Decision details

The Director of City Development submitted a report outlining the work undertaken to develop proposals for the introduction of a charge for Residents Parking Permits as identified in the annual budget report. The report also detailed the basis under which a charge could be made, should permission be given to proceed with such a proposal

The report outlined the findings of a Scrutiny Board review into Resident Permit Parking, conducted in 2008, which recommended that the introduction of a charge be considered further, although this was not pursued at that time. However, with increasing pressure on Council budgets an external review of City Development Directorate funding and budgets was conducted which included considering the potential to offset the cost of some of its services by raising additional income. The study identified the potential for charges for RPP to contribute towards budget pressures. A review of comparable authorities had also been undertaken which revealed that the majority of the Core Cities make some form of charge for RPPS tailored to local circumstances. A list of charges from Core and other cities was included at Appendix 1 of the report.

Members commented on the possible impact of the proposals on those permit schemes already in operation. Having regard to residents’ ability to pay for permits, discussions also covered the likely drop-out rate from the scheme and subsequent impact on the resources supporting the scheme

RESOLVED - 

a)  That the content of the report and work undertaken to prepare proposals and consult on the introduction of a charge for Residents Parking Permits as included within the annual budget report be noted;

b)  That the initial proposals for establishing a charge for Residents Parking Permits as the basis for consultation be agreed;

c)  That authority be given to the further development of detailed proposals for charging for Residents Parking Permits as contained within the Council’s approved 2013 -14 revenue budget; and

d)  That Executive Board receive a report setting out the final proposals in due course.

Under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 16.5, Councillors A Carter and Golton required it to be recorded that they voted against the matters included within this minute