Agenda item

Charging Policy for Car Parking and Stores

Report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services.

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report of the Director of Community and Children's Services in respect of a charging policy for car parking and stores at the Barbican Estate.  Members were reminded that, as part of the annual review of the Car Parking Charging Policy in December 2015, the Barbican Residential Committee had declined to accept a proposal to increase car parking rents by 5% because the underlying rationale had been unclear.  It was therefore agreed that a review of the policy be presented to the December 2016 meeting of the Committee. 

 

The Chairman drew Members’ attention to the fact that the recommendations concerned the basis of charging, and that proposed charges would be dealt with at the meeting of the committee on 13/2/17.

 

Members noted the context of the review in that car parking expenditure had exceeded income for some years;  underused Barbican car parking spaces could be put to other uses (primarily storage)  and the City of London Corporation's Service Based Review was underway, which sought to maximise the City's income from property assets, as referenced in Section SO5 of the City's Corporate Asset Management Strategy. 

 

Members noted that the Barbican Residents Consultation Committee (RCC) had received this report at its last meeting and their comments were set out in their draft minutes, at agenda item 15.  In summary, the RCC's main concerns were in respect of security of the baggage stores; a view endorsed by the Barbican Association's Security Committee.  The RCC also felt that the City's assets should produce a 'fair' rather than 'maximum' return.  Further queries had sought clarity in respect of cross subsidy and how the market valuations would be conducted.  The Chairman advised that the concerns in respect of the letting of storage spaces to non-Barbican residents, in close walking distance, might need to be the subject of a vote, as the proposed market valuations would be different if non-residents were able to use the storage spaces.  Members were also referred to the advice of the Comptroller and City Solicitor under agenda item 2. 

 

During the debate, the following points were raised/noted:

 

*      There was a general agreement with the views of the RCC in respect of 'fair' and not 'maximum' returns. There was a further concern expressed about the perception that disadvantaged groups might be penalised.  Officers advised that such groups would be eligible for benefits or other concessions.

 

*       Members challenged management of car parking in silos; i.e. London Wall, which was cheaper and had a different policy for residents.   Members noted that a City wide car parking study was underway and this would be referenced in the next report  to be presented to the Barbican Residential Committee in February 29017.   Members also accepted that views on parking and car usage in the City had changed, with car usage in the City being discouraged and cleaner schemes, such as electric vehicles, being promoted.   

 

*    Members noted that the Planning and Transportation Committee had   agreed to increase parking charges generally in the City.

 

*       There was a general agreement with the RCC's concerns about security.  Officers advised that keys would be issued securely on the same basis as the transportable stores.

 

 

It was PROPOSED by Deputy Stanley Ginsburg and SECONDED by Mr Michael Hudson, THAT - non-residents of the Barbican Estate should not have baggage stores.

 

On being put to the vote, Mr Ginsburg and Mr Hudson voted for the proposal and Mr Mayhew, Ms Holmes and Mr Moore voted against it.  The Motion therefore failed.

 

 

It was then PROPOSED by Ms Ann Holmes and SECONDED by Mr Gareth Moore, THAT - a decision to extend storage to non-Barbican residents, within close by walking distance of the Barbican Estate, be deferred to the next meeting of the Barbican Residential Committee, based on the outcome of the proposed market valuations.  The Motion was carried.

 

The  Members who voted declared that they did not hold a Barbican parking bay or storage space and had no intention of doing so in the future.

 

RESOLVED - that:

 

1.    Members note that income from city assets should represent a fair return and lettings should not be subsidised.

 

2.   Members agree the principle that no subsidy should be provided, on   running costs,  as between one group of users to another, except where concessionary fees are appropriate. 

 

3.   Officers be instructed to obtain independent valuations of car parking and storage spaces and bring forward recommended charges to the meeting of the Barbican Residential Committee on 13th February 2017, at which time a decision will also be taken as to whether to extend letting storage spaces to non-Barbican residents within walking distance. 

 

 

Supporting documents: