AN independent inquiry into plans for residents living near the Glasgow 'super-hospital' to pay for parking outside their own homes has recommended the controversial charge be heavily discounted.
Following the first ever public hearing into a Traffic Regulation Order in the city, a Scottish Government 'Reporter' has said parking permits for residents, visitors and business around the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital (QEUH) were "disproportionately excessive" and should be reduced by 70 per cent.
The findings have now been sent to Glasgow City Council, which is expected to vote on whether to implement the recommendations which affect hundreds of families and businesses in the Govan area.
An attempt to alleviate parking pressure in the vicinity of the £862 million super-hospital, the council in 2014 had proposed permits costing residents £50-a-year and a £2 daily charge for visitors to their homes, while businesses were to face an annual fee of £700.
A major local campaign and around 4000 objections had led to the council appointing a Reporter to carry out an inquiry, with a two-day hearing held in June.
But despite the recommendation of a discount, the Reporter failed to back the G51 Free Parking Group's bid to have the Order binned and supported the need for the council's general approach.
Summing up, the Reporter, Gerry Farrington, said: "In short, for the reasons explained above I believe that the adequacy of the city wide template for parking controls should be tested and found to be demonstrably defective in controlling the overspill into the area surrounding the QEUH university hospital campus before a more stringent model of parking control should be considered.
"However, having regard to the exceptional circumstances of the QEUH development, I consider the proposed level of payment for parking permits for residents, visitors and businesses to be disproportionately excessive. Accordingly, I judge a significant discount is justified."
It was reported earlier this month how nurses were trading blows and sleeping in their cars to get a parking space at the hospital, with staff have describing scenes of "absolute chaos" despite the opening of a third and final multi-storey carpark.
The new multi-storey has taken the number of bays up to around 3,800.
Planning permission for the hospital campus included a requirement that peak hour traffic flow is capped at 1,500 vehicles per hour. However, surveys have indicated that the number of car trips into and out of the QEUH site exceeds 15,000.
Lawyer Mike Dailly has represented the G51 Group. He said: "The people of Govan wanted no charges but what this report has recommended is to be welcomed and is a major result. If 4000 people had not taken this campaign on families would required to pay £2 for relatives to visit or £700 for a business.
"But the bigger issue remains. There is no public transport to speak of, 10,000 people work there, about half from outside Glasgow and we have a tier of arrogant local council officials who don't live in the city making decisions for its citizens."
Local MSP, Humza Yousaf, said: "“Labour-led Glasgow City Council has the power to reverse their ludicrous decision to impose car parking charges on residents and businesses in the G51 area.
"The independent report clearly states that the Council has no justification in charging residents £50 for parking outside their own houses. The Council’s Executive Committee must now scrap their plans and continue to consult with G51 residents on a solution to the parking issues in the area that does not involve punishing residents and businesses.”
A council spokesman said: “We’re pleased the Reporter has endorsed the principle behind the council’s proposed Traffic Regulation Order. Officers will now consider his recommendations and report back to the council’s Executive Committee in due course.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel