Rother Valley Parking Expensive?

[Guest]

Price went up on 1st April according to their website.

 

Quite apt really as it is a ****ing joke!

[AmourDesign 10]

i understand that they need funds to maintain the park but the flat fee of £5.00 will put casual visitors or dog walkers off.

 

I found free parking here...

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Rother+Valley+Country+Park/@53.3256811,-1.3216469,3a,75y,112.3h,68.67t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1suc92hf2NV9mRvTax6NElhQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Duc92hf2NV9mRvTax6NElhQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D120.97305%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x38bace2dee6b7383!6m1!1e1

Edited April 20, 2016 by AmourDesign

[Cyclone 10]

Perhaps someone could identify what part of the council is responsible for the decision to charge so much and then people who don't like it could email them.

 

---------- Post added 20-04-2016 at 12:49 ----------

 

This might be one way to make a complaint.

 

https://www.rotherham.gov.uk/forms/form/77/en/contact_green_spaces

 

Suggested wording of complaint

 

Hi,

Regarding Rother Valley Country Park, I believe that the parking charge of £5/car, regardless of duration of the stay is excessive and is not in keeping with the councils duty under the Health

and Social Care Act 2012

 

Section 12 of the 2012 Act introduced a new duty for all upper-tier and unitary local authorities in England to take appropriate steps to improve the health of the people who live in their areas.

 

An excessive parking charge to access a public park is detrimental to the health of the public and particularly disadvantageous towards those of a lower income.

 

Feel free to copy and paste that and/or modify it however you wish of course.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Cyclone

[achorste 10]

I don't think I've ever parked in their car park, I've found the parking area on the other side easier to access, less busy and of course free. If they knew about it, why would anyone (excluding those with accessibility issues) park in the main rother valley car park?

[Cyclone 10]

proximity to the facilities and buildings?

[willman 10]

I don't think I've ever parked in their car park, I've found the parking area on the other side easier to access, less busy and of course free. If they knew about it, why would anyone (excluding those with accessibility issues) park in the main rother valley car park?

 

Responsibility for the upkeep of the park perhaps?

 

 

Other parks offering similar facilities aren't quite as steep as RV, but between £3 and £5 for the day appears normal.

 

Parking near Woolley Bros has also got a high crime rate for cars being broken into, always has been.

[Gricehead 10]

Responsibility for the upkeep of the park perhaps?

 

 

Other parks offering similar facilities aren't quite as steep as RV, but between £3 and £5 for the day appears normal.

 

Parking near Woolley Bros has also got a high crime rate for cars being broken into, always has been.

 

Thrybergh is £1.50. That's a pretty large discrepancy even within Rotherham Council's scope of responsibility.

 

Graves and Millhouses are £2.

 

Poolsbrook (Staveley) is free.

[willman 10]

Thrybergh is £1.50. That's a pretty large discrepancy even within Rotherham Council's scope of responsibility.

 

Graves and Millhouses are £2.

 

Poolsbrook (Staveley) is free.

 

None of the above have anywhere near the facilities at RV, not that that excuses an increased parking fee.

 

I live close enough to be able to walk into RV in all weathers at all times at the year and come summer i'd vote for making the parking £10.

Edited April 20, 2016 by willman

[A.B.Yaffle 24]

None of the above have anywhere near the facilities at RV, not that that excuses an increased parking fee.

 

I live close enough to be able to walk into RV in all weathers at all times at the year and come summer i'd vote for making the parking £10.

 

The fact that Rother Valley has far more facilities which have also increased in price over recent years makes it more unfair to charge more for parking. If you want to go in a canoe and pay RV's price for that, paying another £5 to park makes it much less affordable.

[tinfoilhat 11]

I'm thinking of painting a few white lines on the front lawn and offering park and ride - the ride being a regular shuttle in my elderly germanese bin wagon. £4. ;)

[willman 10]

The fact that Rother Valley has far more facilities which have also increased in price over recent years makes it more unfair to charge more for parking. If you want to go in a canoe and pay RV's price for that, paying another £5 to park makes it much less affordable.

 

Why does it?

 

Perhaps they want people to use the facilities or pay for the privilege of being on the park.

 

At least one of the venues mentioned uses volunteers to run the cafe, and the park is subsidised from the Caravan Club.

So the expenditure versus income isn't comparable.

 

Why should something offering a 5 mile circular cycle path charge the same for parking as something with a 1/4 walking footpath?

I know which needs more upkeep between RV and Millhouses.

 

You can cycle and destroy the countryside around RV free of charge,unless you park, you can't ride your horse in there without having to pay.

Now why is that right?

[Cyclone 10]

The charge makes it disproportionately harder for poor people to access the leisure facilities.

£5 is irrelevant to some people, but the difference between eating or not for others.