Decision details

Proposal to undertake the refurbishment of the car park to ensure it is health and safety compliant and in a condition to be fully operational. In addition the proposal will also consider transitioning the existing Parking Tariff Band from Zone 2 to Central.

Reason for being Council Decision: The Report is a request to:
i) approve the refurbishment proposals
ii) supporting capital funding budget.

The Leader moved the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Wright, and invited the Strategic Director for Corporate Resources to introduce the report

 

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources in presenting the report made the following points:

 

·        the report was requesting approval for a £2.5 million capital budget to enhance and improve the Cathedral Quay multi-storey car park;

·        the car park had required improvements for some time and a recent intrusive structural analysis confirmed the car park was structurally sound, contrary to earlier concerns;

·        given the concerns of the structural analysis had been alleviated, the budget would be used to improve appearance, lighting, and overall user experience as well as upgrading the surrounding landscape;

·        the budget would also enable the re-opening of two and half decks which had been closed for an extended period of time;

·        the site had experienced ongoing antisocial behaviour issues and the proposal sought to outsource the day-to-day operation to a specialist car park managing agent to address operational and safety issues;

·        the Council would retain full control of decisions and all income from the car park;

·        the estimated borrowing cost would be around £158,000 per year and additional revenue was expected from re-opening of the closed decks; and

·        the projected additional income was expected to offset both the borrowing costs and operator fees.

 

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources and Head of Service for Commercial Assets responded to Members questions as follows:

 

·        the recommendation was seeking Council approval to outsource the management of Cathedral Quay car park only and the decision would be made by Council;

·        the recent structural report included an intrusive structural analysis, unlike the report from two years ago and the latest findings were considered more reliable;

·        consultants had confirmed that the car park was structurally sound and met the required standards, even in the unlikely event that it was fully occupied by heavier electric vehicles;

·        the refurbishment works could require the car park to be closed for six months’, though this was not yet confirmed. A phased refurbishment option may allow parts of the car park to remain open, but this would be more complex;

·        it was likely there would be some disruption to nearby businesses during the works but the Council would consult and engage with local traders to minimise disruption as plans developed;

·        although a private operator would be managing the car park, the Council would retain full control over all operational decisions and requirements;

·        the refurbishment provided an opportunity to improve the carpark layout and usability of its spaces, taking into account larger modern vehicles;

·        the aim was to maximise usable spaces and create one of the city’s best multi-storey car parks;

·        to confirm, Members were being asked to approve a £2.5 million capital budget, with the borrowing decisions being delegated to the section 151 officer in consultation with the Council Leader, with updates reported back through normal reporting processes;

·        the main measures proposed to address anti-social behaviour were - installing CCTV, re-opening and providing full usage of the car park, increasing natural surveillance and providing an outsourced operator presence, with staffing and active management on site;

·        KPIs would be included in the contract to ensure proper staffing, maintenance, and a high-quality user experience;

·        the operator would be appointed through a formal competitive tender process in line with procurement regulations and Council approval would enable officers to negotiate commercial terms;

·        Council would be consulted again if there were any significant changes or if costs become unaffordable;

·        the Council currently managed multiple surface and multi-storey car parks across the city using existing council staff;

·        currently staff were capacity stretched, particularly due to the need for requiring an on-site presence at John Lewis, Guildhall, and Mary Arches, in the event of machine failures;

·        by outsourcing management at the Cathedral and Quay car park, it would support existing staff capacity and act as a trial to assess effectiveness and maximize that that benefit of improving the car park;

·        initially, outsourcing arrangements would be for a three to five year period, though a shorter contract was preferred. This was the first time using this approach, and having flexibility was important in case that it did not work as intended;

·        the Council would retain responsibility for parking enforcement and would not be outsourced to the private operator;

·        cameras could be installed on site, and enforcement would still require Council officers to check vehicles and issue Penalty Charge Notices on site;

·        the existing Council enforcement team would continue to manage enforcement at the Cathedral Quay car park and would operate to the same standards and processes used across all council owned car parks;

·        the debt servicing included repayment of the principal and interest and borrowing for the project would be repaid over 50 years, reflecting the expected lifespan of a building asset;

·        borrowing periods typically aligned with the asset life span;

·        the Council’s car park service would manage the contract, with oversight from the Head of Commercial Assets, with clear KPIs being established to ensure service quality and accountability;

·        performance would likely include regular monitoring with monthly records covering cleaning, security, and maintenance and formal reviews would occur annually or biannually depending on contract terms; and

·        the agreement would include a termination provision, allowing the Council to end the contract if performance issues arose and persisted.

 

The meeting was briefly adjourned between 20:05 and 20:15.

 

The Leader proposed an amendment to recommendation 2, which was seconded by Councillor Knott to read as follows:

 

·        the outsourcing of the management function of the Cathedral and Quay MSCP park on terms to be agreed shall be delegated to the Strategic Director in consultation with the Portfolio Holder,  to enable it to re-establish itself as a premier car park for the city.

 

The Leader in speaking to the amendment advised:

 

·        the amendment highlighted that he had listened to concerns raised and had previously held discussions with the Head of Service regarding the proposal;

·        he clarified the proposal related to outsourcing the management of the car park, rather than full privatisation;

·        he clarified that external operators could bring additional capacity, expertise, and resources, while recognising there would be financial considerations;

·        there were examples from other cities such as Liverpool and Manchester, where modern systems (including number plate recognition and controlled access) provided a safe, efficient, and welcoming parking experience;

·        the Cathedral and Quay car park was an important asset to the area and should be improved for visitors and residents;

·        the current car park condition and management could be significantly improved, particularly with safety and environment;

·        the intention was not to outsource all civic car parks immediately, but to trial the approach first and assess outcomes;

·        proportionate enforcement was needed to ensure drivers were not penalised for minor issues while addressing persistent misuse and antisocial behaviour;

·        details of enforcement, expectations, and service standards must be clearly defined in any agreement;

·        a forthcoming meeting with the Strategic Director was planned to refine the tender offer, expectations, and financial arrangements;

·        contract terms, including break clauses and review periods, would be carefully considered; and

·        the primary aim of the report was to improve the quality and management of city car parks, ensuring they provided a good service and supported the attractiveness of the area.

 

During the debate on the amendment, the following points were raised:

 

·        the amendment, provided greater oversight by Members regarding the proposed outsourcing of car park management;

·        Portfolio Holders routinely brought issues from their areas to the Executive informally, and this matter could also come to the Executive formally in the future if required;

·        the amendment provided reassurance that decisions would not be taken without proper consideration, particularly given concerns raised by residents;

·        the clarification that parking enforcement would not be outsourced was welcomed;

·        the Leader’s amendment was welcomed but considered not going far enough;

·        concerns were raised about the principle of outsourcing a public sector function and lack of detailed reporting, evidence, and discussion prior to the proposal;

·        there was a significant policy shift from in-house provision to outsourcing should be supported by clear evidence and fuller debate;

·        given the timescale for capital work, there would be sufficient time for further review of the management arrangements before any implementation and the matter needed to come back to a future Council meeting for further consideration;

·        concerns were raised regarding the employment conditions of staff working for any external operator, including wages, pensions, and working conditions;

·        employment standards could potentially be addressed through contract requirements or KPIs;

·        more detailed evidence, scrutiny, and discussions were required before proceeding and there was no need to rush the decision;

·        any outsourcing arrangements needed to include ongoing feedback mechanisms from both car park users and nearby residents;

·        live performance data linked to KPIs should be made available, using digital tools such as QR codes to gather feedback;

·        there was support for the amendment, given the alternative options were less favourable;

·        clarification was sought on how the proposal aligned with the Council’s procurement processes, including the role of the Procurement Board;

·        no best value or cost–benefit analysis had been presented, particularly comparing outsourced management with in-house provision;

·        a Member enquired how outsourcing would integrate with existing Council services, including community safety priorities and initiatives to protect women from violence;

·        funds potentially used for contractor profit could instead be reinvested in council teams;

·        there was a need to demonstrate best value for money;

·        the proposal to restore the car park to full operation was welcomed, the amendment provided reassurance on outsourcing issues, and the approach ensured outsourcing would only occur if it represented best value and was the most practical solution; and

·        a Member considered that the wording of the amendment still assumed that the management function would be outsourced, albeit subject to delegated approval.

 

In summing up the amendment, the Leader advised that

 

·        delegation to the Strategic Director in consultation with the Portfolio Holder would not make outsourcing a foregone conclusion, and allowed for further consideration before any final decision;

·        he acknowledged the point raised regarding the need for a cost–benefit analysis, which would be discussed with the Strategic Director;

·        he noted the need to clarify operational details, including the potential use of number plate recognition technology for entry and exit, and confirmed further questions would be addressed with officers;

·        the Council’s reputation and service standards would be protected in any arrangements made;

·        re-iterated that the amendment followed standard Council practice of delegating decisions to officers in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder;

·        appropriate safeguards, guidance, and contractual conditions would be put in place, including consideration of issues raised during the debate;

·        confirmed that outsourcing the management function remained the proposed direction, subject to delegated decision-making;

·        further delays or additional lengthy council processes would be unnecessary, as the matter could be progressed through delegated authority;

·        it was important to move forward with improvements and investment in the car park, noting that local traders and the public wanted improvements to be made; and

·        the intention was to listen to contributions in the debate and ensure concerns raised were addressed in the implementation process.

 

Following a vote the AMENDMENT was CARRIED. 

 

 

Councillor Fullam proposed an amendment to recommendation 1, which was seconded by Councillor K. Mithcell to remove the word “estimated” to read as follows

 

·        a budget of £2,500,000 for undertaking the refurbishment and upgrade works at Cathedral and Quay MSCP.

 

Councillor Fullam in speaking to the amendment advised:

 

·        the minor amendment was to solely remove the word “estimated” from £2,500,000 budget, and he expressed his support for the figure provide that it was a fixed figure;

·        any additional funding should be requested through a future supplementary budget if needed;

·        he welcomed the redevelopment as an opportunity to improve a problematic area of the city;

·        he acknowledged general scepticism toward large capital projects but expressed confidence that the officers’ financial projections were robust;

·        he highlighted the potential for increased revenue from improved car park facilities, benefiting wider city spending; and

·        expressed support for the proposal, subject to the requested wording amendment.

 

The Lord Mayor advised that removal of the word “estimated” would not alter the substance of the motion and the Leader accepted amendment to remove “estimated” from the substantive motion to assist procedural clarity.

 

 

Councillor K. Mitchell proposed an amendment to recommendation 2, which was seconded by Councillor M. Mitchell to read as follows:

 

·        that a further report be brought back to Council on the outsourcing of the management function of Cathedral and Quay MSCP versus retaining the service in-house.

 

Councillor K. Mitchell in speaking to the amendment advised:

 

·        he had reservations after reviewing the report and listening to the debate;

·        expressed support for recommendation 1, agreeing that the car park required additional funding and improvements, including addressing anti-social behaviour;

·        he was not able to support recommendation 2 due to concerns about outsourcing the management function and there was a lack of sufficient evidence or justification that the service could not be delivered in-house; and

·        he raised concerns about maintaining staff standards and protecting employee terms, including pensions, under outsourcing and further information was needed;

 

 

The Leader advised that he would be deferring the report to allow for further work to be carried out and explained the following:

 

·        he acknowledged the concerns raised during the debate and confirmed he had listened to Members’ views;

·        a revised report would be brought back to a future Council meeting which would provide clearer detail on the proposed outsourcing/management arrangements;

·        he emphasised the need to address key issues, including understanding of what was being proposed, ensuring strong governance, oversight, and performance measures and maintaining control over pricing and service standards;

·        he referenced past issues with outsourced services to highlight the importance of proper controls and accountability; and

·        reiterated that the intention was to ensure any future proposal was robust, transparent, and compliant with the Council’s constitution.

 

RESOLVED that the report be deferred.