Spinning Parking Charges

[steveL]

A report from the RAC covered in today's Mail tells us that the council made a £278,000 profit from parking charges in Hartlepool during 2015/16.

Cast your mind back a few months and you'll remember the council's response to Riddle's call for free shopping centre parking was that free parking would cost the council £1.5m which would have to be found from elsewhere.

The RAC report tells us that  £1.2m of the £1.5m of income raised from parking charges actually goes on the cost of running the scheme itself - that's 81%. Scrapping parking charges would only cost the council the lost profit - £278,000, a fraction of what the council claimed. A fine example of council spinning at its worst.

The latest artists impression of Jacksons Landing commissioned by HBC will cost £124,000. So if the town could just live without two of CAB's visionary artist's impressions per year, then we could all be enjoying free town centre parking instead.

mmm..... that's a toughy, isn't it? 

[craig finton]

There's something very wrong about those 1.2m costs. How many meter maids do they employ? Say 3 at a generous £25,000 a year and you still don't dent that 1.2m by much. Where's the rest going?

[akarjl]

If you live in the south of the town or seaton it is easier ( assuming you have a car) to drive to the Boro = 2 hours free parking. Free parking would have a huge effect on businesses in the showing centre - then again The Kremlin can't dip into the profits of the stores in the centre- well apart from hammering up the business rate causing shops to close?

Yet another pack of lies from the Kremlin.

[Inspector Knacker]

Wasn't the profits from parking supposed to go towards subsidising bus services. ?

[kevplumb]

anything transport related if mem serves

ie tyres for the official car 

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

Reading the Mail's latest edict from HBC, does anyone else find the concept of increasing the short stay cost (and starting to charge at Seaton) a rather baffling method of boosting trade?

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/new-parking-charges-aimed-at-boosting-town-centre-shopping-1-8292254?ref=BNTMedia&utm_medium=facebook

[akarjl]

The charges at Seaton Carew will I guarantee result in some shops closing unless the first 20 minutes are free. You already find morons parking in middle road as they waddle over for their chips n scraps in a bun gourmet meal.

Perhaps there's some perverted logic let's charge for parking at Seaton immediately adjacent to the Wilkies "development" resulting in the longscar going bust....again?

[Land Phil]

No charge  for parks no at Summerhill then ?

Just Labour punishing the non Labour voters again.

[mk1]

The 'logic' behind the Town Centre rise is to catch those who 'pop in' and do not stay very long. Now they will have to pay an extra 30p for the pleasure. More money needed for Councillors vanity projects.

[Inspector Knacker]

Great.way to make Seaton a visitors destination, keep cutting back on the not very imaginative plans and slap in parking charges. A tribute to the art of being utterly clueless.

[kevplumb]

what's next meters on the cycle racks

[Inspector Knacker]

Thinking about this, why not keep the 70p charge for an hour and the 2 hours for £1?
Just whereabouts on the headland had they decided to start charging for parking ?
Seaton, so it looks like it'll be a case of a being a handy milk cow, that'll be drained and blow the effects.

[Lord Elpus]

Dear Cllr. James,

I am email you to express my disgust at the proposal to impose a charge for parking at Seaton Carew. Specifically the car parks at Newburn Bridge and the old coach park car park.

These car parks are a key part of many families and individuals leisure time and enable them to enjoy walking along the prom and the beach.  You (HBC) is in effect charging our own residents to enjoy a free natural asset.

Fellow dog walkers have already commented on the situation and as a fellow pensioner pointed out to me this morning if he wants to continue to enjoy his current dog walks routine it will cost him at least £2 a day, 7 days a week. for 6 months, which works out at £336 per year.

There is also the negative effect this increase will have on local business and congestion.

I ask that you please consult with car park users and the community before you impose this silly idea on the good people of Hartlepool

Looking forward to your reply

Geoff Lilley

[fred c]

Staggeringly stupid decision by this mob.... several days before this little plumb was announced, we had Cllr Craney spouting forth about improvements to Seeton Crew & the hoped for inprovement in the number of visitors, this f***wit idea ain't going to help with that little Masterplan.

So nice one Marj, you have just shown how dysfunctional & moneygrubbing this council really is, one of the towns major assets will become unavailable to an awful lot people...... both local & visitors alike.

Only in Hartlepool & Only under the LabTor Mob

[steveL]

When Riddle made his call for free shopping centre parking a few months ago, the spin was that parking charges raised £1.5m in revenue which would have to be replaced through some other method. The RAC report last week revealed that the council only made £278,000 in profit from parking charges. A little bit of maths and you realise that £1.22m of the £1.5m actually goes on the running costs of the scheme - that's 81%.

We found out then that the council was planning a review of parking charges and there was already hints that it was planning to increase charges, not lower them. The reason for this was because that £278,000 was lower than the amount raised the year before and lower than the amount the council had expected in its budget.

It takes quite a bit of heavy spinning to suggest that an increase from the present 70p to £1 will lead to an increase in the number of visitors to the shopping centre and you can thank shopping centre Mark Rycraft for coming up with the suggestion - but then Ryecraft would have passed off the fall of Jericho's walls as a remodelling exercise.

The effect of introducing parking charges at Seaton will be catastrophic and cannot be reconciled with all of the baloney about increasing visitor numbers - if they were serious about the latter, they wouldn't even be contemplating the former.