{"id":98864,"date":"2025-05-13T19:39:12","date_gmt":"2025-05-13T19:39:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/98864\/"},"modified":"2025-05-13T19:39:12","modified_gmt":"2025-05-13T19:39:12","slug":"birmingham-council-accused-of-scrooge-mentality-as-divisive-park-plans-take-step-forward","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/98864\/","title":{"rendered":"Birmingham Council accused of \u2018Scrooge mentality\u2019 as divisive park plans take step forward"},"content":{"rendered":"

Birmingham City Council has plans to introduce new parking charges at Sutton Park, Lickey Hills Country Park and Sheldon Country Park\"SuttonSutton Park in the autumn sunshine(Image: Darren Quinton\/Birmingham Live)<\/p>\n

Birmingham City Council\u2019s controversial plans to introduce parking charges at three beauty spots have taken an important step forward.<\/p>\n

The proposals were part of a painful and alarming raft of budget cuts and \u2018savings\u2019 which were passed through by the council<\/a> after it became overwhelmed by financial turmoil.<\/p>\n

They mean parking charges could soon be introduced at Sutton Park in Sutton Coldfield<\/a>, Lickey Hills Country Park, on the Worcestershire<\/a> border, and Sheldon Country Park, close to Birmingham Airport<\/a>.<\/p>\n

READ MORE:<\/strong> Birmingham City Council issues update on major proposal for beloved park attraction<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

A consultation was held recently on the plans which showed a \u201csignificant proportion\u201d were not in favour of the proposed parking charges, as a recently-published council report reveals.<\/p>\n

Despite this, the Labour<\/a>-run council is planning to proceed with the proposals – albeit, with slightly revised charges.<\/p>\n

Councillor Majid Mahmood, cabinet member for environment<\/a>, said the three beauty spots were \u201csome of our most cherished destination parks\u201d at a meeting today, May 13.<\/p>\n

He went on to describe the proposed parking charges as \u201cmodest\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis project is about our ability to invest in our parks so that they are fit for the future,\u201d the Labour councillor said.<\/p>\n

\"MajidMajid Mahmood, Birmingham City Council’s cabinet member for environment(Image: Alexander Brock)<\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019ve listened carefully to the community – while the original modelling was based on Cannon Hill Park\u2019s rates, we\u2019ve responded to feedback by significantly reducing proposed charges at Lickey Hills and Sutton Park by up to 69 per cent.<\/p>\n

“The new rate is designed to be fair, accessible and considerate of local businesses and residents.”<\/p>\n

He added that there would be a grace period of 30 minutes and free parking permits for park volunteers.<\/p>\n

But opposition councillors called for the Labour administration to rethink its plans, with Robert Alden highlighting how the proposals were for 365 days a year and therefore \u201cnot even allowing free parking on Christmas<\/a> Day\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cSome might say that makes a real Scrooge mentality at the council,\u201d the leader of the Conservatives<\/a> at the council said.<\/p>\n

\"CouncillorCouncillor Robert Alden, leader of the Conservatives at Birmingham City Council(Image: Nick Wilkinson\/Birmingham Live)<\/p>\n

He continued: \u201cThere\u2019s recognition in the report that [Sutton Park and Lickey Hills] are located in wealthier neighbourhoods.<\/p>\n

\u201cOf course, the people who will actually drive to those parks are not the people who live right next door to them.<\/p>\n

\u201cSo in the case of Sutton Park, we\u2019re talking about people from Kingstanding, Oscott, Erdington<\/a>, Stockland Green, Falcon Lodge.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is in fact them being hit with the charge, not the wealthiest people in the city.\u201d<\/p>\n

Referring to the results of a consultation, he added: \u201cThe public have been very clear they don\u2019t agree with this and the cabinet should drop this policy.\u201d<\/p>\n

READ MORE: <\/strong>Birmingham City Council accused of ‘undermining local democracy’ after divisive change<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

Councillor Ewan Mackey, deputy leader of the opposition, said: \u201cIf you\u2019re going to start putting barriers in the way of people being able to exercise, this is actually not going to be beneficial for those people and detrimental for what you\u2019re looking to achieve.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe most sensible thing at this moment in time is to withdraw this option and allow people to have unfettered access to the parks that were basically given to them years ago.\u201d<\/p>\n

Focusing on Sheldon Country Park, Roger Harmer, leader of the Liberal Democrat<\/a> group said: \u201cIt doesn\u2019t take much drop-off of income that you\u2019re actually not making any money on this at all.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe others are much more robust in financial terms so I will ask that Sheldon is looked at again.\u201d<\/p>\n

Responding to such concerns, cabinet member Coun Mahmood stressed the council was not removing access to the parks.<\/p>\n

\"AA moment of contemplation at the Lickey Hills (Image: Graham Young, Birmingham Mail)<\/p>\n

\u201cBut we do have to try to bring in revenue to support the maintenance of the parks,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

\u201cI agree that parks are one of our greatest assets in the city,\u201d he went on to say. \u201cThe pricing has been reduced significantly than [current charges] at Cannon Hill Park.\u201d<\/p>\n

He continued that a third of the city does not drive and West Midlands Mayor Richard Parker\u2019s plans to bring the region\u2019s buses back under public control could help further connect communities and strategic parks.<\/p>\n

He added: \u201cI asked officers to ensure [the risk register] is as comprehensive as it can be and it is.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2018Controversial and unpopular\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

The council report stated that for Lickey Hills Country Park, 919 respondents of the consultation (78.4 per cent) felt access to the park should remain free.<\/p>\n

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).<\/p>\n

Acknowledging the opposition to the proposed charges, the council report continued: \u201cThe introduction of parking charges is often controversial and unpopular as users are asked to pay for something that has previously been free.<\/p>\n

\u201cHowever, the projected income from parking charges still falls short of the cost of maintaining the three parks in question.<\/p>\n

\u201cTherefore it is deemed reasonable to ask park users to contribute financially to the upkeep and maintenance of these parks.<\/p>\n

\"SheldonSheldon Country Park(Image: Birmingham Mail\/Iain Findlay)<\/p>\n

\u201cDespite the introduction of parking charges, there will still be a requirement for financial support from the council\u2019s general fund to maintain and manage these parks.\u201d<\/p>\n

It went on to say that charges across \u201cdestination sites\u201d throughout the UK has become common practice.<\/p>\n

The report said: \u201cIn the vast majority of cases, parking charges for these sites have been in place for several years.<\/p>\n

\u201cIntroducing charges on Birmingham<\/a> \u2019s sites will be in line with national best practice to offset the cost of maintaining these destination sites.\u201d<\/p>\n

It added that there was more support for revised parking charges which were lower than the consulted ones.<\/p>\n

READ MORE: <\/strong>Charging proposal for Birmingham park set to proceed despite 78 per cent opposition<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cThis 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,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n

\u201cReduced 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.\u201d<\/p>\n

Cabinet ultimately agreed 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 \u201cutilising private parking arrangements\u201d.<\/p>\n

Both the original and revised proposed charges for each of the parks can be found below:<\/p>\n

Sutton Park:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Original proposals:<\/p>\n