Bury is a lot closer to Southwold or Lavenham in population than it is to Cambridge or Norwich.

Ok you don't like that comparison, how about Thetford, also free.

Slash the salary of that chief executive women from 40000 billion down to something more sensible like 60,000 and use the money you save to pay for the lighting and resurfacing every 30 years.

Bury is a lot closer to Southwold or Lavenham in population than it is to Cambridge or Norwich

Sorry to be pedantic but that depends entirely on how you do your calculations: Bury has 20 times the population of Lavenham and 24 times that of Southwold. Norwich has 6 times and Cambridge 3 times the population of Bury respectively.

You are absolutely correct about Thetford being closer to Bury in terms of population size but how close is it in terms of visitors? I suspect they are miles apart although I don’t know the figures so can’t argue that point. – it is only my opinion that they are dissimilar.

I also wouldn’t argue about the reduction of Andrea Hill’s enormous salary but in reality nothing is going to happen to redistribute any of her income.

Meanwhile in the real world car parking generates a huge amount of revenue for the council. If they don’t make that money from the car parks they will look to make up that shortfall elsewhere. You can bet you bottom dollar that it won't be made up from efficiency savings. Instead it would be the residents and businesses in Bury that would pay through taxes.

Is £1.40 (current cost for Ram Meadow) for up to 4 hours parking so unreasonable? Personally I don’t think so.

The sad thing is we dont know the figures to judge if car parking is a break even cost centre or a profit contributor here in bury. We dont for arguments sake know if the cost of enforcement, collection, and administration exceed the revenue. either on a over all basis or a carpark by carpark basis, It is yet another tax.
I recently travelled to the centre of suffolk council thinking "that great town of Ipswich" I parked at the London Road (Tesco) park and ride for £1 ( carparking and return bus fare ). the bus ran every 10mins, and once in town discovered a number 38 bus which was free from the cattle market ( yes they still have the name) to the council offices. Parking in the centre of town was i grant you more than Bury.
That said Ipswich has 3 park and ride schemes,a free council bus service, we in bury dont have any of these, one wonders who pays for these services ? I would ask Mr Farmer, but he has disappeared off the local path and bye ways, must be attending all these meeting, or maybe just trying to find areas to cut and save costs.....or increase taxes to keep........

I would like to see free parking in Bury for local residents unless the figures are public knowledge and justify a charge, and if they do justify a charge make it such that we can have at least two park and ride schemes at a norminal cost, with a cheap rate for local rate payers and workers. ( ie make it attrative) and no FREE bus services for council and others if the numbers still dont stack up cut over heads, that includes people. sorry essex, cambridge, bedford and others are cutting numbers why does suffolk think they need to keep the numberhead count, bench marking should work both ways.

indy wrote:

Bury is a lot closer to Southwold or Lavenham in population than it is to Cambridge or Norwich

Sorry to be pedantic but that depends entirely on how you do your calculations: Bury has 20 times the population of Lavenham and 24 times that of Southwold. Norwich has 6 times and Cambridge 3 times the population of Bury respectively.

Yes but if we only count the women of Bury, and even then only the ones who live on Morton Hall then it is closer to Southwold and Lavenham.

Oh sorry, I thought we were dreaming up ridiculous ways to compare population

You are absolutely correct about Thetford being closer to Bury in terms of population size but how close is it in terms of visitors? I suspect they are miles apart although I don’t know the figures so can’t argue that point. – it is only my opinion that they are dissimilar.

Maybe, but what about the workforce?

I also wouldn’t argue about the reduction of Andrea Hill’s enormous salary but in reality nothing is going to happen to redistribute any of her income.

You're probably correct, but it just demonstrates the frugality and competence of the council that she was paid so much in the first place.

Meanwhile in the real world car parking generates a huge amount of revenue for the council. If they don’t make that money from the car parks they will look to make up that shortfall elsewhere. You can bet you bottom dollar that it won't be made up from efficiency savings. Instead it would be the residents and businesses in Bury that would pay through taxes.

Is £1.40 (current cost for Ram Meadow) for up to 4 hours parking so unreasonable? Personally I don’t think so.

The main reason I argue so vehemently against the council is the same reason I dislike paying tax so much. I just don't feel I get my moneys worth. If all the roads were silky smooth, no litter in sight, roads gritted ahead of time etc etc I'd be more than happy to pay council tax, parking and everything else they * us for.

However, the roads are riddle with pot holes and when I drove last night there was no grit insight. Instead the council managers to waste spectacular amounts of money on employing people they don't need, executives, failed IT projects, and £300,000 car park signs that don't work etc etc.

So yes, I feel sure that if the council put their minds to it they could easily streamline themselves and manage to offer free car parking with out raising funds from elsewhere.



PS. You seem strangely fond of the council, I'm guessing you either work for them or are a councillor?

Bury St Edmunds
35,015 pop
17,674 employed
15,878 dwellings

Thetford
21,588 pop
10,070 employed
9,270 dwellings

This is at the 2001 census but they are the most reliable figures available. On a socio-economic level Bury St Edmunds and Thetford have very little in common. Furthermore, in terms of being a destination town they have absolutely nothing in common. Bury is a difficult town to compare with others and doing so with neighbouring towns simply because they are nearby will never draw sensible results. There are very few historic cathedral towns with a comparable population to Bury and cathedral cities are normally much larger (or a great deal smaller). A better comparison is somewhere like Winchester. The population (not to be confused with the population of the Winchester City Council area) at 2001 was in the region of 40,000. It is affluent like Bury St Edmunds and has similar tourist attractions. The town centre parking charges in Winchester are currently as follows:

Tower Street
Monday to Saturday 8am-6pm
Up to 1 hour £1.20
Up to 2 hours £2.50
Up to 3 hours £3.00
Up to 4 hours £4.00
All day rate £8.00

Cattle Market
Monday to Saturday 8am-6pm
Up to 2 hours £2.00
Up to 4 hours £3.50
All day rate £7.00

I agree finding a city comparable to Bury is difficult Squirrel, but in my opinion Winchester isn't really a fair comparison. It's a city, it has a very famous public school and a university.

It also has one of the highest job densities in the country with very low unemployment rates and a lot of commuting, ergo, a lot of fighting for car parking. That example you gave is £1 more expensive than the cattle market all day, yet is also the most expensive car park in Winchester, others go down to £6. Oh and as an added bonus, THEY DON'T CHARGE FOR SUNDAY PARKING!!!!

Aug wrote:It also has one of the highest job densities in the country with very low unemployment rates and a lot of commuting, ergo, a lot of fighting for car parking

If you're quoting ONS figures for commuting to work, those are outward - there are no reliable figures for inward commuting. Bury has a very low rate of people commuting (outwardly) to work and thus there is greater competition for parking within the town. Unemployment in Bury St Edmunds is very low with the bulk of the 1,800 people unemployed (at September 09) falling elsewhere in west suffolk. You are correct to state Winchester has similarly low rates. You've also decided to ignore the fact you can park all day in Bury for £1.90. I agree that Winchester is bigger than Bury but it is a far better comparison than anywhere else you mention. If you can find anywhere with similar historical attractions, population and workforce where the parking is cheaper I will be amazed. Bury's biggest problem is that parking is so cheap. If it were more, not as high as Winchester, but say £4 for all day then the Park & Ride system people crave would be more of a reality. Unfortunately everybody seems to want to have their cake and eat it. Some go further, those with more left leaning tendancies such as yourself think we should all be taxed to the back teeth to pay for people from Essex, Cambridgeshire etc to park in Bury!I think people who use a service should pay for it rather than taking the old attitude of hit the council tax payer for more.

Aug wrote

PS. You seem strangely fond of the council, I'm guessing you either work for them or are a councillor?

Aug – like most of your assertions throughout this thread – wrong on every level. I’ve worked in private industry for 25+ years. I am not and have never been a councillor and have no intention of trying to become one.

What I am is a resident of Bury St Edmunds who is concerned that my taxes would go up to subsidise car parking.

So while we’re playing a guessing game I’m guessing that you don’t live in Bury and that you’d like me to pay towards your parking costs when you visit the town.

The two previous posts by Squirrel echo my opinions. He/She he has put forward the argument in a much more informative and eloquent way than I could hope to achieve

Indy - like most of your assertions throughout this thread - wrong on every level. I do live outside town but I don't use public car parks, so, if anything my council tax is helping to subsidise your parking.

If you bothered to read what I had written you'd understand that I don't want your council tax to go up, I believe we get taxed too much. Instead I firmly believe that the council could quite easily offer free parking if they decided to streamline a bit and stop wasting so much money, (I use Andrea Hill's salary as just one example).

Can you honestly tell me you're happy with the amount you're taxed and that you feel the money is put to the best use, both locally and nationally?

ug wrote

Indy - like most of your assertions throughout this thread - wrong on every level. I do live outside town….

So my assertion that you don’t live in town is in fact correct and not wrong on any level. If you’re being ironic it’s lost on me I’m afraid . I also park in my own garage and as far as I’m aware you haven’t subsidised that.

Of course I’m not happy about the level of taxes I pay - show me anyone that is. However, If efficiency savings are made locally or nationally I’d rather the money be used to maintain front line services than go into subsidising car parking.

In these cash strapped times subsidising car parking just seems a bit perverse, but each to their own I suppose. We’ll just have to agree to differ on this particular subject.