Mike Atherton (Group Manager for Parking, Marine and Garage Services) introduced the report and highlighted the following:

a)    The report presented changes around the provision of support to local business, including in regard to high turnover and churn;

b)    The commitment for the parking was for it to remain without-charge;

c)    ‘Blue-Badge’ holders were to be allowed an additional hour of parking time;

d)    New data and insights were utilised within the report, which derived from car park use over the previous months and weeks;

e)    The data displayed that there had been no decline in traffic numbers in the area.

Councillor Patrick Nicholson (Ward Councillor for Plympton St. Mary) rendered the following points of discussion:

f)     Acknowledged that this petition and change in parking restrictions had been received by Councillor Coker after a change of administration;

g)    Ridgeway Carpark and the carpark closest to the Co-op affected areas under the responsibility of Corporate Property; such as Harewood House and the Tennis Courts and the effects changes to parking would have on these venues;

h)    Concerns were additionally expressed that the report did not emphasise or concentrate on the impact for the greater Plympton community, including elderly residents and specific facilities (Plympton Clinic) within close proximity and the facilitation of the NHS and medical care, as compared to the impact on road users;

i)     Proposed a recommendation was made to Councillor Coker, as the relevant portfolio holder, to continue to investigate the impact on the aforementioned facilities.

Mike Atherton, supported by Councillor Coker (Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning and Transport), in response to questions, the following was discussed:

j)     The scope and scale of data for these reports and the scale of ongoing review of impacts after the implementation of parking schemes and related displacement of parking;

k)    The difficulty of analysis of the displacement effects of particular parking changes, as reports usually analysed the area of parking itself as well as specifically the immediate areas within proximity to this area;

l)     The use of this style of data reporting being implemented for other car parks in the areas, specifically Plymstock Broadway;

m)  Caution was expressed in reference to the continuation of requesting further reports in regard to this specific issue, especially in light of budgetary considerations and value-for-money;

n)    Car parks were consistently reviewed for performance and impacts on the surrounding area, however the proportion of officers being requested, and would be required for ongoing review of the area in the capacity being requested, would not be possible.

The Committee agreed to:

      I.        Note the report.

This item was not discussed and was deferred to the next committee meeting for discussion.