Evening car parking

[RichardH]

There are many clubs and societies who use the facilities (Drill Hall, Arts Centre etc) who would probably find it difficult to continue because of such charges.

Hmmm - yes, that might have an effect on the numbers that attend the clubs etc.

[IGS]

Don't need to spend any money on consultation to know that people want pay on exit car parks and am sure the machines don't cost £30k so there is a saving straightaway.

I hear that they have £60m so £30k is nothing to them. Money that could go on good causes which won't p*** off the people of Ware.

[Steve]

Don't need to spend any money on consultation to know that people want pay on exit car parks and am sure the machines don't cost £30k so there is a saving straightaway.

The consultation is not about pay on exit. The figure quoted is for the Traffic Regulation Order, new signage across the District and reprogramming all the existing machines.

[Steve]

I hear that they have £60m so £30k is nothing to them. Money that could go on good causes which won't p*** off the people of Ware.

From where did you hear it and what was the £60m referred to? The actual surplus in the budget is £610,000. The new proposals will result in a deficit of £340,000.

[KateG28]

Don't need to spend any money on consultation to know that people want pay on exit car parks and am sure the machines don't cost £30k so there is a saving straightaway.

The consultation is not about pay on exit. The figure quoted is for the Traffic Regulation Order, new signage across the District and reprogramming all the existing machines.

You do know what the smiley face was for? It was to signify a joke.

[Stephen]

I tried to find out more via Google/East Herts website but nothing came up. Does anyone know what the proposals are regarding long stay? I occasionally park in Broadmeads when I catch the train to London. At the moment that runs to 6.30. Are they planning to extend long stay hours to the end of the evening?

[Alec]

So, if there is a fixed cost of £30k to implement this, makes you wonder what the payback time is.

Not sure how much change in numbers using the car parks at night they've factored in, and I'd expect it to be quite a big drop where there's (currently) reasonably freely available street parking.

I *really* hope they do a good job of advertising that there are new charges, as I would expect many people not to realise.

I suspect that they will make a whacking great income from parking fines, especially if they don't address the previous point above.

[Enoughofthat]

I suspect that they will make a whacking great income from parking fines, especially if they don't address the previous point above.

Which is exactly as it should be if the council are genuinely representing the interests of the majority of residents rather than a few vocal business intersts.

The overwhelming majority of council tax paying residents are nett beneficiaries of car parking charges. Even those residents who occasionally have to pay a parking charge are better off, neutral or fairly paying their use of an amenity.

Those who call for free or parking charged at below cost are in fact arguing for a subsidy from PAYE paying residents to a minority of business people. Why should people in business get a handout from ordinary residents? Aren't entrepreneural-types supposed to creators of wealth rather than living at the expense of ordinary working people?

Car parks are provided for the benefit of local business but that should not mean those who benefit should not cover the cost. If a business relies on customers arriving by car then it's business model should account for the provision of the facilities necessary.

If the argument is that the business would fail if parking were not provided free then, if we truly believe in market forces, that is a business that is unsustainable and should be allowed to fail.

It is not for ordinary working people to subsidise poorly skilled people in business.

[IGS]

I suspect that they will make a whacking great income from parking fines, especially if they don't address the previous point above.

Which is exactly as it should be if the council are genuinely representing the interests of the majority of residents rather than a few vocal business intersts.

The overwhelming majority of council tax paying residents are nett beneficiaries of car parking charges. Even those residents who occasionally have to pay a parking charge are better off, neutral or fairly paying their use of an amenity.

Those who call for free or parking charged at below cost are in fact arguing for a subsidy from PAYE paying residents to a minority of business people. Why should people in business get a handout from ordinary residents? Aren't entrepreneural-types supposed to creators of wealth rather than living at the expense of ordinary working people?

Car parks are provided for the benefit of local business but that should not mean those who benefit should not cover the cost. If a business relies on customers arriving by car then it's business model should account for the provision of the facilities necessary.

If the argument is that the business would fail if parking were not provided free then, if we truly believe in market forces, that is a business that is unsustainable and should be allowed to fail.

It is not for ordinary working people to subsidise poorly skilled people in business.

What about the Not For Profit clubs and societies and those who put on events in the evening and night time for your entertainment?

[tonyappleton]

And what about the poorly paid evening workers who staff our pubs and restaurants? They'll be hit hard by evening parking charges in order to serve your drink/cook your dinner.
This was one of the reasons that Westminster council's plans to introduce evening parking charges last year were so overwhelmingly opposed, that the proposer was forced to resign!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16613890