councillors, that there
should not be charging for the first hour.
9 While this is a shift from the original principles advocated, the overall notion
of charging is still predicated on the idea that the user - later recommended to
be altered to: 'beneficiaries' - should pay. But, this neglects the fact that all
council tax payers, whether motorists or not are beneficiaries of a thriving
variety of independent traders, eateries and hostelries, which in turn depend
critically and overwhelmingly, as is the case in Harleston, on the continued
support of car-borne users of the town. Neither, do the proposals get-to-grips
with the social and other sustainable community issues connected with the
character of the town, which will be harmed by placing people on a 'time
clock'.
A Petition and Public meeting
10 In response to the original proposals, a Petition was launched in Harleston
from within the community to object to charges. This attracted more than
5500 signatories. In addition, a Public Meeting, attended by 150 people, was
held at the Apollo Rooms, Harleston on 29 th November 2007, at which
representatives of the Council were invited to explain the position.
Co-operation between Council and Community
11 At the public meeting, with the support of the Leader of the Council,
representatives of the Harleston Community agreed to meet with South
Norfolk Council to explore the way forward. It was acknowledged that
discussions would take place on the basis that:
- ' Nothing had been decided';
-' Evaluations would be evidence-based', and
-' The principles could be modified if shown to be necessary'.
A Position Statement
12 In the light of agreement to meet, The Group formulated a clear position
statement and on 10 December 2007, Mr Robin Twigge, formally presented
the Petition with an accompanying statement to the Full Council on behalf of
the community.
13 To date, the Group has maintained a consistent position with regard to the
importance of understanding how Harleston 'works' and the responsibilities
and opportunities, which it believes, are incumbent upon the Council to
embrace. Note: The Group remains firmly open-minded to discussing the
'right answer' for the town, though as much of the research proposed in the
statement has now been undertaken, the results do bring new, firm and
relevant perspectives to the issue. The sequence of public statements by the
Group, along with a copy of Harleston Town Council's resolution with regards
to the issue are included for ease of reference.
Progress stalls
14 On 18 January a meeting was held with officer and councillor representatives.
The tone of this meeting from the Council's side and the inaccuracy of the
position asserted by the Council's representatives, along with a number of
other apparent irregularities and inconsistencies, meant that the Group was
prevented from proceeding in the spirit of what it thought had been agreed.
15 Subsequent recent approaches by the Leader of the Council to individuals on
the Group, to seek to broker some form of deal, risked cutting across the
agreed timetable of the Scrutiny Committee, though such discussions, set
against the right background, might be valuable in due course.
Group focuses on evidence
16 Nevertheless, the Group has maintained its co-operative stance, working
diligently to provide the Scrutiny Committee with a depth of information at
present unavailable to the Council from its own resources.
Policy Context --------------------------------------------------------
17 The review of car parking charges falls under several polices and guidelines
including the overarching responsibilities of South Norfolk Council, embraced
in the Local Plan, for the social, economic and environmental well being of its
residents. These policies are rooted in the Local Agenda 21 principles
established at the Rio Earth Summit 1992.
18 The Council's powers to manage discretionary services derive from the Local
Government Act 2003 and associated Guidelines produced by the Office of
the Deputy Prime Minister. Increasingly, national policy is focussed on the
drive to work towards sustainable communities as demonstrated by the
Sustainable Communities Act 2007.
19 These new measures feed directly into issues of Sustainable Development,
the most widely used definition of which is 'development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs'. Though Sustainable Development can also be seen
as 'ensuring a better quality of life for everyone, now and for future
generations'.
20 More particularly, 'The Sustainable Community Strategy' for South Norfolk
aims to meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents by making
effective use of natural resources, enhancing the environment, promoting
community cohesion and increasing economic prosperity; all highly pertinent
to the Group's contentions in relation Harleston and the need for the Council
to act cautiously and with a full understanding of the situation on the ground.
Present policy
21 The present Council policy for car parking in Harleston derives from a
resolution of the Council in December 2001. This states that the
arrangements in Harleston would be reviewed when the issue of on-street
parking is addressed.
22 Thus, members of the public and especially businesses investing in the town
and which might be affected by any changes should be able to rely on this as
the council's formal position and the start point from which any modifications
might be considered.
23 However, on-street parking is expressly separated out in the car park charges
review and no mention is made of the historical position with regard to
existing Council Policy. The principles now espoused pay little regard to the
policy context and fail demonstrably to evaluate the significance and risk with
regard to the impact of any changes on the well-being of community life.
What we set out to do ---------------------------------------------
24 Following publication of its position statement, the Group sought to:
a. Demonstrate the level of concern.
b. Ascertain the extent of the Harleston Community.
c. Understand the High Street business structure of towns.
d. Assess the levels and patterns of car park use.
e. Comment on SNC's proposals on an informed basis.
f. Seek appropriate studies before changes (if any) are introduced.
How we did it ---------------------------------------------------------
25 Working as a co-ordinated team, volunteers assisting The Group have
conducted extensive information gathering and analysis of information.
covering:
a. Comparison of structure and retail profile - all towns.
b. Origins of car park users and shoppers.
c. Parking provision - all towns.
d. Car park usage.
e. Business patterns and comparative rental levels.
f. Business changes in last 20 years.
g. Walking distances.
h. Basic through traffic study.
i. Other community adverse experiences.
j. Other Districts' variable parking regimes.
k. Statutory responsibilities and powers.
l. Analysis of Councils proposals and amendments.
m. Analysis of Council's evidence.
n. Assessment of Harleston in the context of 'Renaissance in Market
Towns'. Criteria, promoted by Council, and Cittaslo objectives being
rolled out locally
o. Liaison with others.
p. Briefing of and presentation of information to councillors.
26 While the full information and associated raw data is available, mindful of the
workload for officers and councillors, the Group has presented selected parts
of its material and data resource where they are felt to be most helpful to the
Committee (Evidence Part 2). In some instances the areas of research are
combined under integrated draft technical appraisal reports.
What we proved and things we learnt -----------------------
27 Through the research and discussions the Group revealed the:
a. Individuality of each community/town.
b. Wide extent of 'the Harleston community'.
c. Uniqueness of the Harleston situation noted by the Greater Norwich
Development Partnership.
d. Complexity of use and issues to be considered in relation to the
town's car parks.
e. Integral importance of car parking to the social and economic wellbeing
of the town.
f. All council-tax payers benefit - car user and non-car user - from the
parking provision.
g. Reliance on car-borne shoppers.
h. Need to consider all parking provision, including on-street parking,
together in relation to the social and economic needs of each town.
i. Opportunity to encourage car-use reduction.
j. True consistency of approach is impossible unless it is the overarching
aim of seeking to secure the social and economic well-being
of each community.
k. Arbitrary notions of fairness can be contradictory between
communities and services, are divisive and unnecessary.
Positive suggestions -----------------------------------------------------
28 Based on the research undertaken, the Harleston and District Car Parks
Group respectfully suggests that Scrutiny Committee might consider advising
Cabinet that:
a. the Harleston and District Car Parks Group supports the principle of
review that the Council has been undertaking as it has provided the
trigger for much useful study and gathering of valuable information;
b. consistency of result is to be aimed for, not consistency of
approach - that ' result' being the furtherance of the economic and
social well-being of all communities ;
c. parking regimes be tailored to the needs of each community,
including assessment of all parking on and off street, and should be
defined in immediate and urgent consultation with each of the Town
Councils, not through making comparisons, which will only encourage
divisive positioning, but rather through much-needed co-operation for
mutual benefit .
d. in the case of Harleston, research should be extended, with the
help of the community, to seek the 'right answer' and to contribute to
the understanding of sustainable communities and ways of helping to
fostering independent retailers and business..
e. the situation in Harleston be reviewed after the research has been
completed and consultation undertaken and in the light of the findings
f. A forum meeting of representatives of all the communities might
be convened to share information and to more readily identify and
understand ways of helping each other to put a 'best foot forward,.
Conclusions
Avoidance of unacceptable risks -----------------------------------------------------------
It would appear from the Group's research that the contribution made by car
drivers to the well-being of the town is essential. Without them the shops would
struggle for survival as there is no possibility that the 'pedestrian' shoppers could
sustain the local shops unaided. Even a reduction in the numbers parking in
reaction to incautious changes could have highly uncertain consequences;
witness the experiences of Newport, Shropshire and Cameflord, Cornwall. The
end result could be an ailing high street. This is not an acceptable risk.
A primary responsibility ------------------------------------------------------------------------
We suggest that it is in The Council's interest and, indeed, is their responsibility
to maintain sustainable communities, thriving high streets and the local
distinctiveness as exemplified by the town of Harleston. This can be achieved
only when the needs of each and every town are considered carefully and
individually and properly understood. This is demonstrably not the case at
present.
A potential leader in the national debat - if - ------------------------------------
South Norfolk Council is a potential leading voice in the national drive to achieve
these very desirable aims. It is essential therefore, that it does nothing to upset
the current balance that exists between the social and business activities in
Harleston, a rare example of a town with a thriving High Street of independent
shops and high social inclusion, influenced fundamentally by those who use its
car parks.
South Norfolk Council - Car Parks Review
Harleston and District Car Parks Group
Evidence
Topic Appendices - Part 2
Topic 1: Harleston - the place
Topic 2: Car Parking complexities
Topic 3: Charges can cause problems
Camelford, Cornwall
Newport, Shropshire
Topic 4: Variable Charging
East Riding of Yorkshire Council
Harrogate Borough Council
Topic 5: South Norfolk Alliance Approved Minutes
Topic 6: Public statements
Car Parks Group
Harleston Town Council Resolution
TOPIC 1
Harleston : The Place
Key points:
- Ancient town plan
- Focus for wider Community
- High Social inclusion and sense of community
- Extensive range of independent traders
- Limited on-street Parking
Harleston and District Car Parks Group 3 March 2008
Harleston - the Place
Redenhall-with-Harleston (Harleston), is a historic market town adjacent to the
Waveney Valley on the Norfolk/Suffolk border. It is by-passed by the main road
from Diss to Great Yarmouth.
Unlike other significant towns in the area, it has not experienced catastrophic
town centre fires during its history and so the town exhibits a progression of
buildings and development stretching across its entire recorded history. Although,
its precise development is poorly understood, the buildings we see today, though
modified and adapted over the centuries, are mostly timber-framed, often behind
Georgian facades.
In the 14 th Century, it appears that the earliest known buildings were developed
around an open market plain, with the oldest perhaps lying on the higher ground
to the south-east of Old Market Place. On the market plain stallholders would
have erected booths from which they traded. In time these booths developed into
more substantial wooden structures, which progressed to become the retail and
domestic premises today.
Car use constrained by history and geography
By virtue of its history and geography, vehicular use of Harleston is tightly
constraine.. It has two car parks: Bullock Fair and Broad Street, along with
stretches of restricted on-street parking. There are no side streets adjacent to the
centre suitable for parking, though some short stretches of residential roads come
close to the back of the Bullock Fair Car Park. Some establishments, for example
The Magpie and Swan have limited car parking, which to varying degrees are
used sporadically by people other than patrons.
Bullock Fair Car Park - A hub and Forum.
The Bullock Fair car park, effectively the 'Hub' of Harleston, is in split ownership,
part being controlled by the South Norfolk Council and the remainder by Perrin's
Retail Ltd (formerly Budgens) an independent supermarket-style business. The
combined car parks are a complex place serving a variety of purposes (Doctors
Surgery, Charity shop, recycling, public toilets, public meeting place, drop-off
point, 'bus station' for social mini-bus services and is a cross-roads for access and
other activities. Both car parks are free and unrestricted in their use and are of a
sufficient scale in relation to the social and economic activity of the town to
effectively satisfy most parking needs. Residents and workers who have no other
long-stay parking options also use them. Although privately owned, the Perrin's
car park (1/3 of Bullock Fair) is universally used as a part of the town's public car
park provision in an indivisible way from the Council run area. This happens with
the consent of the owners of the business.
The town serves and is supported by a wide spectrum of the South Norfolk and
North Suffolk community and It has received a number of significant community
awards and accolades over recent years. Its thriving shopping centre populated
primarily by independent traders. The medium-sized Perrin's (Budgens)
supermarket-style retail food outlet complements the other traders and vice-versa,
helping to provide a critical mass of retail provision at the heart of the town. It is
this solid nucleus of affinity from which Harleston derives much of its energy and
character.
Harleston Town Centre - Bullock Far Car Park is just out of frame to the
left/centre of the picture, Broad Street out of frame to the right
Bullock Fair car park to right of Perrin's (Budgens)in background
A car turns into Broad Street Car Park to right of church
TOPIC 2
Car Parking Complexities
Key points:
- Numerous issues to be considered
- Main Bullock Fair /Budgens' car park has split ownership
- Dynamic 'Town Forum' role
- Integral to social and economic well-being
- Efficiently used at present
Complexities of car parking
As far as the public are concerned, there are two car parks in Harleston:
- ' Budgens' (Bullock Fair); and
- Broad Street.
However, the former falls into two ownerships – South Norfolk Council and Perrin’s Retail Ltd. Broad Street is
owned by South Norfolk Council.
The marked official car parking spaces provided comprise:
'Budgens' Bullock Fair (SNC and Perrin (Budgens): (199 spaces)
Broad Street (61 spaces)
There is a limited range of short-stay restricted on-street parking and a few
unrestricted places in the central area.
However, imaginative parking can result in between 5 and 10% increase in the
parking capacity on exceptionally busy occasions. There are also a small
number of parking spaces in the Doctors' surgery accessed through the Bullock
Fair car park
Budgens/Bullock Fair Car Park is the principal car-parking place in Harleston. It
is a primary hub of activity, rather like a City Square or Piazza. The complexities
inherent in this car park make it imperative that a careful study is carried out
before changes, if any, are made. One good reason alone is the need to
consider properly the Relationship between Perrin's (Budgens') Car park and
Council owned Car Park. At present, Perrin's retail provides a significant
proportion of the town's free parking without restriction or payment and the
functioning of the two is indivisible.
The wider range of complexities to be considered include:
- Through footpath routes
- Significant Health and Safety issues of vast increase in people
movement (many elderly) if ticket machines installed, with
greatly increased risks of accident in this dynamic
environment, along with slowing of parking process - consider
the impact of say up to 3,000 extra unsupervised people
movements in this space on December 12 2007 to walk too
and from a machine.
- Doctors surgery requirements (see letter)
- Charity shop, recycling centre, toilets,
- Residents need to park
- Workers and shopkeepers, need to park
- Future problems - new adjacent housing - no direct foot
access
- Greater Norwich Development implications
- Impact on small private car parks elsewhere in town, leading
to possible need to more firmly prevent non-patron parkers.
Inspection of the Graphs and charts comparing occupancy levels and activity and
trading patterns, demonstrate that there is not a fundamental parking problem in
Harleston, though there are some welcome busy peaks. If parking charges aim to
reduce long-term parking this would be counter productive to trade and social
activity. Many would seek to migrate to residential roads, but there are few nearby
and this form of parking would instantly become a major nuisance. Charges in the
car park would lead to shoppers also using these roads. Needs for restrictions on all
residential roads could then be required. If annual ticket arrangements are made for
workers and residents this will provide no extra capacity in the car parks, as the
same cars will still be there. And analysis of the throughput and lengths of stays
suggest the whole exercise may well not make economic sense. Until figures are
provided no assessment of this can be made.
TOPIC 3
Charges can cause problems
Camelford, Cornwall
Newport, Shropshire
Key points
- Incautious introduction of charges can affect:
o Business
o Character
o Community
- Free parking:
o Enhances welcome
o Encourages affinity
BOROUGH OF TELFORD & WREKIN
Minutes of an Extraordinary Meeting of the Borough of Telford & Wrekin
held on Wednesday, 13 July 2005 at 6.30 pm at Civic Offices, Telford
PRESENT -
Councillors M.J. Smith (Speaker), J.C. Sadler (Mayor), R.K. Austin (Leader),
D.D. Ahir, E. Allan, D.G. Allen, D.W.D. Ashley, I. Baker, S. Bentley, D.
Blackwell, K.T. Blundell, R.G. Chaplin, E.A. Clare, G.J.L. Davies, J.A. Dixon, A.J.
Eade, A.R.H. England, I.TW. Fletcher, V.A. Fletcher, B.A. Flowers, K.H. Gray,
G.M. Green, P. Harrison, J.T. Hicks, T.J. Hope, M.B. Hosken, A.J. Hussey, A.
Lawrence, L. Lomax, A.A. Mackenzie, C.N. Mason, J.C. Minor, D.J. Morgan, B.M
Norton, R.A. Overton, L.V. Pattinson, F.R. Picken, H. Rhodes, K.S. Sahota, U.E.
Sambrook, J.M. Seymour, R.J. Sloan, C.F. Smith, E.S. Swift, K.L. Tomlinson,
W.L. Tomlinson, V.J. Verster and D.R.W. White.
18. MINUTES SILENCE
A Minutes Silence was observed in memory of the victims of the terrorist bomb
attacks in London.
19. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Councillors P.M. Davis, S.J. Davis, J.A. Francis, R.E. Groom, P.A.E. Homer and
J. Jones
20. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Interest
M.B. Hosken Personal and prejudicial interest in relation to car parking
charges in Wellington
B.M. Norton Personal interest in car parking as a blue badge holder
G.J.L. Davies Personal interest in car parking as a blue badge holder
C.N. Mason Personal interest in car parking as a blue badge holder
21. REVIEW OF CAR PARKING STRATEGY
Councillor Hosken withdrew from the meeting.
Attached to the agenda were the report of the Scrutiny team that had carried out
a full review of the Council's car parking strategy; the report of the Corporate
Director: Environment and Regeneration setting out his response to the Scrutiny
Committee report's recommendations; and the Cabinet's recommendations to
Council in relation to car park charging policy. The Cabinet's response to the
remaining Scrutiny recommendations was contained in the Decision
Notice/Minutes for the Cabinet meeting on 4 July 2005.
Councillor C.F. Smith, Cabinet Member for Planning, Development and
Transport, moved the recommendations of Cabinet as outlined in Appendix A to
the agenda. In referring to the original decision to introduce car parking charges
in Newport and Wellington, he stated that the Council had believed this to be
valid at the time. Unfortunately, this policy had coincided with a national and
continuing downturn in retail activity and an increase in shop rents. Given this
situation, it was appropriate to reconsider the Council's decision, and to link all
the car parking issues to the wider issue of the re-generation of district centres in
the Borough.
The Leader, in seconding the motion, announced his intention to hold a
conference to discuss the future of all the district centres in the Borough with the
town and parish councils and other stakeholders. It would seek their views on
regeneration and the ways in which partnership could help build a sustainable
future for those areas. Car parking issues would be one of the matters to be
addressed by the conference.
Councillor D.R.W. White, Chair of the Scrutiny Management Board, commended
the team that had carried out the Scrutiny Review of Car Parking, and highlighted
some of the recommendations in their report. In terms of car parking charges in
Wellington and Newport, it had been concluded that the charges had not
significantly helped to reduce car usage, had been perceived to be unfair and
had damaged the viability of the two centres.
During the ensuing debate, the majority of speakers were in favour of the motion
to remove car parking charges in Wellington and Newport. A number of Members
welcomed the opportunity for car parking to be looked at in relation to the
economic problems being experienced in some district centres, and to the
involvement of partners.
In terms of the financial implications of removing car parking charges in
Wellington and Newport, Councillor R.J. Sloan, Cabinet Member for Resources,
reported that, because of increased usage of the car parks since the introduction
of revised charges at Christmas 2004, the extra income generated would offset
the costs of scrapping the charges. It was also anticipated that the net income
requirement of 37,000 pounds in the Council's budget for Newport, Wellington and
Town Centre car parks could be achieved in the future from the Town Centre
alone, once the one-off abortive costs had been written off for this year.
In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 17.5, a recorded vote was
requisitioned in relation to the motion to approve the Cabinet recommendations
on car parking charges in Wellington and Newport. The voting was as follows:
For: (45)
Councillors D.D. Ahir, E. Allan, D.G. Allen, D.W.D. Ashley, R.K. Austin, I.Baker, S. Bentley, D.
Blackwell, K.T. Blundell, R.G. Chaplin, E.A. Clare, G.J.L. Davies, J.A. Dixon, A.J. Eade, I.T.W.
Fletcher, V.A. Fletcher, B.A. Flowers, K.H. Gray, G.M.Green, P Harrison, J.T. Hicks, T.J. Hope,
A.J. Hussey, A. Lawrence, L. Lomax, C.N. Mason, J.C. Minor, D.J. Morgan, B.M. Norton, R.A.
Overton, L.V.Pattinson, F.R. Picken, H. Rhodes, J.C.Sadler, K.S. Sahota, U.E. Sambrook, J.M.
Seymour, R.J. Sloan, C.F. Smith, M.J. Smith, E.S. Swift, K.L.Tomlinson, W.L.Tomlinson, V.J.
Verster and D.R.W. White .
Against: (2)
Councillors A.R.H. England and A.A. Mackenzie
Abstentions: (0)
RESOLVED -
a) that car parking charges in Wellington and Newport be removed.
b) that the car parking charges in Wellington and Newport be set aside
from 14 July 2005 whilst the required statutory process for the
cessation of charges be undertaken.
c) that the continuation of car parking charges in the Town Centre and
Ironbridge be noted.
d) that the reports of the Scrutiny Review team and the Corporate
Director: Environment and Regeneration be noted.
The meeting ended at 7.35 pm
Speaker
Date
TOPIC 4
Variable charging
Key points:
- The council does not have to have a standard system
- There is ample evidence of different regimes between
towns within a District and within car parks within the
towns. Examples are:
o East Riding of Yorkshire Council
o Harrogate Borough Council
- It is wholly within the Council's powers to suit the scheme
to the needs.
TOPIC 5
South Norfolk Alliance
Minutes
The 30 January Scrutiny Committee Paper stated that the Alliance
was broadly supportive. This is not borne out by the approved
minutes.
Key points
- Many questions posed to which adequate answers have
not been given
- Points raised mirror many of the Group's concerns
- The Alliance did not Approve the Report
- Proper consultation with full facts is still needed
TOPIC 6
Public Statements
Harleston and District Car Parks Group
Redenhall-with-Harleston Town Council
- Commitment to co-operation
- Consistent request for proper study to seek ‘right answer’
for Harleston
Presentation of Petition to South Norfolk Council Monday 10th December
Chairman, Councillors --- Good evening --
Thank you for allowing me to speak today.
I am Robin Twigge --- and I have been asked to present this petition and a short statement to
you on behalf of the Harleston Businesses Group, which is concerned about the future
management of our car parks.
The Petition --- which was triggered by a Council decision on the 10 th of September --- and
of which regrettably most of the electorate were at the time unaware --- contains more than
5000 signatures of people, who are opposed to the introduction of car parking charges in
Harleston.
If we take into account the families of many of the signatories it may reasonably be said to
represent the interests of several thousands more.
Although a very large number have signed --- you may wonder why I am here alone. This
was a conscious decision born out of respect for recent developments.
At a public meeting held in Harleston on 29 th November, Councillors John Fuller and Jon
Herbert, explained the Council's position --- and because of the support and enthusiasm for
a co-operative way ahead, a large public demonstration today would have been inappropriate,
and at this stage, an unnecessary pressure on council resources to police and manage large
numbers of people.
But the absence of a wider show of support does not mean that there is no strength of feeling.
The number of names on the petition speak for themselves --- and the town buzzes with
concern.
At the public meeting, it was agreed that the community will work with the you to seek the
right answer for Harleston. It was particularly important to those attending that your
Councillors gave firm reassurances that nothing has been decided, --- that discussions
would be evidence-based --- and that principles could be reconsidered if appropriate.
I would emphasise that we are mindful that there are different issues concerning car parking
in other communities within your area of responsibility, to which you also have to be fair and
that Councillors have wider financial and operational matters to consider.
Fairness cuts many ways, and that which satisfies the needs of one might be highly
detrimental to another and vice versa. We know that the issue of car parks is a considerable
challenge and not easy to resolve. But we believe strongly that it cannot be reduced to
simplistic questions such as --- Who pays? or a desire for a one-size fits all approach.
Those of you who are familiar with Harleston, will appreciate that it is not a matter solely of
money --- Rather it includes ---
---- how do we maintain our strong sense of community,
---- how do we keep our businesses vibrant,
---- how de we foster social inclusion.
--- how do we ensure that the crucial relationship between our car parks,
supermarket and the well-being of other traders in the town centre is not
harmed.
--- how do we encourage car use reduction in the face of growing environmental
concerns, while at the same time catering for those both in the town and from
surrounding communities who have no alternative but to use a car.
All of these are intimately bound up with the charging and car park use
strategy. Yet we have had no consultation on, nor meaningful
investigation of any of them ---
--- Clearly these matters need to be explored with you urgently before
incautious changes with unknown consequences occur. We believe that
our forthcoming meetings with you will help.
From preliminary analysis of the petition it is illuminating to know that a large number of the
signatories come from more than 5 miles out of town, - clearly this is highly significant in a
flourishing but fragile local economy, based exceptionally, on enterprises of almost wholly
sole traders. Many come for a relaxed visit, to shop, to chat and wander at leisure, not
governed by the time on a parking machine. It is the very character and life-blood of this
community, with many traders and shoppers on first-name terms.
The signatories to this petition come from all walks of life --- undoubtedly representing
varying political persuasions. But many are weary of cross-party criticism and have
expressed a desire that this should stop. The grass-roots feeling is that decisions should not be
politically-driven, but arrived at by objective analysis of the particular circumstances of each
community. What they care about is not who did what, but fundamentally that a celebrated
quality of life should not put at risk by hasty decisions based solely on a bottom line on a
balance sheet or inadequate recognition of local circumstances --- nor by being lost in
political manoeuvring. The issues are important, not the politics and we would simply like
the right solution which recognises the individuality of Harleston and other South Norfolk
communities.
Chairman --- our major concern is the viable sustainability of our town as a community ---
may I therefore present to you this Petition on behalf of the Harleston Businesses Group and
ask that the Council might approve its receipt. I am obviously happy to answer questions
about the Petition itself, but as this is just a first step, with deeper issues to be the subject of
discussions with the council, I hope you will accept that it would not be appropriate for me to
personally second-guess these discussions by seeking to answer questions on wider matters
today.
Thank you for your time --- it is very much appreciated.
Harleston Car Park Charging - A perspective
Background
1 The Harleston Businesses Car Parks Group was initially formed to reflect
the views of traders concerned about the potential effects of introducing
car parking charges in Harleston.
2 The Group's co-ordinators accept that there will be a range of views
throughout the businesses and the public. Not only will there be those
who are open-minded, and those who are wholly for the charges, but also
a very large number who are against them for a wide range of reasons.
3 It is also recognised that these varying views, will be largely based on a
personal perspective of the issue. Quite understandably, few, if any, at
this stage can be a fully-informed opinion. Neither can it be said that the
propositions put forward by South Norfolk Council are a true
understanding of the issues, but appear to be based on advancing
unresearched and narrow concepts.
4 Following a public meeting on 29 November in the Apollo Rooms,
Harleston, the Businesses Group expanded its scope to unite with
representatives of the Harleston Town Council and the Save Harleston
Group under the collective title of Harleston and District Car Parks
Group (The H&DCPGroup) Together they can reasonably claim to
provide a voice for a significant proportion of the Harleston Community.
The Community
5 To evaluate the car parking charges issue it is important firstly to
understand the nature of the 'Harleston Community'. The social and
economic viability of Harleston appears founded on embracing both the
residents of the town and, importantly, residents from surrounding and
widespread settlements across south Norfolk and North Suffolk. This
dispersed and diverse community shares with town residents an affinity
for Harleston, which provides both a focus for their shopping needs and
social contact, combining with the town to create its exceptional inclusive
character.
Sustainabilty
6 All political parties recognise the significance of seeking to achieve
sustainable communities, to reduce CO2 emissions and car dependency,
promote healthy living and to increase local supply of sustainably-grown
food. The challenges and changes facing all society have to include
action on the ground at local level, as well as globally. Local government
and its partners must show their commitment to tackling both mitigation
and adaptation [to climate change]' Taking this lead, it is imperative that
allowance is made for future needs as well as present characteristics.
These changes cannot happen overnight, but an effective start needs to
be made and to fail to build this thinking into proper consideration of car
parking and community matters would be irresponsible and a missed
opportunity.
7 Without suitable public transport, private motor vehicles will remain
essential for many households who have no practical or effective
alternative. But, many more, especially who live close to town could use
the car less. It should not be overlooked, however, that fuel technology to
propel vehicles may well advance such that harmful emissions are
reduced or eliminated, but the number of vehicles to be catered for
remains the same or increases; economics drives everything and
innovation thrives on adversity. While encouraging healthier walking and
cycling to shops, it is essential also to plan to accommodate the private
motor vehicle.
Car Parking Understanding the issues - looking for the answer
8 At the public meeting with South Norfolk Council it was agreed that
representatives of the community would meet with South Norfolk Council
to explore the right way forward with regards to the car parks.
Subsequently The Group has undertaken some initial surveys and
information gathering to inform this process and to establish the basic
principles which they believe properly reflect the position.
9 The H&DCPGroup:
a. appreciates the need for South Norfolk Council to review the
management of car parks;
b. welcomes the platform that this review provides to seek the right
answer to maintain and enhance Harleston as a sustainable and
viable community, set within the South Norfolk family of market towns;
c. is open-minded to the 'right answer', and views this as more
important than the pursuit of financial or 'gold-plated' car park
solutions;
d. respects the different opinions of neighbouring communities whose
requirements may vary from Harleston's, but asks that in turn they will
respect Harleston's needs, if thought to be different from theirs;
e. is fully supportive of the principle that any decisions should be
evidence-based;
f. will work diligently with South Norfolk Council to explore the issue;
g. with so much at stake, hopes for mutual consensus in arriving at the
right answer .
10 The Group does not believe that either 'who pays' or expected car park
standards are the main issues, Market towns support all residents in their
District, often in different ways and their viability individually and
collectively is essential in the interests of all charge payers.
11 The Group strongly endorses the Council's commitment to the well-being
of the Market towns. It suggests that the real question to be answered is:
a. how to best manage the overall car parking asset to the general
benefit of the district, while supporting the well-being of each market
town and their wider communities.
12 There is an over-riding need to work together to arrive at credible
solutions.
The way ahead
13 The Group suggest that at present:
a. information available on which to base any strategic decisions is
insufficient;
b. there is much to be learned about how Harleston 'works', which could
be valuable to other towns, not only in the immediate area, an
opportunity that will be lost if changes are imposed without firstly
conducting appropriate research - this will be money well spent if the
Harleston 'model' can inform debate for other towns always accepting
that no two places are exactly the same.
c. Ill-informed changes to the complex and potentially fragile economic
situation in Harleston could have unforeseen consequences which if
detrimental will not easily, if ever be counteracted;
d. with future new housing and the Greater Norwich Development
Strategies on the horizon, important wider matters must be taken
account now before imposing new regimes on the framework on
which the town's enviable small-enterprise -based economy has
developed and thrives.
14 The Group proposes that:
a. with urgency The Council engages with the community to carry out
agreed research, with a high degree of direct involvement, so that the
community can 'own' the result;
b. the Council, on the evidence thus far recognises that there are many
complex issues and options affecting the centre of Harleston, which
need to be identified and considered;
c. no change is made until the position is fully explored and more clearly
understood including a cost/benefit/risk/opportunity analysis;
d. the sharing and promotion of results of any research with the
community will make proposed changes (if any) less likely to trigger
adverse reaction and that these potential changes will be, on balance,
more readily accepted, as being of least risk to the viable future of the
town and sustaining its wider community.
December 2007
Harleston and District Car Parks Group - Statement to
Scrutiny Committee:
30 January 2008
Following a Town meeting at the Apollo Rooms, Harleston,
on 18 January, representatives of the Harleston and District
Car Parks Group, met with the Portfolio holder and Head of
Finance.
During preparation for the meeting, the difficulties we have
encountered in gaining responses and the inconsistencies
and irregularities which have been revealed, would have
left any reasonable person frustrated and dismayed.
More particularly, members of the Group were shocked to
be contacted on Wednesday 23 rd January, by two
journalists who had been provided with a copy of your
committee papers before they were complete.
While we mention these points, the Group does not wish to
get drawn into debate about them today, when the critical
issue of the well-being of our market towns is at stake.
What we are particularly concerned to talk about, is the
nature of our 18 th January meeting with the Council’s
representatives, the Committee Paper itself and our
proposals for a fair and fully considered way ahead.
Our meeting was based on the agreed proposition that
nothing had been decided, discussions would be evidencebased
and the Principles could be adjusted if necessary.
In Harleston, Volunteers have spent hundreds of hours
working to help inform our discussions. I am sure,
therefore, that you would have shared in our surprise to be
told at our meeting that:
1 the principles had been formally adopted by
council
2 the Council was compelled to charge and that the
user had to pay ,
3 Important material we sought to present was
dismissed as 'not evidence'
4 the Council were here to get information from us
not to share anything with us - wholly contrary to
the spirit of working together which we had agreed
with the Leader of the Council at the outset;
5 That the car park issue was not an integral part of
the social and economic well-being of our
communities ;
Through our researches - we have assessed the total
parking provision within the shopping areas of all of the
main settlements. It is clear that The Car Parking
provision, whether it be private or public, on street or in car
parks, is an integral part of the social and economic
structure and well being of South Norfolk and its Market
Towns. To believe it is anything else is to wholly ignore a
potent factor in the dynamics of the community.
The bald statements made at the meeting constrained and
defined the scope of our discussions. Worse, subsequent
reading of the Guidance Circular from the Office of the
Deputy Prime Minister confirmed that the Council is NOT
compelled to charge and that the user is NOT compelled to
pay as was stated to us. It may be that you believe that you
are legally restricted in whatever options you may wish to
explore. This is not the case.
Turning to today-zs committee papers. It is unrealistic to
expect the public to assimilate, and comment on such wideranging
issues in such a few days, but we have provided an
initial critque, which we will leave with other evidence. It
is not practical to discuss all of the details now, but we
would like to pick out three points in particular.
At 4.2 c under Car parking research, it states that 'Parking
regulations can be tailored according to your town's needs.'
- we can only agree.
At 6.1 the paper reviews what can be afforded and mentions
how charges will have to be increased. This shows that the
proposed charges are known. Surely it is time the public
were given the full picture and the likely costs defined. To
hold them back is to suggest there is something to hide.
Most significantly however at 4.1 the paper states that
feedback from the Alliance was generally positive. To make
such a statement is disingenuous, when the Alliance, as
recorded in its minutes, expressly did not approve the
report, but raised many relevant questions, which are also
recorded.
Insofar as Harleston is concerned, the general proposals
could change the character of the town. People will be
governed by the burden of the time clock. The easy-going
atmosphere of social inclusion will be eroded and the
| 
