Birmingham City Council acknowledged the introduction of parking charges is “often controversial and unpopular” in a recent report
A moment of contemplation at the Lickey Hills(Image: Graham Young, Birmingham Mail)
Crisis-hit Birmingham City Council is to proceed with divisive plans to introduce parking charges at Lickey Hills Country Parking despite huge opposition.
The consequences of the Labour-run council’s financial turmoil have been far-reaching, impacting waste collection, libraries, street lighting, culture, adult social care day centres and much more.
One proposal which has been met with significant backlash is to introduce parking charges at Lickey Hills, one of the city’s most iconic and historic beauty spots.
READ MORE: Birmingham residents make demand amid ‘outrageous’ update on council crisis inquiry
The council also wants to bring in charges at Sutton Park in Sutton Coldfield and Sheldon Country Park, close to Birmingham Airport.
Coun Adrian Delaney (Conservative, Rubery and Rednal) has spoken out against the proposal for Lickey Hills in particular, saying recently on social media: “This land was gifted to Birmingham City Council by George Cadbury.
“And I just wonder if he were alive today, I think he’d be absolutely appalled by these plans.
“This will hit local people hard, especially those people that use the park for exercise, well-being and for community.
“It’s not just about parking fees, it’s about treating our community with respect.”
Coun Adrian Delaney (Conservative, Rubery and Rednal) at Lickey Hills Country Park
A council report showed a “significant proportion” of the people who responded to a consultation were not in favour of the proposed parking charges.
For Lickey Hills Country Park in particular, 919 respondents of the consultation (78.4 per cent) felt access to the park should remain free.
For Sheldon Country Park, that figure was 120 respondents (65.9 per cent) while for Sutton Park it was 2,741 respondents (68.2 per cent).
Despite the level of opposition, the council is planning to proceed with the proposals, which have been slightly revised following the feedback.
‘I know these things can be unpopular’
Earlier this year, council leader John Cotton was asked if such charges should be introduced at Lickey Hills, which were given as a gift to the people of Birmingham.
He responded: “It’s important we look at all options for raising income.
“I know sometimes these things can be unpopular and create challenges.
“But I think we’ve also got a responsibility to look at every opportunity we have to generate income to bring the budget back into balance.”
Acknowledging the opposition to the proposed charges, the council report added: “The introduction of parking charges is often controversial and unpopular as users are asked to pay for something that has previously been free.
Council leader John Cotton during the budget meeting on March 4(Image: Alexander Brock)
“However, the projected income from parking charges still falls short of the cost of maintaining the three parks in question.
“Therefore it is deemed reasonable to ask park users to contribute financially to the upkeep and maintenance of these parks.
“Despite the introduction of parking charges, there will still be a requirement for financial support from the council’s general fund to maintain and manage these parks.”
It said charges across “destination sites” throughout the UK had become common practice.
The report said: “In the vast majority of cases, parking charges for these sites have been in place for several years.
READ MORE: Birmingham City Council accused of ‘undermining local democracy’ after divisive change
“Introducing charges on Birmingham’s sites will be in line with national best practice to offset the cost of maintaining these destination sites.”
It added that there was support for revised parking charges which were lower than the consulted ones.
“This support for reduced parking charges was echoed by the feedback from park stakeholders who argued if the introduced parking charges are lower (than the consulted charges) it will minimise the negative impact on the trade of businesses within the parks,” it said.
“Reduced charges are more popular amongst consultees and whilst that would imply an income deficit, we expect the visitor numbers to increase (with less displacement parking) at such levels as to mitigate the impact.”
Both the original and revised proposed charges for Lickey Hills, Sheldon Country Park and Sutton Park can be found below:
Lickey Hills Country Park:
Original proposals:
- £2.20 for up to 2 hours, £3.30 for 2 to 4 hours, £5.00 all day
- Cost of annual parking permit price to be determined
- Chargeable hours of 9am to 6pm, 365 days a year
Revised proposals:
- £1 per hour up to 4 hours, £5.00 all day
- £52 per annum
- No change to chargeable hours (9am to 6pm, 365 days a year); a 30 minute ‘grace’ period is proposed in addition
Sheldon Country Park:
Original proposals:
- £2.20 for up to 2 hours, £3.30 for 2 to 4 hours, £5.00 all day
- Cost of annual parking permit price to be determined
- Chargeable hours of 9am to 6pm, 365 days a year
Revised proposals:
- £0.75 per hour up to 3 hours, £3.50 all day
- £52 per annum
- No change to chargeable hours (9am to 6pm, 365 days a year); a 30 minute ‘grace’ period is proposed in addition
Sutton Park:
Original proposals:
- £2.20 for up to 2 hours, £3.30 for 2 to 4 hours, £5.00 all day
- Cost of annual parking permit price to be determined
- Chargeable hours of 9am to 6pm, 365 days a year
Revised proposals:
- £1 per hour up to 4 hours, £5.00 all day
- £52 per annum
- No change to chargeable hours (9am to 6pm, 365 days a year); a 30 minute ‘grace’ period is proposed in addition
Birmingham City Council House in March 2024.(Image: Anita Maric /SWNS)
Ahead of a meeting on Tuesday, May 13, cabinet have been recommended to approve both the proposed changes and free parking permits for park volunteers.
Cabinet were also recommended to delegate to the relevant cabinet member the decision to proceed with the Sheldon Country Park and Sutton Park charging schemes and the decision to introduce a scheme for charging and enforcement at the Lickey Hills site “utilising private parking arrangements”.
On the council’s financial strife, external auditors recently highlighted several issues including the equal pay debacle, inadequate budget setting, poor service management, demand led pressures and the disastrous implementation of a new IT system.
Labour politicians have also pointed to the impact of funding cuts over the past decade or so.