Decision details

It is proposed, following careful consideration of the public response to the £200 permit fee, that the permit fee be reduced to £85 per annum, with no quarterly payment option provided. This will ensure that the benefit of cheaper parking is provided to incentivise regular park users whilst still ensuring that a contribution towards maintenance of the car park and park is achieved. As part of the £85 a fee will be taken by the permit administrator of £7.20. This is included in the £85 permit fee.

Removal of the quarterly payment option ensures that the administrative costs of a quarterly payment scheme are removed which will facilitate a cheaper annual fee overall.

It is recognised that until demand for daily parking or permit parking is properly established, the impacts on income will not be clear. It is proposed that the fee of £85 for an annual permit is kept under close review to ensure sufficient income is generated to maintain the park and car park going forward. A review of arrangements will be undertaken within 6 months of the scheme to establish demand and future pricing.

That the leader approves the revised pricing arrangements for car parking permits at Gedling Country Park car park as detailed in paragraph 2.1 of this report and confirms the remainder of the permitting scheme is unchanged.

To ensure income can be generated to support the ongoing maintenance of Gedling Country Park taking into account the views of park users and the wider financial sustainability of the asset

Alternative options include not amending the permitting fee and retaining the quarterly options to pay. This would ensure that the permit scheme could be rolled out and would limit the risk of a significant reduction in income by making the charge cheaper. Continuing with this approach would not take into account the views expressed by regular park users who have considered the charge to be too expensive. Gedling Country Park is a well-used asset which supports the health and wellbeing of residents of the borough and visitors; it is important that permit charges do not dissuade people from utilising the asset. It is considered, following review of park users’ views, that a lower permit fee could be trialled without significantly impacting on income in the short term until proper demand is established.

A further option would be to not introduce a permit scheme at all and only offer the £2 daily charge. However, a permit scheme has been agreed by Cabinet as it was considered necessary to support regular park users.

A different level of fees could be agreed for permits. However, this level is proposed taking into account fees at other parks across Nottinghamshire. As is reflected within the report there could be impacts on budgets with the permit fee being reduced, and as such income should be kept under review.