Parking Permits in Hillsborough.

[matsalleh]

Well, there's the scaremongering, let's examine the facts:

 

• The first resident permit started off at £35 and was that price for several years before it went up to £36
  
• The last time the Lib Dems were in power they dropped the price to a tenner.
  
• When Labour got back in, they went up to £20
  
• Now they are going back up to £36, which is the same as they were a couple of years ago
  

 

The evidence shows you that apart from a short period when the Lib Dems dropped the price, permits have always been £35/36 since 2003. Does this point to a Council that wants to "screw you for every penny"? The permit costs less than a tank of gas, hardly a fortune.

If you could step outside your brainwashed little world,you should realise that this thread is about Hillsborough permits which were £10 and are about to be increased,by £26.That sounds like an increase to me.

[Planner1]

If you are trying to tell me that the big car park on parkside rd was always full on a daily basis i dont believe you. i pass there most days ,have done for years ,and ive never once seen it full apart from machdays when SWFC use it as an overspill car park.

The car park on Parkside road is nothing whatsoever to do with the permit parking scheme.

 

The Parks and Countryside department decide to introduce charging in park car parks totally independently form the Transport and Highways dept who promoted the permit scheme.

 

They are totally separate scheme and the income from the parks pay and display goes directly to the parks.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2013 at 11:24 ----------

 

If you could step outside your brainwashed little world,you should realise that this thread is about Hillsborough permits which were £10 and are about to be increased,by £26.That sounds like an increase to me.

Hillsborough was brought in when permits started at £10, but, before that, in all permit areas in the city they were £36. so, they are only going back up to the level they were before.

 

No one likes a price rise, but £36 is hardly a fortune, is it. It's less than a tank of fuel.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2013 at 11:26 ----------

 

I agree parking all day is wrong so I wouldn't have a problem with a 2hr time limit to allow people to use the banks local shops etc,but to pay to use these facilities is WRONG like I've said before why live there then start moaning.I go to football matches but wouldn't buy or rent a house near bye due to the parking problems.

To make any time limited parking effective, you have to have enforcement, which costs money. Introducing a permit scheme guarantees higher levels of enforcement and promotes the turnover of spaces in the pay and display zones.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2013 at 11:31 ----------

 

Excellent point.

 

I was going to add to my post up there ^^^ that the council need to look at options that make sure that people don't need to park for 10 hours on suburban streets in order to make a living.

 

A key component in that is the provision of a coherent, fit for purpose, public transport system. We don't have one of those any more.

You're forgetting that public transport is the responsibility of South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, not the Council.

 

In the deregulated situation we are in now, for public transport to get better, there has to be a demand for it or the operating companies will not provide the service. The degree of co-ordination now being offered after the Sheffield Bus Agreement came into force is the best you can get in a deregulated environment. To get anything better, you would need franchising, which carries significant financial risks.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2013 at 11:35 ----------

 

The council wouldnt just ignore local residents and push through their schemes anyway would they ?

 

 

 

 

Of course they would............. thats what they do.

 

I think you can see form the posts on here that there really was strong demand for the permit scheme and that it was only introduced in the streets where people said they wanted it.

 

But of course the Council being seen to be responsive to local needs and only introducing something where it's wanted doesn't suit your council knocking arguments does it, so you will just ignore the facts as usual.

[Penistone999]

Of course it had nothing to do with the council seeing the motorist as a cash cow as normal . ?

[Litotes]

I think you can see form the posts on here that there really was strong demand for the permit scheme and that it was only introduced in the streets where people said they wanted it.

 

 

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhh?

 

 

The majority of posts on the forum related to these parking schemes are against them - what world are you living in?

 

Oh, I forgot, the world of the council... an alternative universe!!

 

I find it ironic that there are plans afoot to extend these schemes, which 'are only to help the residents' and 'are not to generate income to offset the uncollected taxes we are owed', until 8.30 at night...

 

Useful for residents - NOT!

[retep]

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhh?

 

 

The majority of posts on the forum related to these parking schemes are against them - what world are you living in?

Oh, I forgot, the world of the council... an alternative universe!!

 

I find it ironic that there are plans afoot to extend these schemes, which 'are only to help the residents' and 'are not to generate income to offset the uncollected taxes we are owed', until 8.30 at night...

 

Useful for residents - NOT!

 

There's hope that the cutbacks will knock him off his perch.

[BoroB]

 

[/color]

Hillsborough was brought in when permits started at £10, but, before that, in all permit areas in the city they were £36. so, they are only going back up to the level they were before.

 

No one likes a price rise, but £36 is hardly a fortune, is it. It's less than a tank of fuel.

 

£36 may hardly be a fortune to you Planner 1 but to someone struggling on minimum wage it is nearly a days wage.

 

Whether the scheme was requested or not is open to debate - some people will have been in favour but I believe most people were not in favour - it is clear that it is now being seen as a cash cow by the council rather than a tool to control parking.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2013 at 13:04 ----------

 

 

 

I think you can see form the posts on here that there really was strong demand for the permit scheme and that it was only introduced in the streets where people said they wanted it.

 

But of course the Council being seen to be responsive to local needs and only introducing something where it's wanted doesn't suit your council knocking arguments does it, so you will just ignore the facts as usual.

 

The problem with facts is that they can, and usually are, manipulated by the council to support the argument they are in favour of.

 

The council are in the middle of carrying out a review of the scheme in Hillsborough. If most repondents are against the scheme will it be scrapped? No, the council will state that the silent majority who didn't reply are in favour of the scheme.

 

If 50 people reply and 30 support the scheme, the councils argument will be that the majority of respondents support the scheme so there should be no changes to it.

[Shef_Fitness]

No one likes a price rise, but £36 is hardly a fortune, is it. It's less than a tank of fuel.

 

 

 

I think this is the root cause of the problem. People who make up these schemes are so well paid they are out of touch with the people they seem to represent.

 

For these people the odd £36 here and there is nothing.

[Planner1]

I think this is the root cause of the problem. People who make up these schemes are so well paid they are out of touch with the people they seem to represent.

 

For these people the odd £36 here and there is nothing.

For anyone who runs a car, £36 is not a huge expenditure for something which runs for a full year and offers advantages to the permit holder. It's less than a tank of fuel.

[Ms Macbeth]

I think this is the root cause of the problem. People who make up these schemes are so well paid they are out of touch with the people they seem to represent.

 

For these people the odd £36 here and there is nothing.

 

I'm a pensioner on a lowish income. Being realistic £36 is not much, over a year its less than £1 a week. If I lived on my daughter's street, I'd be happy to pay double that for a 24 hour permit as long as they were limited to one car each!

 

Other towns manage to have some streets with 24 hour residents' parking, but I don't know of any in Sheffield.

[Planner1]

£36 may hardly be a fortune to you Planner 1 but to someone struggling on minimum wage it is nearly a days wage.

I fully understand that some are less well off, but £36 is very little when viewed in context of the overall annual ownership and running costs of a car.

Whether the scheme was requested or not is open to debate - some people will have been in favour but I believe most people were not in favour - it is clear that it is now being seen as a cash cow by the council rather than a tool to control parking.

I dealt with more requests for a permit scheme in Hillsboro than i care to recall.

 

There was consultation when the scheme was implemented and those areas that said they didn't want it, didn't get it.

 

You cannot deny that the Council have been responsive to what the local people said to them.

 

The problem with facts is that they can, and usually are, manipulated by the council to support the argument they are in favour of.

 

The council are in the middle of carrying out a review of the scheme in Hillsborough. If most repondents are against the scheme will it be scrapped? No, the council will state that the silent majority who didn't reply are in favour of the scheme.

 

If 50 people reply and 30 support the scheme, the councils argument will be that the majority of respondents support the scheme so there should be no changes to it.

And people on here don't manipulate data to support their negative view?

 

The Council have never said that the silent majority who don't respond support any measure that they are promoting. The reports to Councillors state the facts on how many respond and what they say. It's up to the decision makers to draw on that data to reach an informed decision.

 

We don't know the results of the review, so it's wrong to pre-judge.

 

---------- Post added 12-01-2013 at 13:47 ----------

 

There's hope that the cutbacks will knock him off his perch.

No such luck I'm afraid.