South Lakeland car parking machines will no longer need registration numbers

DRIVERS will no longer have to key in their car registration numbers into new South Lakeland District Council parking machines come the new year.

The pay and display machines have been controversial since they were introduced at 38 car parks in the area earlier this year at a cost of £340,000.

There was an outcry from residents, visitors and traders because motorists were forced to enter their registration details to get a ticket.

The machines prevented drivers from passing on partly-used tickets to other motorists. There were also criticisms from people unable to properly read the small print on the keys.

Swayed by public opinion, members of SLDC’s Cabinet yesterday agreed to adapt the machines so that motorists no longer had to tap in their registration details.

Coun Ian Stewart, economy and enterprise portfolio holder, said: “People will not need to punch their registration details into the machine in order to activate a ticket. “There will be an announcement very shortly when we have received a date for the work. I anticipate it will not be this side of Christmas.”

Coun Stewart said the new machines allowed the council to constantly review the service across the district by data that was collected each day.

He also said the council was looking into bringing weekly tickets for people but these might require registration details.

“We need to get the message out to South Lakeland to use our car parks more,” said Coun Stewart. “We might then be able to find other ways of reducing the burden.”

Car parks across the district will be free on Sundays throughout December.

Comments (31)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:14am Thu 29 Nov 12

Geoff103 says...

Are we supposed to be impressed?

So the £340,000 spend was not necessary. The old machines were adequate and where needing to be replaced at end of life could have been at much lower cost.

The councillors should be surcharged for this wasteful overspend.
Are we supposed to be impressed? So the £340,000 spend was not necessary. The old machines were adequate and where needing to be replaced at end of life could have been at much lower cost. The councillors should be surcharged for this wasteful overspend. Geoff103

10:50am Thu 29 Nov 12

life cycle too says...

I have been keying in fake numbers since they were introduced - and nobody has bothered to check up!

As to Councillors being charged for their wastefulness... dream on!
They are immune to every potential censure, aside from being turfed out at the next election!
I have been keying in fake numbers since they were introduced - and nobody has bothered to check up! As to Councillors being charged for their wastefulness... dream on! They are immune to every potential censure, aside from being turfed out at the next election! life cycle too

12:07pm Thu 29 Nov 12

oceancloud says...

Muppets!
Muppets! oceancloud

12:55pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Lakeuk says...

SLDC finally taken a little bit of common sense, why do they stuggle so must with this kind of thing.

Surprised they can't alter the machines this side of Xmas (3.5 weeks), I thought these machines were supposed to be flexible.

“We need to get the message out to South Lakeland to use our car parks more,” said Coun Stewart.

Based on Stewart's quote to the gazette will he act on that statement and make use of the machines flexiable specs to get more people using the car parks. Reduced or free parking when usage is below a certain % rate, free parking on a Sunday through off peak months eg Jan/Feb - look at the trial results.

Time to stand up and start experimenting with different options/ideas
SLDC finally taken a little bit of common sense, why do they stuggle so must with this kind of thing. Surprised they can't alter the machines this side of Xmas (3.5 weeks), I thought these machines were supposed to be flexible. “We need to get the message out to South Lakeland to use our car parks more,” said Coun Stewart. Based on Stewart's quote to the gazette will he act on that statement and make use of the machines flexiable specs to get more people using the car parks. Reduced or free parking when usage is below a certain % rate, free parking on a Sunday through off peak months eg Jan/Feb - look at the trial results. Time to stand up and start experimenting with different options/ideas Lakeuk

4:33pm Thu 29 Nov 12

in despair says...

Yet another waste of OUR money by SLDC - only a member of this Council's Cabinet could appear smug when announcing they were going to correct a huge error on their part.
With one hand they want MORE use of the car parks - with the other they want less cars and more cycling/walking -- I have no faith in any politician these days but this current Council administration is beyond belief - roll on the May elections but will the brain washed sheep in this District do the right thing ??? I think not unfortunately
Yet another waste of OUR money by SLDC - only a member of this Council's Cabinet could appear smug when announcing they were going to correct a huge error on their part. With one hand they want MORE use of the car parks - with the other they want less cars and more cycling/walking -- I have no faith in any politician these days but this current Council administration is beyond belief - roll on the May elections but will the brain washed sheep in this District do the right thing ??? I think not unfortunately in despair

5:15pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Geoff103 says...

I can understand why it will take time to implement the modifications to the machines but of the Council has taken the decision to abandon the need for registration numbers, then the change can take place immediately.

Just attach a waterproof notice (run up on a computer using Word and sealed in a plastic folder) on each machine telling drivers that ANY 7-digit/numeral combination may be entered on the pad to allow the machine to go to the next stage of accepting timing and cash instructions.

Then just instruct all Parking Enforcement Office to ignore the registration numbers on the tickets and focus solely on whether payment has been made correctly and there's no overstaying.

I suppose that would be too simple for a Councillor to understand.

Meanwhile, will the modifications to the machines involve additional expenditure over and above the original £340,000?

Of course, we all know the answer to this and by the same token can we expect Cllr Stewart's resignation anytime soon?
I can understand why it will take time to implement the modifications to the machines but of the Council has taken the decision to abandon the need for registration numbers, then the change can take place immediately. Just attach a waterproof notice (run up on a computer using Word and sealed in a plastic folder) on each machine telling drivers that ANY 7-digit/numeral combination may be entered on the pad to allow the machine to go to the next stage of accepting timing and cash instructions. Then just instruct all Parking Enforcement Office to ignore the registration numbers on the tickets and focus solely on whether payment has been made correctly and there's no overstaying. I suppose that would be too simple for a Councillor to understand. Meanwhile, will the modifications to the machines involve additional expenditure over and above the original £340,000? Of course, we all know the answer to this and by the same token can we expect Cllr Stewart's resignation anytime soon? Geoff103

5:24pm Thu 29 Nov 12

onelocal says...

Hopefully the letters in the WG and this blog have had some effect on this decision by SLDC to change their system. Next in line are the spy in the sky cameras installed at the LDNPA car parks. Time for them to go too.
Hopefully the letters in the WG and this blog have had some effect on this decision by SLDC to change their system. Next in line are the spy in the sky cameras installed at the LDNPA car parks. Time for them to go too. onelocal

5:32pm Thu 29 Nov 12

zaney5 says...

oceancloud wrote:
Muppets!
And that's putting it mildly!
[quote][p][bold]oceancloud[/bold] wrote: Muppets![/p][/quote]And that's putting it mildly! zaney5

5:52pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Milkbutnosugarplease says...

If you insult a Muppet, you are kermitting and offence. Call the money-wasters what they are: incompetent.
If you insult a Muppet, you are kermitting and offence. Call the money-wasters what they are: incompetent. Milkbutnosugarplease

6:48pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Airfix says...

How much money has just been completely and utterly wasted by buying machines that will now not needed ( what was wrong with old machines )
How much money has just been completely and utterly wasted by buying machines that will now not needed ( what was wrong with old machines ) Airfix

7:04pm Thu 29 Nov 12

life cycle too says...

Cllr Stewart is the same councillor, who when told some drivers were flouting the 30 MPH limit in Arnside, called for a 20 MPH limit - against the wishes of the local people and council, who just wanted some enforcement of the EXISTING speed limit!
Cllr Stewart is the same councillor, who when told some drivers were flouting the 30 MPH limit in Arnside, called for a 20 MPH limit - against the wishes of the local people and council, who just wanted some enforcement of the EXISTING speed limit! life cycle too

7:55pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Lakeuk says...

If the flexibility of the machines is fully utilised then the £340k may turn out to be a good investment, not being able to remove the number plate entering screen within the 3 working weeks before Xmas isn't a good demonstration of how good these ticket machines should be. Or could it be the case that SLDC is enshrined in it's own bureaucracy
If the flexibility of the machines is fully utilised then the £340k may turn out to be a good investment, not being able to remove the number plate entering screen within the 3 working weeks before Xmas isn't a good demonstration of how good these ticket machines should be. Or could it be the case that SLDC is enshrined in it's own bureaucracy Lakeuk

8:24pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Kendal Jock says...

Milkbutnosugarplease wrote:
If you insult a Muppet, you are kermitting and offence. Call the money-wasters what they are: incompetent.
I like this post, very funny tho', I'm not sure everyone will get it. Call the money-wasters what they are: "Incontinent"
[quote][p][bold]Milkbutnosugarplease[/bold] wrote: If you insult a Muppet, you are kermitting and offence. Call the money-wasters what they are: incompetent.[/p][/quote]I like this post, very funny tho', I'm not sure everyone will get it. Call the money-wasters what they are: "Incontinent" Kendal Jock

10:54pm Thu 29 Nov 12

Pete W. says...

… I've been keying in BO11LUX for the last 12 months, apparently its an offence!
… I've been keying in BO11LUX for the last 12 months, apparently its an offence! Pete W.

7:39am Fri 30 Nov 12

hogheaven says...

Time for a new council will they ever get anything right, only persons who have ample common sense need apply. Besides saving a fortune ,council tax will be reduced, is it not time for another consultant fee?
Time for a new council will they ever get anything right, only persons who have ample common sense need apply. Besides saving a fortune ,council tax will be reduced, is it not time for another consultant fee? hogheaven

12:29pm Fri 30 Nov 12

HardJelly says...

Perhaps while updating the machines, the council could also change the settings so that when money is inserted it gives a pro-rata period of time to park. e.g 50p gives 27 minutes - this might also encourage people to use the car parks.
Perhaps while updating the machines, the council could also change the settings so that when money is inserted it gives a pro-rata period of time to park. e.g 50p gives 27 minutes - this might also encourage people to use the car parks. HardJelly

1:05pm Fri 30 Nov 12

endada2 says...

Before elections prospective councillors should undergo an IQ test to make sure they score above what I suspect at the moment is an average of 42. £340,000 wasted. Someone made a nice profit on that one. Any idea who that might have been? Anybody? Will anyone get fired? And yet the same citcus of people get elected time after time. We are the clowns.
Before elections prospective councillors should undergo an IQ test to make sure they score above what I suspect at the moment is an average of 42. £340,000 wasted. Someone made a nice profit on that one. Any idea who that might have been? Anybody? Will anyone get fired? And yet the same citcus of people get elected time after time. We are the clowns. endada2

1:07pm Fri 30 Nov 12

endada2 says...

Before elections prospective councillors should undergo an IQ test to make sure they score above what I suspect at the moment is an average of 42. £340,000 wasted. Someone made a nice profit on that one. Any idea who that might have been? Anybody? Will anyone get fired? And yet the same circus of people get elected time after time. We are the clowns.
Before elections prospective councillors should undergo an IQ test to make sure they score above what I suspect at the moment is an average of 42. £340,000 wasted. Someone made a nice profit on that one. Any idea who that might have been? Anybody? Will anyone get fired? And yet the same circus of people get elected time after time. We are the clowns. endada2

4:59pm Fri 30 Nov 12

Kendmoor says...

Fantastic news - which car parks will the effect? there are loads of these stupid machines that need to go!

I shudder to think about the costs that were involved in putting them out in the first place. Unimpressed about that part.
Fantastic news - which car parks will the effect? there are loads of these stupid machines that need to go! I shudder to think about the costs that were involved in putting them out in the first place. Unimpressed about that part. Kendmoor

8:51am Sat 1 Dec 12

wezzyk says...

I am sure they could send them back and get a full refund. Or sell them onto another council as like new, hardly used condition.
I am sure they could send them back and get a full refund. Or sell them onto another council as like new, hardly used condition. wezzyk

8:39pm Sun 2 Dec 12

wartonsuperman1 says...

Swayed by public opinion I don't think so. More like swayed by interest of vociferous minority. Council should have stuck to it's original policy.
Swayed by public opinion I don't think so. More like swayed by interest of vociferous minority. Council should have stuck to it's original policy. wartonsuperman1

10:23pm Sun 2 Dec 12

Lakeuk says...

Letter in this weeks gazette is an example of the many experiences people wanting to visit the area have faced with these machines and having to spend additional time queuing to get a ticket.

Kirkby Lonsdale car park had loads complaining about the queuing and revenues have gone down there.
Letter in this weeks gazette is an example of the many experiences people wanting to visit the area have faced with these machines and having to spend additional time queuing to get a ticket. Kirkby Lonsdale car park had loads complaining about the queuing and revenues have gone down there. Lakeuk

10:03am Mon 3 Dec 12

life cycle too says...

Has anyone from the council explained yet why parking in Windermere car parks costs more than Kendal car parks?

And how much is it costing to enforce the overnight charges in car parks, compared to overnight income?
Has anyone from the council explained yet why parking in Windermere car parks costs more than Kendal car parks? And how much is it costing to enforce the overnight charges in car parks, compared to overnight income? life cycle too

12:19pm Mon 3 Dec 12

Lakeuk says...

life cycle- Answer would be Windermere car park pricing = gullable tourists

I doubt overnight car parking is being enforce, at the very least perioditic spot checks. Wait 6months then put in a FoI request for the parking data from the new machines
life cycle- Answer would be Windermere car park pricing = gullable tourists I doubt overnight car parking is being enforce, at the very least perioditic spot checks. Wait 6months then put in a FoI request for the parking data from the new machines Lakeuk

5:14pm Tue 4 Dec 12

Kendaltrader says...

The only reason I can see for SLDC to get rid of the need to insert a registration number into their car parking machines is a financial one. Have motorists voted with their feet (or cars in this case) and boycotted the car parks and thus our town? Has SLDC lost money since these machines were installed? Did they even consider what this would do for trade?
The only reason I can see for SLDC to get rid of the need to insert a registration number into their car parking machines is a financial one. Have motorists voted with their feet (or cars in this case) and boycotted the car parks and thus our town? Has SLDC lost money since these machines were installed? Did they even consider what this would do for trade? Kendaltrader

6:15pm Tue 4 Dec 12

life cycle too says...

Lakeuk wrote:
life cycle- Answer would be Windermere car park pricing = gullable tourists

I doubt overnight car parking is being enforce, at the very least perioditic spot checks. Wait 6months then put in a FoI request for the parking data from the new machines
It IS being enforced in some areas, because some local councillors (they're the ones who give their time for free, and don't have a free car park for their exclusive use) were given tickets for not paying as they attended council meetings!
[quote][p][bold]Lakeuk[/bold] wrote: life cycle- Answer would be Windermere car park pricing = gullable tourists I doubt overnight car parking is being enforce, at the very least perioditic spot checks. Wait 6months then put in a FoI request for the parking data from the new machines[/p][/quote]It IS being enforced in some areas, because some local councillors (they're the ones who give their time for free, and don't have a free car park for their exclusive use) were given tickets for not paying as they attended council meetings! life cycle too

7:41am Wed 5 Dec 12

in despair says...

It IS being enforced in some areas, because some local councillors (they're the ones who give their time for free, and don't have a free car park for their exclusive use) were given tickets for not paying as they attended council meetings!

NOW that is GOOD NEWS.
It IS being enforced in some areas, because some local councillors (they're the ones who give their time for free, and don't have a free car park for their exclusive use) were given tickets for not paying as they attended council meetings! NOW that is GOOD NEWS. in despair

8:11am Wed 5 Dec 12

endada2 says...

in despair wrote:
It IS being enforced in some areas, because some local councillors (they're the ones who give their time for free, and don't have a free car park for their exclusive use) were given tickets for not paying as they attended council meetings!

NOW that is GOOD NEWS.
SLDC councillors do get around £3500 per year plus expences plus payment for chairing committee meetings plus travel expenses plus special car badges that allow them to park for free at designated car parks plus they have a free car park in Kendal where SLDC want's to take away OUR only free car park on New Road. Councillors don't work for free - they work for trhemselves.
[quote][p][bold]in despair[/bold] wrote: It IS being enforced in some areas, because some local councillors (they're the ones who give their time for free, and don't have a free car park for their exclusive use) were given tickets for not paying as they attended council meetings! NOW that is GOOD NEWS.[/p][/quote]SLDC councillors do get around £3500 per year plus expences plus payment for chairing committee meetings plus travel expenses plus special car badges that allow them to park for free at designated car parks plus they have a free car park in Kendal where SLDC want's to take away OUR only free car park on New Road. Councillors don't work for free - they work for trhemselves. endada2

8:52am Wed 5 Dec 12

Geoff103 says...

I spotted this elsewhere. Seems appropriate:

"The ticket machine in the car park said to ‘depress button’ so I told it would never amount to anything & no one would ever love it."
I spotted this elsewhere. Seems appropriate: "The ticket machine in the car park said to ‘depress button’ so I told it would never amount to anything & no one would ever love it." Geoff103

9:54am Wed 5 Dec 12

life cycle too says...

endada2 wrote:
in despair wrote:
It IS being enforced in some areas, because some local councillors (they're the ones who give their time for free, and don't have a free car park for their exclusive use) were given tickets for not paying as they attended council meetings!

NOW that is GOOD NEWS.
SLDC councillors do get around £3500 per year plus expences plus payment for chairing committee meetings plus travel expenses plus special car badges that allow them to park for free at designated car parks plus they have a free car park in Kendal where SLDC want's to take away OUR only free car park on New Road. Councillors don't work for free - they work for trhemselves.
Town and Parish Councillors don't usually receive anything excepting travel costs to events other than routine meetings.

District Councillors fare much better!

Despite this, parish councillors still have legal responsibilities and obligations, that are becoming more complex, and now require a training session or two to understand!
[quote][p][bold]endada2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]in despair[/bold] wrote: It IS being enforced in some areas, because some local councillors (they're the ones who give their time for free, and don't have a free car park for their exclusive use) were given tickets for not paying as they attended council meetings! NOW that is GOOD NEWS.[/p][/quote]SLDC councillors do get around £3500 per year plus expences plus payment for chairing committee meetings plus travel expenses plus special car badges that allow them to park for free at designated car parks plus they have a free car park in Kendal where SLDC want's to take away OUR only free car park on New Road. Councillors don't work for free - they work for trhemselves.[/p][/quote]Town and Parish Councillors don't usually receive anything excepting travel costs to events other than routine meetings. District Councillors fare much better! Despite this, parish councillors still have legal responsibilities and obligations, that are becoming more complex, and now require a training session or two to understand! life cycle too

10:15am Wed 5 Dec 12

onelocal says...

The WG seems to have missed the story (reported elsewhere) that the SLDC car park was broken into on Sunday evening, and £2500 stolen from two car park machines. Looks like car park income will be down.
The WG seems to have missed the story (reported elsewhere) that the SLDC car park was broken into on Sunday evening, and £2500 stolen from two car park machines. Looks like car park income will be down. onelocal

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree