Parking restrictions and charges

THE essence of policy decisions is to examine their fundamentals. What is the underlying rationale for the policies and for any change? From that base, details can be fairly and properly considered.

That, then, is the approach Dunedin city councillors should take to their discussions today on proposed hefty rises in central Dunedin parking charges.

Parking charges have for many years been a handy money earner for the council. The motorist is charged through meters and other parking costs and through infringement penalties. The council earns — after administration and enforcement costs — a few million dollars every year.

Making money, however, should not be the point of the charges. If that was the reason, the council should operate like a private company. Wilson Parking, for example, will charge what the market will bear, and this is reflected in its charging.

Another reason for increases might be to drive motorists from the central city and encourage bus patronage. If that is the motive, or part motive, councillors need to be upfront about that. Ratepayers and voters deserve to know that clearly.

In Queenstown, that is part of the equation. Faced with clogging congestion, the authorities introduced the $2 bus fares and made parking much more expensive and difficult, all for a purpose.

A reason given in the Dunedin parking report was because charges had been stagnant for 10 years and the proposal addressed the ‘‘significant period of time since a fee increase’’. That might be a basis for a review. Time elapsed, however, is not legitimate grounds for increases.

Reserve Bank figures show inflation over the past 10 years was 17%, whereas the proposed increases are 50%, 33% and 25%. Just because there has not been an increase for a long time is not an excuse to bump up the costs, whether below, equal to or above the inflation figure.

What, then, are the fundamental reasons for timelimited parking and charging in a small city like Dunedin?

For both shoppers and retailers, the key is availability of parks. There should be strong turnover in central business districts so shortterm access to shops is available. That means, as is the case at present, that maximum parking times should be limited. These should be short close to the main street and longer as the streets fan out.

That, too, should be the principle for enforcement, making sure parking is available where needed. Parking officers should be vigilant and effective in highdemand places, and Dunedin staff have had a reputation for vigour. Late in the day, say, in streets with empty parks everywhere there is little need or justification for a similar approach.

That means, too, as is happening, adjustments are made as parts of the city become busier and parts quieter. In Vogel St, for instance, as more businesses operate from the Warehouse Precinct, maximum parking times need to be extended and paid parking considered.

Charging, as well as strict enforcement at busy times, can also encourage parking turnover and therefore parking availability for shortterm users. There are reasons for higher rates around George St south of Frederick St than heading south of the Exchange on Princes St.

Chamber of Commerce chief executive Dougal McGowan has expressed concern that increased costs could negatively affect central city shopping behaviour. He appears to have understood the essential foundation for parking policy when he said a more positive step than increases would be to shorten parking limits.

It is another question on whether parkers should be subsidising other council activities, including increased costs for its transport department and streetlight renewal.

It is all too easy for a council with its monopoly on kerbside parking to justify parking charge increases. Dunedin’s city councillors need to be clear in their decisionmaking should they back the large proposed rises.