Agenda item

The report was introduced by the Chief Operating Officer who noted that it reflected the performance of the Council in the first nine months of the 2016/17 municipal year (April – December).

The summary was structured to highlight those areas that were performing above expectations, those areas where there was a risk to either performance or delivery and those areas where further work was required for next year’s report.

Areas described as performing well included: Building Control; Development Management; Projects and Growth; and the Trinity Arts Centre.

Those areas described as risks included: Local Land Charges; Enforcement; Markets; and Home Choices.

Further information was given on each of the above.  Data relating to Complaints, Comments and Compliments were being reconsidered to present a more sophisticated way of monitoring.  A measure around section 106s and CIL was also to be introduced to give members greater visibility.

Discussion ensued and a Member sought assurance that when planning applications alluded to economic growth, the Growth Team should be included as consultees and that link made and embedded.  Officers advised that this was the case, however if the Member had a differing experience, they would be happy to discuss this outside of the meeting.

A Member made further enquiries regarding the under-performance in car parking income and sought to ascertain why the finance team had been unable to offer any explanation within the report.  There was a view that the current Car Parking Strategy was failing Gainsborough.  It was suggested that income was down, as people could no longer find a parking space.

In responding, the Financial Services Manager asked Members to recall that the Car Parking Strategy had stated there was limited evidence available as to what to base the charges on, furthermore the impact of the loss of the multi-storey and the introduction of charges in Market Rasen would be unknown and would need to be factored in at some point in the future.  The quarter 3 Monitoring Report due for consideration by the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee on 9 February 2017, did advise, and provide details, of budget pressures relating to car parking income for a number of reasons including the delay in introducing charges in the Market Rasen, in order to support businesses through the Christmas period.  Income from car parking permits had increased and pressure of around £39k was being reported.

Some Member considered the Strategy was just not working, permits were up and yet income in general was down. A Council priority was to be open for business and this Strategy just did not support it.

The Chief Operating Officer responded advising that he had been liaising closely with the Chairman regarding issues the Council were aware currently existed and those which were likely to arise in the future.  The Car Parking Strategy for Gainsborough needed to be reviewed, and a further report would be submitted to the Committee in March 2017.  The report would look at a raft of things including the financial position and pricing of permits but also opportunities for additional car parks around the town.  Some work had been undertaken to date and approximately 70 council staff had been relocated to the Tesco overspill car-park, freeing up spaces nearer the town centre, however it was acknowledged that further work was required.

Members welcomed the positive position in terms of Enforcement, and the continued success being realised by the Trinity Arts Centre. Concern was expressed that the situation in respect of homelessness would only continue.

Returning to concerns relating to the car park income, Members shared their experiences of having tried to park in the town centre recently and expressed disappointment that the original Strategy’s driver appeared to have been cost.  Feedback from residents was that they could not get to their streets as the parking situation was having an impact and it had been suggested that this was Council Staff.  There was a view that the Council needed to make parking easier and closer to the shops if it really wanted to support businesses.  Expectation now dictated people wanted to park close and shop instantly and a cost neutral driver would never deliver this.

The interim work undertaken with regard to staff parking was reiterated.  The revised arrangements could, and would, be enforced against essential car users, at a total of 59.  However staff “paid for permits” / casual users were issued permits at the same cost as to residents, and staff which had agreed to relocate had done this out of good will.

Some Members were of the view that a radical review of how enforcement was carried out was required and welcomed indication that more resources would be put into this area.

RESOLVED that having reviewed the performance information contained in the Progress and Delivery Report, the report be accepted.