Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Link to further information in the Council’s Constitution

There were no declarations of interest made.

The minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday, 12 March 2024 were agreed as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

To answer questions submitted by citizens on the Council or its services.

Question from Isabel Shouler to Councillor Inglis.

“Do you not agree that 1 hour free parking will be detrimental to the businesses of Bingham?” 

Councillor Inglis responded by thanking Ms Shouler and advised that the Council had been assessing a range of tariffs for both Needham and Newgate Street cars parks, which as part of a total package of measureswould aim to improve parking to better support town centre economic vibrancy.  This work would be discussed in more detail this evening as part of Agenda Item 7, which would include full consideration of both free parking in Newgate and , and the charging structure for additional hours.  

To answer questions submitted by Opposition Group Leaders on items on the agenda.

Question from Councillor Birch to Councillor Inglis

“The basis for the recommendations in the 'Bingham Car Parking Project Update' report is the data accrued by traffic data collection company, ITP.  The methodology they used to obtain their data consisted solely of 'in person' surveys of car park users.

Do you not agree that this methodology shows blatant sampling bias, where those residents who are actively avoiding the car parks, because of years of being unable to find spaces, are not represented in the data, and therefore the results do not reflect the true nature of Bingham's parking crisis?”

Councillor Inglis stated that he did not agree, as the report clearly stated that in addition to commissioning on-site surveys the Council had conducted an online survey, which had been well publicised on social media and via press releases including coverage by the As a result of this promotional work, the survey had received over 1,500 responses and this information was used to help inform the package of measures presented in the report this evening.  

Councillor Birch asked a supplementary question to Councillor Inglis.

“With regards to the charging options that have been presented tonight, option 5 has caused public outrage and has been opposed by all local representatives. Given the potential for option 5 to detrimentally affect local businesses, and impose further financial burdens on residents, might Cabinet be inclined to reassess and go for option 4, thereby prioritising the well being of local residents and the local business community over short term financial gain?”   

Councillor Inglis reiterated that details would be explained when Item 7 was considered later in the meeting.

Question from Councillor J Walker to the Leader, Councillor Clarke.

“Despite a generally favourable report from our Peer Challenge colleagues, it feels like the responses/actions are a done deal.  ?Almost like the theme in the report of the Borough talking 'to' its residents rather than in collaboration with, has still not been taken and runs quite deep, as is evident even in response to the suggestions, with no mention of any wider engagement. 

Will all Councillors and residents get the opportunity to offer suggestions on how we can all make the changes suggested in this report and proactively engage in the process of improvement?”

The Leader thanked Councillor Walker and advised that the responses and actions were designed to highlight work that was underway, which the Peer Team were unable to see, as well as future improvements that the Council could work on.  The feedback had been welcomed and there was a proposal to include an engagement section in the next Communications Strategy, and any Councillors or residents that wanted to submit comments were very welcome to do so.  The Leader stated that the Council did have a programme of engagement on a wide range of policy items, as well as its biennial residents survey. The next survey would be delivered to every household in the Borough in the June edition of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

The report of the Chief Executive is attached.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               the LGA’s feedback report as detailed in Appendix A to the report be accepted; and

b)               the Council’s action plan and response to the recommendations as detailed in Appendix B to the report be accepted.

The Leader and Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Strategic and Borough-wide Leadership, Councillor Clarke presented the report of the Chief Executive, outlining the LGA Corporate Peer Challenge Feedback Report and the Council’s initial response to those recommendations, together with the resulting action plan. 

The Leader stated that the Peer Challenge process should be valued by councils, as it shared experiences from its peers, to identify, where necessary, any possible improvements that could be made.  The Leader advised that many interviews had taken place, and that had led to the production of a very supportive and complimentary Feedback Report, which in particular had complimented the effective management of the Council’s finances.

In seconding the recommendation, Councillor Brennan welcomed this positive report, and stated that it was interesting to note the suggested areas for development and improvement.  It was also particularly satisfying that the collective efforts of both Councillors and officers in creating a Council that could deliver on its priorities and strategies had been recognised.  Councillor Brennan thought that the process had been very helpful in providing opportunities to explore in depth how the Council delivered its priorities and how it could improve going forward.  She was particularly keen on the team recognising the Council’s strategic and place leadership in respect of working and influencing partners, as even with relatively small resources, Rushcliffe had a credibility to bring partners along and to help shape their policies for the benefit of the Borough.  The Peer team had also acknowledged new innovations, such as the Economic Development Strategy, and how that could bring investment into the Borough.  Councillor Brennan stated that the process had highlighted that Rushcliffe was a well performing Council and had given it plenty of things to think about going forward.

Councillor J Wheeler welcomed this positive report, stated that the Peer Challenge team had been invited by the Council, and referred to the importance of having external reviews.  The report highlighted all the good work being done by officers and Councillors, and although it was known that Rushcliffe was a very well run Council, having being shortlisted last year for Council of the Year, it was always good to look at ways to improve.  Councillor Wheeler welcomed the action plan and referred specifically to the importance of training and advised that this would continue to be a priority.

Councillor Upton welcomed this excellent report, which the Council should be proud of.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               the LGA’s feedback report as detailed in Appendix A to the report be accepted; and

b)               the Council’s action plan and response to the recommendations as detailed in Appendix B to the report be accepted.

The report of the Director – Neighbourhoods is attached.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)               the work carried out by the Bingham Car Parking Strategy Group be recognised;

b)               reducing the length of stay in the Council’s parking bays in Bingham Marketplace to 30 minutes, as set out in the revised paragraph 4.9 of the report be approved;

c)               changing restrictions on market days to allow spaces to be made available to the public when they are not in use by market traders, as set out in the revised paragraph 4.9 of the report be approved;

d)               changes to Newgate and Needham Street Car Parks to introduce charging for parking after 2 hours, as set out in sections C and D below in the revised paragraph 4.9 of the report be approved;

e)               establishing a permit scheme at Bingham Arena, creating circa 30 spaces for long stay, to be made available for a fee to town centre businesses, as set out in the revised paragraph 4.9 of the report be approved; and

f)                 the proposal for Nottinghamshire County Council to reduce the length of stay in their parking bays in Bingham Marketplace to 30 minutes, as set out in the revised paragraph 4.9 of the report be supported.

Revised Sections C and D Paragraph 4.9

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Environment and Safety, Councillor Inglis presented the report of the Director – Neighbourhoods, which provided an update on the work of the Bingham Car Parking Strategy Group over the last six months. 

Councillor Inglis advised that the published report was a recommendation, and that he had listened to all the feedback, from Bingham Town Councillors, the public and business owners, and read the comments on Bingham Social media sites.  He referred to a revised recommendation, altering the recommendation in D and stated that the table at paragraph 4.9, which was also referenced in recommendations B,C and D had a revised tariff.

Councillor Inglis agreed that parking in Bingham had been an issue for several years. TheBingham CarParking StrategyGroup wasestablished in September2023, to better understand the current situation, specifically in Bingham, to explore short to medium term solutions to improve parking, by changing the length of stay and charges to existing car parks, toprompt behaviour change,freeing upcapacity forshort stayparking.  The Group, investigated not only Rushcliffe car parks, it looked at a complete strategy for all of Bingham, working in partnership with representatives from Bingham Town Council and the County Council, and that challenging work was continuing.  Councillor Inglis thanked everyone on the Group for their hard work and dedication, and in particular Rushcliffe’s Corporate and Commercial Projects Officer.

Cabinet was advised that a three day survey was commissioned to ITP, an independent sustainable transport planning and research consultancy, to obtain the current data alongside a public consultation survey, which concluded that the high majority of car park users stayed for under two hours, the highest percentage under 1 hour and 50% of those under 30 minutes, with just a small percentage of long stay, and the main use was for shopping.  The Group discussed all options for potential tariffs, with the general consensus leaning towards tariff 4, to be considered by officers.  Subsequently to that meeting, and from within the Group, tariff 5 was proposed, based on the data for 1 hour to 2 hour users that had the potential of freeing up more spaces and this was discussed with Group members in taking it forward.  It was noted that option 5 was deemed most appropriateto prompt the behaviour change for freeingup capacityfor shortstay parking that was recommended in the report for an increased churn. However, following publication of the report, some concerns had been expressed via social media and emails to the Council regarding the original report proposal to introduce a charge after 1 hour.

Councillor Inglis stated that he wanted the Group to achieve the right solution so that residents and visitors could park more easily and confirmed that he and fellow Cabinet members had carefully considered the recent feedback and he hoped that by altering and recommending option 4 rather than option 5, within the table at 4.9, it would now be more widely accepted and would be reviewed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.