Harleston and District Car Park Group Report

Harleston and District Car Parks Group

Car Park Charges Review

EVIDENCE to Scrutiny Committee

3 March 2008

Belting down the Thoroughfare, on the way to school

Baby's in the pram, sisters looking cool

Cruise past the bakers, suck in the smell of bread

Dash in to the grocers, lunch box apples shining red

Brakes on the pram, wave across the road

Chat to a friend, local shopping by the load

Pick up the speed, can't be late

What! Mum's gossiping to another mate

Kids charge in the school gates, spot a running friend

Badgers, Brownies, swimming, topics without end

Back down the thoroughfare, head to the market square

Go with the vibe, hear bargains calling there

Local traders, local people, visitors should abound

Enjoy the buzz, soak up the feel of what is all around

This not the 50's, or any time long gone

This is Harleston Thoroughfare, singing its song.

Kate Chenneour 2005

Harleston  - published in 'My small World' an Anthology of poems by local

people about local places. United Press Limited. London. 2006

Harleston and District Car Parks Group 3 March 2008

___________________________________________________________________

opportunities and problems

which critically depend on car users to support the economic

and social structure of the community

parks management to play a full part in sustaining and

improving the individual communities and their collective

contribution to South Norfolk's quality of life.

Extensive research has been carried out by skilled volunteers in line with the principle set out

in the Renaissance in Market Towns report, which identifies 'knowing your town' as the key

starting point for any evaluation of parking provision and its management.

The Harleston and District Car Parks Group however wish to emphasise that this study has

conducted against great time pressures and within a confused and inconsistent context. Its

authors present it as an indicative contribution to the debate, not as substitute for coordinated

research with the Council, although it would significantly inform such a process.

The Group also wishes to point out that while it has looked at other towns to provide a

context for Harleston's own position, it does not seek to have a view on the needs of others,

as this lies properly with those communities. There will be mistakes, but we are confident

that the fundamental messages and pointers are sound.

1     This submission is presented by The Harleston and District Car Parks Group

(The Group), which comprises representatives of Harleston Town Council,

Harleston Businesses Car Parks Group and the Save Harleston Group.

2     The Group was established to provide an efficient, single point of contact for

the Community to work with South Norfolk Council to seek the 'right answer'

for Harleston, which could then be presented as appropriate for approval and

adoption.

3     The submission is in three parts:

                                 Part 1 Summary

                                 Part 2 Topics

                                 Part 3 Preliminary Technical Assessment Reports

4     Of particular relevance in the Topics are the examples of reports from

Newport, Shropshire and Camelford, Cornwall, where a District and Town

Council respectively, found it necessary to remove charges following adverse

effects of their introduction. They show that in certain circumstances there are

real risks associated with the introduction of car parking charges.

5     Additionally, car park charging information from Local Authorities within

Yorkshire Forward's area of activity, an organisation referred to by Officers of

the Council, shows that differential charging to suit local needs is also an

accepted practice elsewhere.

6     At its Cabinet meeting on 10 September 2007, with no apparent background

research and unbeknown to many who might be affected, South Norfolk

Council introduced proposals to modify the Car Parking Charges Regime.

The decision by Cabinet unacceptably narrowed and defined the debate

before the public had had a proper opportunity to contribute to or comment on

the issue. The proposals, were framed by a set of key Drivers emanating

from the Councils' Corporate Policies, and supported by four principles. A

report on these proposals was forwarded subsequently from Cabinet to the

South Norfolk Alliance for comment, but not at the outset to communities they

might affect.

7     The South Norfolk Alliance did not support the report, but raised numerous

questions, many of which remain unanswered, as set out in the Alliance’s

approved minutes.

8     On the 30 January 2008 The Scrutiny Committee subsequently suggested

amendments to the original principles. Meanwhile suggestions have been

made through the media, and reiterated by leading councillors, that there

should not be charging for the first hour.

9     While this is a shift from the original principles advocated, the overall notion

of charging is still predicated on the idea that the user - later recommended to

be altered to: 'beneficiaries' - should pay. But, this neglects the fact that all

council tax payers, whether motorists or not are beneficiaries of a thriving

variety of independent traders, eateries and hostelries, which in turn depend

critically and overwhelmingly, as is the case in Harleston, on the continued

support of car-borne users of the town. Neither, do the proposals get-to-grips

with the social and other sustainable community issues connected with the

character of the town, which will be harmed by placing people on a 'time

clock'.

10     In response to the original proposals, a Petition was launched in Harleston

from within the community to object to charges. This attracted more than

5500 signatories. In addition, a Public Meeting, attended by 150 people, was

representatives of the Council were invited to explain the position.

11     At the public meeting, with the support of the Leader of the Council,

representatives of the Harleston Community agreed to meet with South

Norfolk Council to explore the way forward. It was acknowledged that

discussions would take place on the basis that:

12     In the light of agreement to meet, The Group formulated a clear position

statement and on 10 December 2007, Mr Robin Twigge, formally presented

the Petition with an accompanying statement to the Full Council on behalf of

the community.

13     To date, the Group has maintained a consistent position with regard to the

importance of understanding how Harleston 'works' and the responsibilities

and opportunities, which it believes, are incumbent upon the Council to

embrace. Note: The Group remains firmly open-minded to discussing the

'right answer' for the town, though as much of the research proposed in the

statement has now been undertaken, the results do bring new, firm and

relevant perspectives to the issue. The sequence of public statements by the

Group, along with a copy of Harleston Town Council's resolution with regards

to the issue are included for ease of reference.

14     On 18 January a meeting was held with officer and councillor representatives.

The tone of this meeting from the Council's side and the inaccuracy of the

position asserted by the Council's representatives, along with a number of

other apparent irregularities and inconsistencies, meant that the Group was

prevented from proceeding in the spirit of what it thought had been agreed.

15     Subsequent recent approaches by the Leader of the Council to individuals on

the Group, to seek to broker some form of deal, risked cutting across the

agreed timetable of the Scrutiny Committee, though such discussions, set

against the right background, might be valuable in due course.

16     Nevertheless, the Group has maintained its co-operative stance, working

diligently to provide the Scrutiny Committee with a depth of information at

present unavailable to the Council from its own resources.

17     The review of car parking charges falls under several polices and guidelines

including the overarching responsibilities of South Norfolk Council, embraced

in the Local Plan, for the social, economic and environmental well being of its

residents. These policies are rooted in the Local Agenda 21 principles

established at the Rio Earth Summit 1992.

18     The Council's powers to manage discretionary services derive from the Local

Government Act 2003 and associated Guidelines produced by the Office of

the Deputy Prime Minister. Increasingly, national policy is focussed on the

drive to work towards sustainable communities as demonstrated by the

Sustainable Communities Act 2007.

19 These new measures feed directly into issues of Sustainable Development,

the most widely used definition of which is 'development that meets the

needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to

meet their own needs'. Though Sustainable Development can also be seen

as 'ensuring a better quality of life for everyone, now and for future

generations'.

aims to meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents by making

effective use of natural resources, enhancing the environment, promoting

community cohesion and increasing economic prosperity; all highly pertinent

to the Group's contentions in relation Harleston and the need for the Council

to act cautiously and with a full understanding of the situation on the ground.

21     The present Council policy for car parking in Harleston derives from a

resolution of the Council in December 2001. This states that the

arrangements in Harleston would be reviewed when the issue of on-street

parking is addressed.

22     Thus, members of the public and especially businesses investing in the town

and which might be affected by any changes should be able to rely on this as

the council's formal position and the start point from which any modifications

might be considered.

23 However, on-street parking is expressly separated out in the car park charges

review and no mention is made of the historical position with regard to

existing Council Policy. The principles now espoused pay little regard to the

policy context and fail demonstrably to evaluate the significance and risk with

regard to the impact of any changes on the well-being of community life.

24     Following publication of its position statement, the Group sought to:

                                                   a. Demonstrate the level of concern.

                                                   b. Ascertain the extent of the Harleston Community.

                                                   c. Understand the High Street business structure of towns.

                                                  d. Assess the levels and patterns of car park use.

                                                  e. Comment on SNC's proposals on an informed basis.

                                                  f. Seek appropriate studies before changes (if any) are introduced.

25     Working as a co-ordinated team, volunteers assisting The Group have

conducted extensive information gathering and analysis of information.

covering:

                                                 a. Comparison of structure and retail profile - all towns.

                                                 b. Origins of car park users and shoppers.

                                                 c. Parking provision - all towns.

                                                 d. Car park usage.

                                                 e. Business patterns and comparative rental levels.

                                                 f. Business changes in last 20 years.

                                                g. Walking distances.

                                                h. Basic through traffic study.

                                                i. Other community adverse experiences.

                                                j. Other Districts' variable parking regimes.

                                                k. Statutory responsibilities and powers.

                                                l. Analysis of Councils proposals and amendments.

                                                m. Analysis of Council's evidence.

                                                n. Assessment of Harleston in the context of 'Renaissance in Market

                                                   Towns'. Criteria, promoted by Council, and Cittaslo objectives being

                                                    rolled out locally

                                               o. Liaison with others.

                                               p. Briefing of and presentation of information to councillors.

26     While the full information and associated raw data is available, mindful of the

workload for officers and councillors, the Group has presented selected parts

of its material and data resource where they are felt to be most helpful to the

Committee (Evidence Part 2). In some instances the areas of research are

combined under integrated draft technical appraisal reports.

27     Through the research and discussions the Group revealed the:

                                               a. Individuality of each community/town.

                                               b. Wide extent of 'the Harleston community'.

                                               c. Uniqueness of the Harleston situation noted by the Greater Norwich

                                                   Development Partnership.

                                              d. Complexity of use and issues to be considered in relation to the

                                                  town's car parks.

                                              e. Integral importance of car parking to the social and economic wellbeing

                                                  of the town.

                                              f. All council-tax payers benefit - car user and non-car user - from the

                                                 parking provision.

                                              g. Reliance on car-borne shoppers.

                                              h. Need to consider all parking provision, including on-street parking,

                                                  together in relation to the social and economic needs of each town.

                                              i. Opportunity to encourage car-use reduction.

                                              j. True consistency of approach is impossible unless it is the overarching

                                                 aim of seeking to secure the social and economic well-being

                                                 of each community.

                                              k. Arbitrary notions of fairness can be contradictory between

                                                  communities and services, are divisive and unnecessary.

Group respectfully suggests that Scrutiny Committee might consider advising

Cabinet that:

trigger for much useful study and gathering of valuable information;

including assessment of all parking on and off street, and should be

defined in immediate and urgent consultation with each of the Town

Councils, not through making comparisons, which will only encourage

divisive positioning, but rather through much-needed co-operation for

mutual benefit .

help of the community, to seek the 'right answer' and to contribute to

the understanding of sustainable communities and ways of helping to

fostering independent retailers and business..

completed and consultation undertaken and in the light of the findings

be convened to share information and to more readily identify and

understand ways of helping each other to put a 'best foot forward,.

It would appear from the Group's research that the contribution made by car

drivers to the well-being of the town is essential. Without them the shops would

struggle for survival as there is no possibility that the 'pedestrian' shoppers could

sustain the local shops unaided. Even a reduction in the numbers parking in

reaction to incautious changes could have highly uncertain consequences;

witness the experiences of Newport, Shropshire and Cameflord, Cornwall. The

end result could be an ailing high street. This is not an acceptable risk.

We suggest that it is in The Council's interest and, indeed, is their responsibility

to maintain sustainable communities, thriving high streets and the local

distinctiveness as exemplified by the town of Harleston. This can be achieved

only when the needs of each and every town are considered carefully and

individually and properly understood. This is demonstrably not the case at

present.

South Norfolk Council is a potential leading voice in the national drive to achieve

these very desirable aims. It is essential therefore, that it does nothing to upset

the current balance that exists between the social and business activities in

Harleston, a rare example of a town with a thriving High Street of independent

shops and high social inclusion, influenced fundamentally by those who use its

car parks.

Topic 1: Harleston - the place

Topic 2: Car Parking complexities

Topic 3: Charges can cause problems

               Camelford, Cornwall

               Newport, Shropshire

Topic 4: Variable Charging

              East Riding of Yorkshire Council

              Harrogate Borough Council

Topic 5: South Norfolk Alliance Approved Minutes

Topic 6: Public statements

              Car Parks Group

              Harleston Town Council Resolution

Key points:

Harleston and District Car Parks Group 3 March 2008

Redenhall-with-Harleston (Harleston), is a historic market town adjacent to the

Waveney Valley on the Norfolk/Suffolk border. It is by-passed by the main road

from Diss to Great Yarmouth.

Unlike other significant towns in the area, it has not experienced catastrophic

town centre fires during its history and so the town exhibits a progression of

buildings and development stretching across its entire recorded history. Although,

its precise development is poorly understood, the buildings we see today, though

modified and adapted over the centuries, are mostly timber-framed, often behind

Georgian facades.

around an open market plain, with the oldest perhaps lying on the higher ground

to the south-east of Old Market Place. On the market plain stallholders would

have erected booths from which they traded. In time these booths developed into

more substantial wooden structures, which progressed to become the retail and

domestic premises today.

By virtue of its history and geography, vehicular use of Harleston is tightly

constraine.. It has two car parks: Bullock Fair and Broad Street, along with

stretches of restricted on-street parking. There are no side streets adjacent to the

centre suitable for parking, though some short stretches of residential roads come

close to the back of the Bullock Fair Car Park. Some establishments, for example

The Magpie and Swan have limited car parking, which to varying degrees are

used sporadically by people other than patrons.

The Bullock Fair car park, effectively the 'Hub' of Harleston, is in split ownership,

part being controlled by the South Norfolk Council and the remainder by Perrin's

Retail Ltd (formerly Budgens) an independent supermarket-style business. The

combined car parks are a complex place serving a variety of purposes (Doctors

Surgery, Charity shop, recycling, public toilets, public meeting place, drop-off

point, 'bus station' for social mini-bus services and is a cross-roads for access and

other activities. Both car parks are free and unrestricted in their use and are of a

sufficient scale in relation to the social and economic activity of the town to

effectively satisfy most parking needs. Residents and workers who have no other

long-stay parking options also use them. Although privately owned, the Perrin's

car park (1/3 of Bullock Fair) is universally used as a part of the town's public car

park provision in an indivisible way from the Council run area. This happens with

the consent of the owners of the business.

The town serves and is supported by a wide spectrum of the South Norfolk and

North Suffolk community and It has received a number of significant community

awards and accolades over recent years. Its thriving shopping centre populated

primarily by independent traders. The medium-sized Perrin's (Budgens)

supermarket-style retail food outlet complements the other traders and vice-versa,

helping to provide a critical mass of retail provision at the heart of the town. It is

this solid nucleus of affinity from which Harleston derives much of its energy and

character.

Key points:

As far as the public are concerned, there are two car parks in Harleston:

However, the former falls into two ownerships – South Norfolk Council and Perrin’s Retail Ltd. Broad Street is

owned by South Norfolk Council.

The marked official car parking spaces provided comprise:

'Budgens' Bullock Fair (SNC and Perrin (Budgens): (199 spaces)

Broad Street (61 spaces)

There is a limited range of short-stay restricted on-street parking and a few

unrestricted places in the central area.

However, imaginative parking can result in between 5 and 10% increase in the

parking capacity on exceptionally busy occasions. There are also a small

number of parking spaces in the Doctors' surgery accessed through the Bullock

Fair car park

Budgens/Bullock Fair Car Park is the principal car-parking place in Harleston. It

is a primary hub of activity, rather like a City Square or Piazza. The complexities

inherent in this car park make it imperative that a careful study is carried out

before changes, if any, are made. One good reason alone is the need to

consider properly the Relationship between Perrin's (Budgens') Car park and

Council owned Car Park. At present, Perrin's retail provides a significant

proportion of the town's free parking without restriction or payment and the

functioning of the two is indivisible.

The wider range of complexities to be considered include:

movement (many elderly) if ticket machines installed, with

greatly increased risks of accident in this dynamic

environment, along with slowing of parking process - consider

the impact of say up to 3,000 extra unsupervised people

movements in this space on December 12 2007 to walk too

and from a machine.

access

to possible need to more firmly prevent non-patron parkers.

Inspection of the Graphs and charts comparing occupancy levels and activity and

trading patterns, demonstrate that there is not a fundamental parking problem in

Harleston, though there are some welcome busy peaks. If parking charges aim to

reduce long-term parking this would be counter productive to trade and social

activity. Many would seek to migrate to residential roads, but there are few nearby

and this form of parking would instantly become a major nuisance. Charges in the

car park would lead to shoppers also using these roads. Needs for restrictions on all

residential roads could then be required. If annual ticket arrangements are made for

workers and residents this will provide no extra capacity in the car parks, as the

same cars will still be there. And analysis of the throughput and lengths of stays

suggest the whole exercise may well not make economic sense. Until figures are

provided no assessment of this can be made.

Key points

Councillors M.J. Smith (Speaker), J.C. Sadler (Mayor), R.K. Austin (Leader),

D.D. Ahir, E. Allan, D.G. Allen, D.W.D. Ashley, I. Baker, S. Bentley, D.

Blackwell, K.T. Blundell, R.G. Chaplin, E.A. Clare, G.J.L. Davies, J.A. Dixon, A.J.

Eade, A.R.H. England, I.TW. Fletcher, V.A. Fletcher, B.A. Flowers, K.H. Gray,

G.M. Green, P. Harrison, J.T. Hicks, T.J. Hope, M.B. Hosken, A.J. Hussey, A.

Lawrence, L. Lomax, A.A. Mackenzie, C.N. Mason, J.C. Minor, D.J. Morgan, B.M

Norton, R.A. Overton, L.V. Pattinson, F.R. Picken, H. Rhodes, K.S. Sahota, U.E.

Sambrook, J.M. Seymour, R.J. Sloan, C.F. Smith, E.S. Swift, K.L. Tomlinson,

W.L. Tomlinson, V.J. Verster and D.R.W. White.

A Minutes Silence was observed in memory of the victims of the terrorist bomb

attacks in London.

Councillors P.M. Davis, S.J. Davis, J.A. Francis, R.E. Groom, P.A.E. Homer and

J. Jones

Councillor Interest

M.B. Hosken Personal and prejudicial interest in relation to car parking

charges in Wellington

B.M. Norton Personal interest in car parking as a blue badge holder

G.J.L. Davies Personal interest in car parking as a blue badge holder

C.N. Mason Personal interest in car parking as a blue badge holder

Councillor Hosken withdrew from the meeting.

Attached to the agenda were the report of the Scrutiny team that had carried out

a full review of the Council's car parking strategy; the report of the Corporate

Director: Environment and Regeneration setting out his response to the Scrutiny

Committee report's recommendations; and the Cabinet's recommendations to

Council in relation to car park charging policy. The Cabinet's response to the

remaining Scrutiny recommendations was contained in the Decision

Notice/Minutes for the Cabinet meeting on 4 July 2005.

Councillor C.F. Smith, Cabinet Member for Planning, Development and

Transport, moved the recommendations of Cabinet as outlined in Appendix A to

the agenda. In referring to the original decision to introduce car parking charges

in Newport and Wellington, he stated that the Council had believed this to be

valid at the time. Unfortunately, this policy had coincided with a national and

continuing downturn in retail activity and an increase in shop rents. Given this

situation, it was appropriate to reconsider the Council's decision, and to link all

the car parking issues to the wider issue of the re-generation of district centres in

the Borough.

The Leader, in seconding the motion, announced his intention to hold a

conference to discuss the future of all the district centres in the Borough with the

town and parish councils and other stakeholders. It would seek their views on

regeneration and the ways in which partnership could help build a sustainable

future for those areas. Car parking issues would be one of the matters to be

addressed by the conference.

Councillor D.R.W. White, Chair of the Scrutiny Management Board, commended

the team that had carried out the Scrutiny Review of Car Parking, and highlighted

some of the recommendations in their report. In terms of car parking charges in

Wellington and Newport, it had been concluded that the charges had not

significantly helped to reduce car usage, had been perceived to be unfair and

had damaged the viability of the two centres.

During the ensuing debate, the majority of speakers were in favour of the motion

to remove car parking charges in Wellington and Newport. A number of Members

welcomed the opportunity for car parking to be looked at in relation to the

economic problems being experienced in some district centres, and to the

involvement of partners.

In terms of the financial implications of removing car parking charges in

Wellington and Newport, Councillor R.J. Sloan, Cabinet Member for Resources,

reported that, because of increased usage of the car parks since the introduction

of revised charges at Christmas 2004, the extra income generated would offset

the costs of scrapping the charges. It was also anticipated that the net income

requirement of 37,000 pounds in the Council's budget for Newport, Wellington and

Town Centre car parks could be achieved in the future from the Town Centre

alone, once the one-off abortive costs had been written off for this year.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 17.5, a recorded vote was

requisitioned in relation to the motion to approve the Cabinet recommendations

on car parking charges in Wellington and Newport. The voting was as follows:

For: (45)

Councillors D.D. Ahir, E. Allan, D.G. Allen, D.W.D. Ashley, R.K. Austin, I.Baker, S. Bentley, D.

Blackwell, K.T. Blundell, R.G. Chaplin, E.A. Clare, G.J.L. Davies, J.A. Dixon, A.J. Eade, I.T.W.

Fletcher, V.A. Fletcher, B.A. Flowers, K.H. Gray, G.M.Green, P Harrison, J.T. Hicks, T.J. Hope,

A.J. Hussey, A. Lawrence, L. Lomax, C.N. Mason, J.C. Minor, D.J. Morgan, B.M. Norton, R.A.

Overton, L.V.Pattinson, F.R. Picken, H. Rhodes, J.C.Sadler, K.S. Sahota, U.E. Sambrook, J.M.

Seymour, R.J. Sloan, C.F. Smith, M.J. Smith, E.S. Swift, K.L.Tomlinson, W.L.Tomlinson, V.J.

Against: (2)

Councillors A.R.H. England and A.A. Mackenzie

Abstentions: (0)

The meeting ended at 7.35 pm

Key points:

towns within a District and within car parks within the

towns. Examples are:

to the needs.

The 30 January Scrutiny Committee Paper stated that the Alliance

was broadly supportive. This is not borne out by the approved

minutes.

Key points

not been given

for Harleston

Chairman, Councillors --- Good evening --

Thank you for allowing me to speak today.

I am Robin Twigge --- and I have been asked to present this petition and a short statement to

you on behalf of the Harleston Businesses Group, which is concerned about the future

management of our car parks.

of which regrettably most of the electorate were at the time unaware --- contains more than

5000 signatures of people, who are opposed to the introduction of car parking charges in

Harleston.

If we take into account the families of many of the signatories it may reasonably be said to

represent the interests of several thousands more.

Although a very large number have signed --- you may wonder why I am here alone. This

was a conscious decision born out of respect for recent developments.

Herbert, explained the Council's position --- and because of the support and enthusiasm for

a co-operative way ahead, a large public demonstration today would have been inappropriate,

and at this stage, an unnecessary pressure on council resources to police and manage large

numbers of people.

But the absence of a wider show of support does not mean that there is no strength of feeling.

The number of names on the petition speak for themselves --- and the town buzzes with

concern.

At the public meeting, it was agreed that the community will work with the you to seek the

right answer for Harleston. It was particularly important to those attending that your

would be evidence-based --- and that principles could be reconsidered if appropriate.

I would emphasise that we are mindful that there are different issues concerning car parking

in other communities within your area of responsibility, to which you also have to be fair and

that Councillors have wider financial and operational matters to consider.

Fairness cuts many ways, and that which satisfies the needs of one might be highly

detrimental to another and vice versa. We know that the issue of car parks is a considerable

challenge and not easy to resolve. But we believe strongly that it cannot be reduced to

simplistic questions such as --- Who pays? or a desire for a one-size fits all approach.

Those of you who are familiar with Harleston, will appreciate that it is not a matter solely of

money --- Rather it includes ---

---- how do we maintain our strong sense of community,

---- how do we keep our businesses vibrant,

---- how de we foster social inclusion.

--- how do we ensure that the crucial relationship between our car parks,

supermarket and the well-being of other traders in the town centre is not

harmed.

--- how do we encourage car use reduction in the face of growing environmental

concerns, while at the same time catering for those both in the town and from

surrounding communities who have no alternative but to use a car.

All of these are intimately bound up with the charging and car park use

strategy. Yet we have had no consultation on, nor meaningful

investigation of any of them ---

--- Clearly these matters need to be explored with you urgently before

incautious changes with unknown consequences occur. We believe that

our forthcoming meetings with you will help.

From preliminary analysis of the petition it is illuminating to know that a large number of the

signatories come from more than 5 miles out of town, - clearly this is highly significant in a

flourishing but fragile local economy, based exceptionally, on enterprises of almost wholly

sole traders. Many come for a relaxed visit, to shop, to chat and wander at leisure, not

governed by the time on a parking machine. It is the very character and life-blood of this

community, with many traders and shoppers on first-name terms.

The signatories to this petition come from all walks of life --- undoubtedly representing

varying political persuasions. But many are weary of cross-party criticism and have

expressed a desire that this should stop. The grass-roots feeling is that decisions should not be

politically-driven, but arrived at by objective analysis of the particular circumstances of each

community. What they care about is not who did what, but fundamentally that a celebrated

quality of life should not put at risk by hasty decisions based solely on a bottom line on a

balance sheet or inadequate recognition of local circumstances --- nor by being lost in

political manoeuvring. The issues are important, not the politics and we would simply like

the right solution which recognises the individuality of Harleston and other South Norfolk

communities.

Chairman --- our major concern is the viable sustainability of our town as a community ---

may I therefore present to you this Petition on behalf of the Harleston Businesses Group and

ask that the Council might approve its receipt. I am obviously happy to answer questions

about the Petition itself, but as this is just a first step, with deeper issues to be the subject of

discussions with the council, I hope you will accept that it would not be appropriate for me to

personally second-guess these discussions by seeking to answer questions on wider matters

today.

Thank you for your time --- it is very much appreciated.

1     The Harleston Businesses Car Parks Group was initially formed to reflect

the views of traders concerned about the potential effects of introducing

car parking charges in Harleston.

2     The Group's co-ordinators accept that there will be a range of views

throughout the businesses and the public. Not only will there be those

who are open-minded, and those who are wholly for the charges, but also

a very large number who are against them for a wide range of reasons.

3     It is also recognised that these varying views, will be largely based on a

personal perspective of the issue. Quite understandably, few, if any, at

this stage can be a fully-informed opinion. Neither can it be said that the

propositions put forward by South Norfolk Council are a true

understanding of the issues, but appear to be based on advancing

unresearched and narrow concepts.

4     Following a public meeting on 29 November in the Apollo Rooms,

Harleston, the Businesses Group expanded its scope to unite with

representatives of the Harleston Town Council and the Save Harleston

provide a voice for a significant proportion of the Harleston Community.

5     To evaluate the car parking charges issue it is important firstly to

understand the nature of the 'Harleston Community'. The social and

economic viability of Harleston appears founded on embracing both the

residents of the town and, importantly, residents from surrounding and

widespread settlements across south Norfolk and North Suffolk. This

dispersed and diverse community shares with town residents an affinity

for Harleston, which provides both a focus for their shopping needs and

social contact, combining with the town to create its exceptional inclusive

character.

6     All political parties recognise the significance of seeking to achieve

sustainable communities, to reduce CO2 emissions and car dependency,

promote healthy living and to increase local supply of sustainably-grown

food. The challenges and changes facing all society have to include

action on the ground at local level, as well as globally. Local government

and its partners must show their commitment to tackling both mitigation

and adaptation [to climate change]' Taking this lead, it is imperative that

allowance is made for future needs as well as present characteristics.

These changes cannot happen overnight, but an effective start needs to

be made and to fail to build this thinking into proper consideration of car

parking and community matters would be irresponsible and a missed

opportunity.

7     Without suitable public transport, private motor vehicles will remain

essential for many households who have no practical or effective

alternative. But, many more, especially who live close to town could use

the car less. It should not be overlooked, however, that fuel technology to

propel vehicles may well advance such that harmful emissions are

reduced or eliminated, but the number of vehicles to be catered for

remains the same or increases; economics drives everything and

innovation thrives on adversity. While encouraging healthier walking and

cycling to shops, it is essential also to plan to accommodate the private

motor vehicle.

8     At the public meeting with South Norfolk Council it was agreed that

representatives of the community would meet with South Norfolk Council

to explore the right way forward with regards to the car parks.

Subsequently The Group has undertaken some initial surveys and

information gathering to inform this process and to establish the basic

principles which they believe properly reflect the position.

9      The H&DCPGroup:

            management of car parks;

             answer to maintain and enhance Harleston as a sustainable and

             viable community, set within the South Norfolk family of market towns;

           important than the pursuit of financial or 'gold-plated' car park

          solutions;

            requirements may vary from Harleston's, but asks that in turn they will

            respect Harleston's needs, if thought to be different from theirs;

             evidence-based;

             right answer .

10     The Group does not believe that either 'who pays' or expected car park

standards are the main issues, Market towns support all residents in their

District, often in different ways and their viability individually and

collectively is essential in the interests of all charge payers.

11     The Group strongly endorses the Council's commitment to the well-being

of the Market towns. It suggests that the real question to be answered is:

          a. how to best manage the overall car parking asset to the general

              benefit of the district, while supporting the well-being of each market

             town and their wider communities.

solutions.

13     The Group suggest that at present:

         a. information available on which to base any strategic decisions is

             insufficient;

         b. there is much to be learned about how Harleston 'works', which could

             be valuable to other towns, not only in the immediate area, an

             opportunity that will be lost if changes are imposed without firstly

             conducting appropriate research - this will be money well spent if the

             Harleston 'model' can inform debate for other towns always accepting

             that no two places are exactly the same.

        c. Ill-informed changes to the complex and potentially fragile economic

            situation in Harleston could have unforeseen consequences which if

            detrimental will not easily, if ever be counteracted;

        d. with future new housing and the Greater Norwich Development

            Strategies on the horizon, important wider matters must be taken

            account now before imposing new regimes on the framework on

            which the town's enviable small-enterprise -based economy has

            developed and thrives.

14     The Group proposes that:

        a. with urgency The Council engages with the community to carry out

            agreed research, with a high degree of direct involvement, so that the

            community can 'own' the result;

        b. the Council, on the evidence thus far recognises that there are many

            complex issues and options affecting the centre of Harleston, which

            need to be identified and considered;

        c. no change is made until the position is fully explored and more clearly

            understood including a cost/benefit/risk/opportunity analysis;

        d. the sharing and promotion of results of any research with the

            community will make proposed changes (if any) less likely to trigger

            adverse reaction and that these potential changes will be, on balance,

            more readily accepted, as being of least risk to the viable future of the

            town and sustaining its wider community.

December 2007

Following a Town meeting at the Apollo Rooms, Harleston,

on 18 January, representatives of the Harleston and District

Car Parks Group, met with the Portfolio holder and Head of

Finance.

During preparation for the meeting, the difficulties we have

encountered in gaining responses and the inconsistencies

and irregularities which have been revealed, would have

left any reasonable person frustrated and dismayed.

More particularly, members of the Group were shocked to

journalists who had been provided with a copy of your

committee papers before they were complete.

While we mention these points, the Group does not wish to

get drawn into debate about them today, when the critical

issue of the well-being of our market towns is at stake.

What we are particularly concerned to talk about, is the

representatives, the Committee Paper itself and our

proposals for a fair and fully considered way ahead.

Our meeting was based on the agreed proposition that

nothing had been decided, discussions would be evidencebased

and the Principles could be adjusted if necessary.

In Harleston, Volunteers have spent hundreds of hours

working to help inform our discussions. I am sure,

therefore, that you would have shared in our surprise to be

told at our meeting that:

       the spirit of working together which we had agreed

       with the Leader of the Council at the outset;

Through our researches - we have assessed the total

parking provision within the shopping areas of all of the

main settlements. It is clear that The Car Parking

provision, whether it be private or public, on street or in car

parks, is an integral part of the social and economic

structure and well being of South Norfolk and its Market

Towns. To believe it is anything else is to wholly ignore a

potent factor in the dynamics of the community.

The bald statements made at the meeting constrained and

defined the scope of our discussions. Worse, subsequent

reading of the Guidance Circular from the Office of the

pay as was stated to us. It may be that you believe that you

are legally restricted in whatever options you may wish to

explore. This is not the case.

Turning to today-zs committee papers. It is unrealistic to

expect the public to assimilate, and comment on such wideranging

issues in such a few days, but we have provided an

initial critque, which we will leave with other evidence. It

is not practical to discuss all of the details now, but we

would like to pick out three points in particular.

At 4.2 c under Car parking research, it states that 'Parking

regulations can be tailored according to your town's needs.'

- we can only agree.

At 6.1 the paper reviews what can be afforded and mentions

how charges will have to be increased. This shows that the

proposed charges are known. Surely it is time the public

were given the full picture and the likely costs defined. To

hold them back is to suggest there is something to hide.

Most significantly however at 4.1 the paper states that

feedback from the Alliance was generally positive. To make

such a statement is disingenuous, when the Alliance, as

recorded in its minutes, expressly did not approve the

report, but raised many relevant questions, which are also

recorded.

Insofar as Harleston is concerned, the general proposals

could change the character of the town. People will be

governed by the burden of the time clock. The easy-going

atmosphere of social inclusion will be eroded and the

pleasure of being in Harleston diminished.

Turning to examples of our research, - we will leave a copy,

including a perspective on the results, which we can take

officers through. We have produced an analysis of car park

levels of occupancy over a number of days, the throughput

and lengths of stay in a critical period on one of the busiest

days, and an assessment of the spread of businesses

providing indicators as to the characteristics of the

dependent commercial resource. It paints a picture of

vibrant but vulnerable independent enterprises set in

streets with barely an empty shop, but critically dependent

on the interrelationship between parking, the town's small

supermarket, now an independent retailer and the rest of

the businesses. It is an enviable situation sought after by

many towns throughout the country.

We take no pleasure from the difficulties Diss is facing, but

to suggest, as reported in the media, that The Council is

being fair to all communities by its approach, is, if you will

forgive me, a bit much. The logical conclusion from what is

reported is that in order to help some here, others must be

put at risk over there. And is it fair and consistent to

impose charges wholesale when for example Loddon retains

72 free unlimited parking spaces on the street, where

Harleston has 5, Long Stratton has 37, Wymondham has 3

and Diss has NONE. I only compare to make a point. We

are, after all, all in this together. Consistency is an

impossible aim, all settlements are different. And perhaps

Loddon is in for a nasty surprise once these charges come

into force, where new restriction will be brought in on the

street.

To conclude, we would like to put on record our response to

the three options discussed in the paper and to make a

proposal to be recommended to Cabinet.

unless the cost of subsequent parking after the free hour is

known. Fundamentally we believe that the cost should fall

on all council tax payers. Those throughout the community

who do not use car parks, but depend on local shops, also

depend on the car borne shoppers, without whom many of

the shops would not exist. It is not fair that longer-users

should carry the burden for the short-stayer. This regime is

wage may have to pay 3 or 4 pounds to park all day. If

parking was wholly free, each charge payer would pay only

little more per year, for free parking to support all shops

and communities, than might be paid in just a day or two

by a long-term parking user. The flexible free parking

option does not even seem to have been considered, yet

such a demand is recognised in the paper.

it. This is not consistent for the user. It would create

differential charging which would mitigate against the less

well off business communities and is defeated by the

Council officer's understanding, if correct, of the Guidelines

on issues of geographical variations.

A Group may request a car park be leased to it. This is

appreciated, but it is unrealistic for third party bodies to be

able to fully investigate this option in the timescales

envisaged.

As to the way forward.

It seems to us folly that in a time of such growing economic

pressure in society, Council should be embarking on

upgrading of car parks - one must question the necessity

for such an action at this point.

We appreciate that there are many complexities which we

have highlighted and that these cannot easily be

assimilated today.

We ask you therefore, to consider convening a Working

Group, to look at the role of car parks in relation to the

sustainability of all our communities and that it reports

quickly.

We would like to suggest that the Leader of the Council

might chair it and that it might involve imaginative input

from representatives of the affected towns. Whatever the

outcome and conclusions, if it is carefully worked through

with open minds, we believe that the best opportunities can

be provided to encourage sustainable communities across

the District and that South Norfolk Council could place

itself at the forefront of national Sustainable Communities

debate

Ends

Harleston and District Car Parks Group

our market towns.

Harleston depends on free parking and we fear losing our shops and relaxed atmosphere,

if people are put off by charges or through being governed by a clock.

The urgent need to consider some free parking in Diss to help businesses, only confirms

our fears that charges are a risk.

However, helpful moves are afoot. The Council's Scrutiny Committee is thinking that

beneficiaries, not just the users could pay, recognising also that towns can be treated

differently to achieve the best result.

If we accept that all South Norfolk's residents benefit from local shops and services,

which in turn rely on car-borne users to prosper, an easy solution is staring us in the face: all

parking should, basically, be free. It is an option, which should be seriously considered

Each town could then set their own parking structure to suit particular needs.

The cost to the Council Tax payer, per year, would be little more than the present cost to

park in Diss for a day. Yet everyone could park, within any limitations, all year for free.

No parking machines to be out of order or vandalised; no number plate recognition

cameras; no money collecting; and reduced bureaucracy. Backed up by sensible controls for

promoted in the Waveney Valley by Diss.

Why shouldn't this simpler way be trialed for two years, and monitored to understand the

effects.

Our market towns can help each other to stem the inexorable impact of the Internet, retail

parks and supermarkets on our independent shops.

Let us seek the right answer for EVERYONE. Together, our towns could be a shining

example in the national drive for sustainable communities, and a credit to our region, both

now and in future years.

For the Harleston and District Car Parks Group

4 February 2008

Andy

I write to inform you that the Harleston Town Council unanimously agreed the following

resolution last evening on 6 Feb 07

"That the Redenhall with Harleston Town Council believes that a full and proper

analysis of all available options regarding the financing of the car parks in Harleston

should be undertaken, before the introduction of any form of charging; and that Car

Park charges should only be introduced if it can be shown beyond all reasonable

doubt that such charges will not harm the viability of Harleston and the surrounding

villages."

Regards

B Harding

Town Clerk

Report A : Petition, Parking and People - the facts

Report B : Parking, Population and Business - an evaluation

Report C : Parking and footfall - a comparison

Harleston and District Car Parks Group 3 March 2008

Harleston and District Car Parks Group 3 March 2008

___________________________________________________________________

Towns. Loddon and Long Stratton might more accurately be described as large

villages, though that is properly a matter for the communities and how they see

themselves. For the purpose of this study and ease of presentation they are all

described uniformly as 'towns'.

1     Following presentation of data relating to car park use, analysis of

central Harleston's business profile and Harleston's shoppers to the

scrutiny committee on Wednesday 30th Jan 2008 further information

including data on the other towns has been gathered and assessed

to further inform sensible decisions regarding parking provision.

2     Overall, the combined studies submitted on 30 January 2008,

comprised:

       i.    Analysis of the petition defining and enumerating 4 'zones'

from which the petition signers came and thus gauging the

geographical distribution of Harleston shoppers

      ii. Daily recording of numbers of vehicles parked in both Bullock

Fair (including Budgens) and Broad Street car parks at set

times for a week.

      iii. Continuous Monitoring of parking activity in Bullock Fair from

gauge both length of stay and peak parking times.

      iv. A listing of all businesses in Harleston centre split into the

following categories:

1. Basics (Retail)

2. Discretionary (Retail)

3. Occasional (Retail)

4. Financial

5. Services

6. Restaurant/Licensed Premises

3     The fourth survey was extended to Wymondham, Diss, Long Stratton

and Loddon. However, it was not felt possible (without local

knowledge) to confidently differentiate between independent, local

chain and national chain on 'unfamiliar territory'.

4     The Percentage distribution of each of the groups listed above was

calculated for each town. To give some degree of comparison, the

total number of residents (2001 census) was divided by the total

number of retail outlets giving head of population 'supporting' each

shop - the same calculation was performed for the

Restaurant/Licensed category. It is recognised that further

development will have affected the population figures to a degree.

5     In addition, the new data were combined with the existing surveys of

parking provision in each town, including both private and council car

parking and also the on street parking elements.

6     Purely on a subjective basis, with visits to all four other towns on

consecutive days, it became increasingly apparent how different a

physical structure and atmosphere, each had.

attractions were immediately appealing. The shopping centre was

very much a ribbon type with courtyards off the main shopping streets

and a small satellite of shops at the Town Green end. Tourism

appears significant in the town with a busy (even on a cold February

morning) Tourist Information Centre. The Town is about 8 miles from

Norwich, with supermarket on the outskirts, a small central

supermarket and two convenience stores. There are two branches of

a local bakery/takeout food outlet and two butchers The town has a

railway station.

shopping centre to one side. Its history could not be said to be overly

apparent and the main road (leading directly to Norwich 10 miles

North) gave a definite physical barrier that was noisy, smelly and

intimidating to cross. On the up-side, the road presumably brings a

number of casual shoppers to the town. Long Stratton boasts one

medium sized Co-op supermarket in the centre, two convenience

stores in the two parades of shops and what could be described as a

third convenience store at the garage. The town has one bakers/cafe

and one butchers/deli.

presumably during the summer the numbers are swollen by visitors

too and from Loddon Staithe. The settlement is approx. 11 miles from

Norwich and 5.5 miles from Beccles. Whilst having no supermarket it does

have three convenience stores. The town has a fishmongers, a

butchers/fresh food shop, and a green grocers. Seasonal tourism (via

the Broads) would appear significant.

towns with more shops closing or closed than the rest (sadly

including award winning outlets). Overheard conversations in the

town dwelt on the perceived decline of Diss as a market town. Diss,

with the Mere at one end and the Church and museum at the other

end of the main shopping street is an inherently extremely attractive

town, the courtyards of small and interesting shops being of

particularly note. It has two large supermarkets separated from the

main town by a busy main road (albeit with light-controlled crossings)

and a third medium-sized supermarket at the base of Mere Street

(near the town's large supermarkets). Norwich is some 24 miles

away, via the nearby A140 road. The town has a bakers/health food

shop (very limited opening hours), a bakers/cafe and a third bakers.

There are also two butchers whilst a health food shop sold some

fresh vegetables. The town also has a direct main-line railway link to

London, Ipswich and Norwich. From the comments at the Scrutiny

Committee, tourism is significant to Diss.

than the focal point of its imposing clock tower, but the compact

mediaeval/Tudor centre, largely hidden by Georgian and later

facades, which has been bypassed, lends itself to a pleasant

shopping experience. The town has one small supermarket-style

enterprise in the centre of town and two convenience stores. There

are two vegetable shops, three butchers and two bakers whilst fresh

fish vans set up three days a week in either the market square or

Budgens' Car Park. The town is approximately 23 miles from Norwich

(no direct route), 8.5 miles from Bungay and 9.5 from Diss. It has no

railway station, but has a bus services to other major settlements.

12     Bearing in mind their different sizes and characteristics, a convenient

way of gaining a broad-brush comparison is to assess the number of

residents supporting each kind of business and the percentages of

each type of business that made up the total. The purpose of this is

not to seek a definitive scientific analysis, but to gain an appreciation

of the three-way connection between business, residents and carborne-

users, who contribute to and use the towns, and to clarify their

individual characteristics.

13     From these studies it can be seen that Harleston and Diss are

remarkably similar with 70 and 72 head of population (h.o.p. from

now on) to each of their retail outlets, compared with 172, 184 and

208 respectively for Long Stratton, Loddon and Wymondham. The

retail sector percentage of the overall range of outlets was also

remarkably similar at 56% and 53% - again compared with 40%, 30%

and 43% for Long Stratton, Loddon and Wymondham (Loddon is

perhaps skewed by the number of offices contained in one relatively

small block).

14     However the break down within the retail sector, shows marked

differences between Harleston and Diss, at 15% and 8%

respectively, Harleston boasts twice as many 'basic' outlets, whilst at

12% and 24% the situation is reversed for 'occasional' outlets. At

29% and 21% respectively for discrete outlets, there is also a marked

difference between the two towns.

15     In Loddon, with basics forming 57% of the retail provision and

occasional only 7%, a marked difference is visible between this and

all the other towns. However, the numbers relative to all retail outlets,

184 h.o.p, is not dissimilar to Long Stratton at 172 h.o.p. Both towns

are boosted by 'passing' trade, commuters to Norwich in the case of

Long Stratton and perhaps summertime boaters in the case of

Loddon. This is also reflected in the high supply of basics and

supermarket/convenience stores in Long Stratton.

16     In contrast, both Wymondham and Diss have a very limited number

of basic retail outlets, being 20% and 15% respectively of the total

retail provision. Wymondham, over the whole spread of shopping

provision had a high h.o.p count to each type of retail provision, or

looking at the reverse, not many shops for a large population.

17     Looking at the parking provision for each town, both Wymondham

and Harleston had markedly less parking provision per retail outlet

than the other three towns. In fact at 5.9 and 6.94 spaces per retail

outlet respectively compared to 12.19, 11.29 and 15.27 for Long

Stratton, Loddon and Diss it can be seen that Wymondham and

Harleston have about half that of the other towns.

18    There is much that can be gathered by comparing the data from each

differences are numerous and appeared partly formed or dictated by

the tourism element, closeness to major retail outlets (retail parks,

large supermarkets etc.) and physical situation - the main road

through Long Stratton being an obvious example. The moderatesized

town centre supermarket or convenience store however

appears to be of benefit to the towns bringing shoppers to each town

who, given sufficient time, avail themselves of the other shops.

19     In spite of having triple-handicaps of an out of town supermarket,

proximity to Norwich and parking fees there is still sufficient variety in

the centre of Wymondham to attract customers to the retail outlets.

However, the effect of the supermarket can be seen in the limited

'basic' retail outlets (especially in specialist fresh food stores) and as

mentioned above there is a very high h.o.p or on the other side of the

coin, not many shops per h.o.p.

regularly mentioned in the press. The two large supermarkets may

bring large numbers into the town (Diss and Harleston having low

h.o.p ratios are both particularly dependent on 'outside' shoppers to

maintain their large retail provision) and provide a substantial amount

of free parking, but it would be of interest to discover how many

people parked in the supermarkets' car parks (which create the

largest ratio of parking to retail outlets) actually cross the road to

enter the town centre and contrast the current situation to when only

Somerfield existed. It would also be valuable to know what those

who do walk into town actually do when they get there. Diss also has

limited fresh food outlets and whilst the courtyards were most

attractive, there was a negative atmosphere in the town - with a low

h.o.p (comparable only to Harleston's) it appears Diss is just not

attracting enough people into the main town, and even if it could

issues of exactly how its central car park would cope with the

necessary throughput would seem an important issue. Although

some distance from Norwich, Diss has good communications.

Beccles or Norwich, contrasts in turn with both Wymondham and

Diss. Whilst small and quite 'strung out' it has a good range of basic

provisions and fresh food outlets. It's proximity to Beccles and

Norwich is reflected in the small amount of 'occasional' shops. This

town would be particularly hard hit by short term parking charges,

dissuading people from 'popping' into the stores, but may argue for

long term parking charges to dissuade the informal 'park and rider'. It

also might suffer if any long-term parkers simply migrate to the

streets, necessitating new on-street controls.

charges to dissuade the park and rider (although its parking provision

is high for the number of retail outlets, the effect of this on remaining

car park provision is not as significant as it may be) but on the other

hand the town benefits from passing casual purchasers. Long

Stratton has a reasonable choice of basics, and appears to benefit

from the 'passing ' shopper on the main road - although the h.o.p is

comparable to Loddon's, the absolute population is half as big again

giving a wider choice of outlets.

shopping parks and proximity to a city (being not near to any of them)

resulting in what appears to be the most balanced spread of retail

outlets. However the town is, with a low h.o.p (like Diss), very reliant

on people travelling into it to support this provision. Harleston is

poorly served by public transport and more reliant than most on it's

parking provision, which in turn is low compared with other towns. A

separate survey has shown high turn over in the car parks and

indeed the need to promote longer-term parking to maintain the

diversity of the town's retail provision arguing against the use of

parking charges to manipulate car park use.

24     All the towns have very different retail, geographical and

demographical structures. It is vital to focus on consistently seeking

success for each town, rather than focussing on arbitrary consistency

of process or ill-considered notions of fairness of approach. Since all

residents of South Norfolk (and beyond) benefit from the existence of

healthy towns, the fairest and most workable option is that all

residents should pay for them via Council Tax. If individual towns

wish to apply charges as part of parking management then it should

be their responsibility to submit properly argued cases for such

provision in each town and justify their application on a cost benefit

analysis basis. Any surplus income would be returned to the central

pot.

Harleston and District Car Parks Group 3 March 2008

___________________________________________________________________

25     The following provides a 'portrait' of shoppers and shopping facilities

in Harleston in relation to parking patterns. Whilst much of the

interpretation is based on local knowledge and general observation,

use of various studies is made to provide a more rigorous

contribution.

26     The studies comprised:

i.     Analysis of the Petition produced by the Harleston Community

(signatures collected in late Summer/Autumn 2007) consisting

of: of defining 4 'zones':

1. Town (Those who gave Harleston as their address)

2. 5 mile radius

3. 5 to 10 mile radius

4. 10 mile plus radius

A fifth category represented 'unallocated', which included

both those addresses that were illegible and those who

could not be found in any of the above zones. This

comprised 7.3% of an initial analysed sample of 4059

signatures. Whilst it could be argued that the petition gave

a self-defining sample of only those who could be bothered

to sign it, and did not include those who did not wish to

sign it, investigation found that (in the location checked -

Gentys 1000+ signatures), only one person did not wish to

sign the petition. If anything, one could argue that the

sample shown would be 'local' as it might be assumed that

there is a tendency for 'out of towners' not to be so

motivated to involve themselves in local issues. Evidence

confirms clearly that this is not the case.

ii.     Daily recording of the number of vehicles parked in both

Bullock Fair and Broad Street Car parks took place during the

2008. This survey supplemented those made in two other

weeks in late 2007. The times chosen to sample data were

7.30 am to gauge the amount of overnight parking, then

11.00am as this appears to be a peak time (later born out by

other studies), 1.00pm for lunch time occupancy and 3.00pm

to record the afternoon pre-school-run peak.

Monitoring of parking activity continuously form 7.55 a.m. to

observation probably the busiest day of the year). Attempts

were made to both pair cars arrival and departure times to

obtain length of stay and also by a simple counting of 'ins' and

'outs' to give occupancy level of the car park at minute

intervals during the days.

These data representing the total numbers of cars in the

combined car parks - not those actually parked) were then

processed to calculate not only the length of stay of individual

cars and thus a representative car parking picture but also to

calculate the actual occupancy of the Car Park at any one time

in the day.

This particular survey was undertaken in Bullock Fair Car park

only, this giving both a larger sample and also appearing more

reflective of activity in the town as a whole. As this is the key

car park, space here means there is space in the town. Whilst

the official number of parking spaces in the combined

Budgens/Council Car park totals 199, when the Doctor's Car

park and 'improvised' spaces are included, the total reaches

212, this excluding circulating cars and cars 'dropping off

passengers'.

iii.     A listing of all businesses in Harleston centre from 'Sindalls' on

the London Road, North to Robert Mack's Hairdressing salon

on Station Road was prepared. with Businesses in Broad

Street, Old Market Place, Church Street and Exchange Street

also recorded. The business types are split into the following

categories:

1. Basics (retail) - self-explanatory, every day items.

2. Discretionary (retail) - non-essential but not particularly

costly e.g. knitting wool, small gifts.

3. Occasional (retail) - more expensive, less often

purchased items, designer clothes, furniture etc.

4. Financial - banks building societies but not

accountants (see below).

5. Services - hairdressing, estate agents, accountants etc

6. Restaurant/Licensed Premises - this includes take-out

outlets.

Categories 2. and 3. to a large extent overlap what the

council report describes as 'comparative' shopping.

Some businesses are given a half-point in two

categories to help refine the sample but no attempt has

been made to weight the data to represent significance

to the community nor size of 'footfall'. Businesses are

further categorised as:

a. Independent

b. Local chain - one or more branches, at least

one of which is not in Harleston.

c. National Chain.

27     Looking at the geographical distribution of petition signers and thus

(one might reasonably assume) Harleston Shoppers, it is notable that

at least 20% came from a distance of over 5m radius (as crow flies,

not actual journey distance). Presumably a portion of the 7%

unallocated also fell into this group and also that the actual proportion

of visitors in these zones was greater than that calculated, as local

residents are more likely to be motivated to sign this petition. The

number that lived within a 5-mile radius of the town was significantly

greater than those who actually gave Harleston addresses - almost

25% as many again.

28     Assessing the occupancy of both the Bullock Fair and Broad Street

Car parks using the data from February, a pattern emerges whereby

both Car Parks start at a low point on the Monday, build to a peak on

Wednesday (market day) dropping markedly on Thursday (early

closing day) with Friday being almost as busy as Wednesday.

Saturday was less busy than both Friday and Wednesday. Whilst

Broad Street generally peaked at 11.00am falling through both

1.00pm and 3.00pm Bullock Fair, on several occasions had more

cars at 3.00pm than 1.00pm. This pattern was echoed in the surveys

carried out in November and December last year. The absolute

number of cars parked at 7.30am in each car park was consistent

through the weeks covered, both car parks peaking on Saturday

mornings.

29     The number of short stays in Bullock Fair Car Park during what is

deemed to be peak time (when official capacity was reached or

exceeded - see note above) was significant - almost 75% of the cars

logged as being in the car park during this time stayed 60 minutes or

less, during off-peak time that figure reached 87%. The peak period

occurred between 10.35am to 1.45pm with the peak time being at

12.25, other than one marked drop (when the Thoroughfare was

blocked by a delivery vehicle preventing cars from entering the car

park) the build up to peak occupancy was remarkably smooth.

30    There appears to be a particularly good balance of business type.

'Basics- and 'occasional' are comparable (15% and 12%

respectively), with discretionary being slightly greater than their

combined sum (29%). Harleston's service sector seems surprisingly

large until one realises that of the 27% service sector, almost a

quarter of the total consists of Hairdressers. The number of

independents is very high - totalling 75%; 14% are regional chains

and only 11% national chains. If one allocated the two co-ops to

regional chain status then only 9% could be described as national

chains. Although, in 2001 a stated complaint was that Harleston had

an inadequate choice of places to eat - there are now 15 cooked

food outlets - excluding the Baker's, and the hot food counter at

Budgens..

31     It is generally accepted that Harleston is not a wealthy town, the

population is fairly aged and local employment opportunities are both

limited and generally lower-waged. To support such a broad

spectrum of shops and services customers from outside the

immediate area are essential. The town is neither quaint like

Lavenham, nor smart like Southwold, nor indeed distinct in any way

other than offering an excellent shopping experience. Tourism is

negligible: the Weybread fishing pits are well known locally but the

town is too far from the Broads to benefit from those visitors. There is

no major employer in the immediate area whose employees would

use the town centre.

32     In short Harleston is heavily reliant on the car-park-user to keep its

'High Street' thriving. Long term parking by people commuting to

other places is not an issue, we have poor public transport services -

if you are parked in Harleston then you are in Harleston. Indeed it

would be in the interests of the numerous food outlets, service

providers (hairdressers in particular), and discrete and occasional

goods suppliers to encourage Harleston's image as a 'day out'

shopping experience. It is also worth drawing attention to the fact that

most children of secondary school age in the surrounding villages will

be educated at Archbishop Sancroft (as were a sizable proportion of

their parents) creating a peer group within the town of Harleston upon

which the extended community spirit, which is a notable feature of

Harleston, is based. The size of the sample that came from a 0 to 5

miles radius of the town shows the importance of the town to the

surrounding villages. It would be anti-social for them to be deterred

or hurried.

33     The interdependence between shopping and carparks is very clearly

illustrated by the way the carpark use shadows shopping patterns

within the town - market day peak, Thursday drop (less marked in

Bullock Fair which also serves the Doctor and where the

Supermarket is open throughout the day). A minor peak around 3

p.m. (significant only in the Bullock Fair Car Park) shows the

significance of the school run shop - if a carer has to come to town to

collect a child, it makes sense to do the odd bits of shopping before

the child is collected from school at 3.10pm to 3.15pm.

34     Less obvious from the data gathered, is the social and psychological

effect of parking fees. One must ask why someone would wish to visit

the town to shop. There are two bookshops - Amazon is as quick

(unless the book is luckily in stock on quite small premises) and

cheaper. Other websites compete to supply cut-price furniture and

electrical goods. Supermarkets have a wider choice of food at low

prices (although the local greengrocer supplies some goods both

cheaper and at better quality than Tesco, a star-fruit or Pakchoi

hasn't yet been spotted in either of the town's grocers). Their meat

may be of superb quality but, in a time of plastic pre-packing and

mass factory farming, our butchers must battle against the

convenience of a single supermarket shop. The same or parallel

statements can be made for nearly all of Harleston's shops.

35     Why people come to Harleston is for personal service, conversation

and variety of style, within an un-pressured setting. A certain

nostalgia for a slower gentler time when a 'high street' like ours was

the norm must also be part of the appeal, whilst the role of both The

Thoroughfare and Bullock Fair as an informal social forum cannot be

underestimated. Introduce a 'beat the clock' element or even take the

edge off the experience by the inconvenience of having the correct

change and the shopping experience is undermined.

36     Rashly imposing parking charges in a 'one fits all' fashion can only be

a reckless step in times when independent traders are threatened by

changes in shopping habits, threat of global depression and, pubs in

particular face projected huge increases in beer prices whilst

supermarkets promote vastly discounted alcohol. The crux of the

debate is not how market towns compete against each other but how

they can compete and survive against retail parks and Internet

shopping.

37     This research was undertaken as thoroughly and rigorously as

practical in the circumstances. If there are limitations we do not

believe they diminish the fundamental messages and need for further

careful research and appraisal of both the current situation and the

risks of effects of car parking charges.

___________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

Harleston and District Car Parks Group 3 March 2008

___________________________________________________________________

38     Four businesses agreed to keep a log of all people making purchases

throughout the week of 18 - 23 February. The data were recorded in

15 minute segments during the day. These were then combined into

hourly figures for each business. Two of the business selected, were

'basics' - businesses; one food and one non-food, with the first

located in the centre of the town and the other on the edge of the

shopping area. Two 'discrete' businesses were also chosen, again

one central and the other at the edge. A fifth business provided

computer-generated data of trading/shopper patterns

39     In addition, customers in a 'basics'-type and a 'service' - type

business; were asked how they had travelled to Harleston. A later

survey also asked if the person had access to a car.

40     When all the data were combined, the broad trading patterns of the

businesses match each other - peaks sit within peaks and troughs

within troughs - this, in spite of the disparate location and nature of

the businesses and in spite of 'Basics 2' business having roughly 7.5

times the footfall of 'Discrete 1' business. The only day when this may

not hold true to the same extent is on the Friday when the 'discreet'

peaks and troughs seem not to match with the 'basic' peaks and

troughs). On closer inspection, however, it could be that might be

happening is a time lag - the peaks and troughs of the two discreet

businesses which echo those of the basic businesses are in line but

shifted to the right (i.e. later in the day). Friday is normally one of the

busiest days of the week with people stocking up for the weekend. It

would therefore not be surprising if people did their basic shopping

(i.e. the prime motivation for being in town) then their 'extras' i.e. their

discrete purchases. However, further specific research would be

needed to confirm if this is indeed the case.

41     The number of people who walked to the Basics shop and who had

no access to a car is also important. The owner of this shop is very

concerned as to the possible impacts of potential charges on custom

and with such a high proportion of Harleston's shoppers being carborne,

the position for the non-car owners who use this business has

an obvious link.

42     A survey conducted on 12 December 2007, shows that of the 75% of

Bullock Fair peak-time car park users parking for less than 60 minute,

over 1/3 parked for less than 10 minutes. Whilst these shoppers are

important, they are unlikely to make substantial purchases (and

indeed may be merely using the bottle bank or collecting and

dropping off). This appears to point to the vital part promoting longerterm-

parking, plays in supporting the economic and social structure in

Harleston as opposed to discouraging such parking for -informal' park

and ride, as experienced in some other communities.

43     Comparing the trade patterns with car park use it is evident that

there is a close relationship between car parking activity and retail

activity with a general bulk of activity building through the morning,

with t 11.00, 1.00 and again at 3.00 around the time of the School

run.

44     Looking at the 'Travel' survey, this dependency on car travellers -

often from out of the town, is again marked for the days researched,

particularly for the service business.

___________________________________________________________________

45     Car parking and retail activity are closely linked. Any reduction of use

of car parks, caused by whatever action (unless replaced by equal

numbers entering the town by alternative means) will lead to damage

to the retail provision. In an ideal world non-car use should be

encouraged where practical, but the wide area served by Harleston,

transporting bulky purchases home again and the lack of public

transport means this is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future.

The Friday 'time lag' effect strengthens previously made arguments

for the encouragement of longer-term parking by existing users - the

discrete purchase and, eventually, the social and economic diversity

of the town itself will suffer if a customer makes their basic purchases

and is then forced to rush off to 'beat-the-clock' without making later

'discretionary' purchases - exactly the risk which a car park charging

regime, whether free for the first hour or not would create.

___________________________________________________________________

The following charts compare Car Park and trading activity in Harleston

 on December 12 2007 and the week of 18th - 23rd february 2008