That parking isn't free?

[toparkforfreeorforfee]

Our local leisure centre has recently extended its car park so there are more spaces. The new area isn't tarmacked like the rest of the car park but has gravel down the 'road' part and the spaces are grass, marked with stones. There aren't any signs in this part of the car park (but plenty in the main bit), but you can only access it from the main car park

Here's the debate - a few people seem to have decided this new bit is free and have therefore been getting fined which they aren't happy about.... their argument being that there aren't any signs and it looks different. Others think this is ridiculous as it's quite clearly part of the car park and therefore comes under the main rules.

I'm in the second camp and tend to park in the new bit a lot as the spaces and 'road' bit are wider and it's always quiet, so much easier when I'm grappling the kids. I always pay. What prompted this thread is that I was there the other day and a chap came up to me while I was loading the buggy into the car ranting about his fine... he didnt seem happy when I just shrugged said 'well of course it's not free' and stormed off to take photos.

I can't draw for toffee, so google map screenshot is below - white arrows point to the entry and exit points of the car park from the road, orange dots are the entry/exit points to the new bit, yellow star is the new parking area.

Aibu to think it's obvious parking is definitely not free here?

Because they make money for their maintenance costs via the fee you pay to join/attend. Do you pay for supermarket car parks? Restaurant car parks? No, of course not. Generally the only car parks you pay for are the ones that run purely as car parks. I expect a business that also has a car park for customers to be providing that free of charge (for customers at least).

Oooh, touched a nerve did I? Shall I break it down a little for you?

The provision of car parking is an overhead the centre needs to build into their running costs.

The provision of car parking is an extra service that is only used by a portion of the centre users.

If car parking is "free", the cost of providing that service will be born by everyone, even if they don't need/use it.

So someone who is paying for their bus travel is effectively paying twice (bus ticket AND portion of the car park running cost) and subsiding the car driver's parking.

I expect to pay for the services I use, don't you?

I think it's poor form to require leisure centre users who don't drive there to subsidise those who do.

Exactly. And I bet the cost of bus fare for parent(s) plus children will be more than the car parking charge, not to mention the barrier of lack of convenience of lugging wet kit around.

In my (relatively affluent) city, around 20% of households with kids don't have access to a car, council leisure facilities have been rationalized (ie some closed) so large parts of the city no longer have leisure facilities with in walkable distance.

Yet those families are expected to underwrite car parking?

The same arguments could be made for the playgrounds or library which are there too though couldn't they? Should they charge people to go into library? No? What if they then pop into the loo while they're there? Everyone pays for services they don't use all the time.

Anyway the debate isn't really on whether they should charge at all, more if it would be obvious the new bit is also paid for.

I agree with you that intuitively it's not free, but also they should have proper signage.

This is a far more complex argument. You are talking about a libertarian model.

Public buses are funded by people who may never step on a bus in their life.
Likewise schools are funded by people who have no children.
Libraries by people who have never stepped foot in a library.

The bus users you mention are using a service that is already subsidised.

You seem to be the one who is aggrieved, it seems that I, along with most others, find it usual for leisure centres to provide free parking for customers. That’s the norm, hence why the OP’s post has generated surprise. If you choose not to drive, and then get bitter about it, that’s up to you. There’s costs associated with the drive there just like there would be on bus fare so no, you’re not “paying twice”. Some folk won’t use the whole of the gym facilities, but they’re still paying for it aren’t they? Should every machine be pay per use? It just doesn’t work like that.

Do you complain to Tesco for providing car parks that you have to pay for too?

Didn’t think so.

That’s a shame for you. It must really grate on you every time you go to a restaurant, supermarket, hotel, spa or other facility that provides parking for its customers 🤨

Not to mention the fact car parks are minimal maintenance or cost associated.

Such an odd response. There’s a lot of bitter non drivers around here today!

As a basic principle, car parks owned by a service you pay to enter or use, or a shop where you will expect to spend money, should be free for people using that service.

Public transport costs are irrelevant - as pp pointed out, the equivalent of paying for someone's bus ticket would be paying for their fuel and maintenance of their vehicle, not imposing a parking charge.

It usually costs more annually to own, tax, fuel and maintain a car than it does to use public transport, unless you are taking very frequent long train journeys. People have cars because they're infinitely more convenient, not because they're a cheap option.

I don't choose not to drive but I do choose to acknowledge my privilege in being able to.

The privilege is in being able to have the car, not having use of a car park when using someone’s business. Feel free to make a donation to your local pub for their kind offer of a “free” car park. Even though the actual ongoing cost to them is next to nil….

Oh, and don’t forget to ask for a discount at the gym if you never use their showers, as the person that goes every day and has a hot shower each day is costing them far more money than you are 😂

Is a council run leisure centre really a business though? Shops, pubs etc are profit making private businesses who are totally at liberty to attract customers how they want.

The car parking facility is not free though is it? The value of the land, cost of upkeep etc will be an overhead the business will need to recoup somehow, so will be added into the costs of the service/goods on offer.

Our urban landscape is now so car centric that most people don't even see this.

Well, yanbu - if the main carpark is pay then the overflow is pay.

That said, I do think that it's wrong for a council leisure centre to charge for parking. People are doing healthy things there - and they have already paid their council tax. It's just councils grabbing money by stealth as usual - after people have paid their very hefty bills and the council has wasted the money.

Fining residents trying to use a leisure centre is disgusting IMO. Even if the poor bloody residents were going to the shops instead of using the leisure centre, it should be free. All the car parks in my town used to be free and the area was as on its feet as possible in today's climate. Recently the council have set about trying to screw money out of people by making all the car parks pay. What has happened is that people now park on double yellows if they're just nipping in, or they park in the free supermarket (so you now can't get a space) - or they simply do not support the local shops anymore as it costs to even enter the high street if you've travelled by car.

Of course the facility isn't free - but that's what council tax ought to be paying for.

Yes. If they don’t get the customers through the door, your local council run pool/gym will close. I know, I worked for one!! They were always worried about being closed down, so as much as it could be seen as a “council service”, it relies very much on its income in order to keep going. It is not necessarily out for a profit, but the cost of running a pool, gym, track etc is not cheap and the council won’t simply hand out money to keep it going. Ours is pretty well priced too, so they don’t want to be scaring off their customers by adding on a parking fee.

Negligible upkeep. It’s a load of tarmac. Balance that against the cost of running a large pool, staff costs, electricity, heating, water, regularly updating and replacing gym equipment and the myriad other costs … the car park is nothing!

The car park fees are just a way to screw ordinary people

I think they should probably put up a sign, otherwise customers may have a case that it's not clear.

It's 'overflow parking' essentially, similar to many National Trust parking sites around here. Of course you have to pay.