Agenda item

Charging Policy for Car Parking and Stores

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


Members received a report of the Director of Community and Children’s Services in respect of the Charging Policy for Car Parking and Stores and were asked to comment on the report and specifically the options listed in paragraphs 21 – 29.  Members noted an error in recommendation 3 to the BRC which should read ‘ available car parking spaces plus (Not less) those that are occupied ….


During the discussion on options 21 – 29, the following points were noted:


  1. A strong resistance to any reduction in the free period of visitor car parking, as most trades were likely to work longer than the minimum suggested. 


  1. Visitors may be considerably longer than 1 or 2 hours – an amenity greatly valued by the residents.


  1. Parking by visitors and trades should not be subject to an additional charge and any changes/additional charges should be subject to full consultation. 


  1. The comparison to other London car parks was unfair.


  1. Officers advised that they could issue double bays to disabled users without Committee approval. With any costs accruing to the Landlord. 


  1. Will there be extra pressure on parking in Lauderdale Place rather, than paying for Thomas More Car Park. 


  1. Officers advised that income from Temporary Car Parking would go into the car parking account, to the benefit of external decorations and other similar work.  Payments for Temporary Car Parking are in advance; cashless and monitored by the Concierges.


  1. Some Members stated  that it was unfair on car users to take the bulk of Concierge charges, as they service all residents. 


  1. In respect of the CPI increase for motorcyles and bicycles; the Working Party felt that the volume would be relatively low and this would keep the calculation simple. A Member  suggested this should be pro-rata to the recent car park charge increases and officers agreed to take this back to the Working Party.


  1. If car parking spaces were being removed for the new residents stores, then would the service charges be spread across less spaces?   


  1. The potential for the re-allocation of concierge charges was noted by some Members


  1. Security duties by the Concierge does include other areas of the Estate and will need further analysis by officers.


  1. Should electric cars be discounted or parking free?  Members noted that there would be a full report to the RCC’s AGM in January and to a Special BRC in February on the Electric Vehicle Charging policy.


  1. In respect of an external consultation, there was a view expressed that this might compromise the good relationship between concierges and residents There were further comments in that the  questions would need to be very precise and it was suggested that  paragraph  28 in the report was a little vague.  Members agreed not to recommend the commissioning of an external report.


RESOLVED, That   the report be noted ahead of its presentation to the BRC on 10th December 2018, and subject to the comments on paragraphs 21-29 of the report as set out above, and Members’ agreement NOT TO commission an External Report on the Concierge Service. 



Supporting documents: