titlepage/contents pg 1-16 - British Parking Association

Published byThe Institution of Highways & TransportationDesigned and produced byWDH Publishing Services Ltd, EssexPrinted in England byHQ Media Services Ltd, EssexPublished July 2005All rights reserved. No part of this publication shall be reproduced, copies stored in anelectronic retrieval system or transmitted without the written permission of the publishers.© IHT 2005Price £40.00ISBN: 0 902933 36 1The IHT and the members of the Steering Group which produced this document have endeavoured to ensure the accuracy of itscontents. However, the guidance and recommendations given should always be reviewed by the reader in the light of the factsof their particular circumstances; and specialist advice obtained as necessary. Any references to legislation discussed within thedocument should be considered in the light of current and any future legislation. No liability for negligence or otherwise in relationto this document and its contents can be accepted by the IHT, the members of the Steering Group, its servants or agents.

CD INSTRUCTIONSThis CD is created in Adobe Acrobat pdf files. It has been created to allow you to navigatethe CD by means of key links.For example, the Contents page (click here to view), has links to all the individualChapters; just click on the Chapter you wish to view and you will be directed there.

Parking Strategies& ManagementJuly 2005Parking Acknowledgements Strategies& Management

ContentsContentsContentsPage NumberAcknowledgements 10Foreword 11Index to Photographs 12Chapter 1: Introduction 13What do we mean by parking? 13How important is parking? 13Why is there a need to look at parking? 13Scope and purpose of these Guidelines 15Section 1: The Policy Context 17Chapter 2: National and Regional 19Transport Planning PoliciesThe development of Parking Policies 19How car use and dependence has been encouraged 19The emergence of parking as a policy tool 20Maximum levels of parking provision 21A strategic approach to parking standards 22Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland 22Chapter 3: Powers and Processes 25Introduction 25The Planning System 25Development Plans and Frameworks 25Development Control 26Transport Assessments 27Parking as an output 28Area wide TAs 28Design of parking and other access 28Travel Plans 28Planning Conditions and Contributions 29Planning Conditions 30Planning Contributions 30

ContentsContentsPage NumberTransport Powers and Processes 31Local Transport Plans 31Transport powers 32The Authorities responsible 32Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 33Road Traffic Act 1991 33Traffic Management Act 2004 33Road User Charges and Workplace Parking Levies 33Parking charges 34Additional parking charges 34Use of surplus funds 34Residential parking 35Residents’ Parking Permits 35Chapter 4: Preparing a Parking Strategy 37Introduction 37Requirements of a Parking Strategy 37Political support 38Timescale 39Responsibility for preparation 39Involvement of planning authorities 40Joint Parking Strategies 40Consistency and co-ordination between parking providers 40The scope of a local Parking Strategy 41The Steps to producing a Parking Strategy 42Step 1: Identify the strategy area 42Step 2: Determine the main issues 42Step 3: Establish working groups and forum 43Step 4: Research and data gathering 43Step 5: Identify problems and opportunities 45Step 6: Identify and agree the causes of problems 47Step 7: Set objectives and targets 47Step 8: Devise potential schemes and policies 47Step 9: Assess the impact of potential solutions 48Step 10: Prepare the finance and business plan 48Step 11: A programme of intervention 48Step 12: Specify a monitoring regime 49The next course of action 50Section 2: Objectives and Measures 51Chapter 5: Defining Parking Objectives 53Introduction 53Key Issues 53Parking as an influence on Trip Generation: 54Patterns and Modal Choice

ContentsPage NumberThe Advantages and Limitations of Parking 55Overarching goals 55Accessibility 56Economic Vitality 57Efficiency 59Environmental Quality 60Safety and Security 62Social Inclusion and Equity 62Reconciling conflicting Objectives for Parking Policy 64Rural Issues 65Chapter 6: Formulating Parking Interventions 67Introduction 67The Quantity of Parking Space 67How much parking? 67How much on-street parking? 68How much off-street parking? 68Ownership, Control and Management 69of Off-Street Car ParksChanging the amount of parking 70Incentives for change to private parking 70Park-and-Ride Car Parks 71Station Car Parks 72New non-residential development 72New residential development 73Car-free and car-reduced housing 73City Car Clubs 75Integration of on- and off-street parking 75The Quality of Parking 76Location 76Parking and accessibility 76Parking for disabled people 78Freight and distribution 79Coaches 80Motorcycles 80Bicycles 80Taxis 81Environment and Street Design 81Design of residential parking places 82On-street provision in residential areas 82Communal versus dedicated parking 83Landscaped spaces 83Security 84Conversion of front gardens for parking 84Regulation versus design 85Parking Control and Pricing 86

ContentsContentsPage NumberFormulating parking control schemes 86Principles of on-street control 86The need for Residents’ Parking Schemes 87Loading for business premises 87Balancing the benefits – Red Routes 88Tariffs and pricing 89Further policy considerations 90Discouraging car commuting 90Provision of free parking 91Management of Parking (Protocols) 92Enforcement of Parking Control Schemes 92Section 3: Implementation 95Chapter 7: Delivery of Schemes 97Introduction 97Public off-street car parking 97Tariff setting and review 98Tariff graduation 99Co-ordination of charges 99Tariff reviews 100Ticketing and Payment Systems 100Motorcycles 101Audit and Fraud Prevention 102Security in Car Parks 102Shopmobility 103Park-and-Ride 103Location 103Information 103Public transport services 104Private off-street parking 104On-street parking – provision and control 105Design of streets 105Traffic Regulation Orders 107Implementation timing 108Incorporating exemptions in the TRO 109Planning signs and road markings 109Computerised design and management of 110parking control schemesRestricting parking for road safety 110School Entrances 111Pedestrian Crossing Places 111Restricting parking for traffic flow 112Restrictions at junctions 112Bus Stops 113Bus Lanes and Bus Gates 114

ContentsPage NumberCycle facilities 114Short stay parking 114Retailers’ concerns 115On-street charging methods 115Single Bay Meters 115Multi–Bay Meters 116Voucher parking 116Pay-and-Display 116Power supply for Pay-and-Display machines 117Providing parking privileges 117Providing for on-street loading 118Providing for Disabled Badge Holders 119Loading 119Disabled bays close to surgeries, 119disability charities etcResident Permit Schemes 119Parking pressures 119Allocation of Permits 120Permit charges 120Deciding on Parking Zones 121Displacement 122Providing for residents’ visitors 123Providing business permits 123Making special provision for Doctors and 124other Health WorkersProviding special permits, waivers and suspensions 124Other on-street parking issues 124Street Trading and Markets 124Hotels and Guest Houses 125Parking on footways 125Overnight Lorry parking 125Coach parking 125Motorcycle parking 126Cycle parking 126Taxi ranks 127Footway crossovers 127Sports Stadia 127Planning the implementation of major Parking Control schemes 127Chapter 8: Public Consultation 129What consultation is required? 129Why consult? 129Consultation on a Parking Strategy 130Consultation on parking control schemes 130Internal organisation and consultation 130

ContentsContentsPage NumberElected Member involvement 131Planning a scheme consultation 131Improving the scheme through consultation 131Handling objections to TROs 132The consultation timetable 132Consultation fatigue 133Post implementation review of schemes 133User satisfaction 134Consultation techniques 134Stakeholder groups 134Forums 136Focus Groups 136Stated Preference surveys 136Structured questionnaires and interviews 136Consultation leaflets 136Exhibitions 138Public Meetings 139Press and other publications 139Chapter 9: Compliance and Enforcement 141Introduction 141Local Authority compliance 141Private Sector compliance 141Parking Regulations – compliance and enforcement 142The basis of enforcement 142Traffic Regulation Orders and Traffic Management Orders 142A proper strategy 143Signs and lines 143Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE) 144The Road Traffic Act 1991 144The Traffic Management Act 2004 144The Road Traffic Act Scheme 144Contrasting the DPE scheme with the criminal scheme 145Parking Charges 145Removing and immobilisation 145Public perception of enforcement 146The enforcement procedure 146Consideration of representations 147Mitigation and extenuating circumstances 147Appeals to the Parking Adjudicator 148Charge certificates and debt registration 148Operational issues 148Removal and Clamping 150Off-street Parking Regulations 150Car parks not subject to a Traffic Order 151Enforcement using wheel clamping on private land 151

ContentsPage NumberPrivate car parks and private land 151How should enforcement be carried out? 151On-street 151Off-street car parks 153Compliance monitoring 154Chapter 10: Funding and the Parking Business Plan 155Introduction 155The Parking Business Plan 155Income from parking 155Setting parking charges 156Additional revenue 157Expenditure and Operating Costs 157On-street 157Off-street car parks 158Capital costs 159Funding 159Off-street car parks 159On-sreet 160Best Value reviews 161The Policy and Finance interface 161Private Sector involvement 162The importance of Local Authority control 163On-street management 164The Parking Account 164Chapter 11: The Role of Marketing and Communications 167Introduction 167The reasons for Marketing and Communications 167Marketing 168Formal communication by Local Authorities 169Designing permits for on-street parking 169Ticket design 169Parking “shop” 169Communication by private companies 170Providing information 170Maps and Guides 170Traffic Signs 171Signing within car parks 172The Internet 173Radio 173Mobile Phone Systems 174Annex A: National Policy Documents 175Annex B: Legislation 180Index 185

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsThanks are due to the Department for Transport, the British ParkingAssociation, the County Surveyors’ Society, National Car Parks andthe Rees Jeffreys Road Foundation for their financial support.Thanks are also due to the Department for Transport and West SussexCounty Council for the supply and use of photographs and diagrams.In addition we are grateful for the photographic and diagrammaticcontributions and inspirations from the late Hugh Collis, ColinEastman, Peter Guest, Andy Male, Tim Pharaoh and Mark Valleley.

Mike SharpePresidentForewordThe Institution of Highways &TransportationJuly 2005ForewordWelcome to the Institution’s guidelines on parking strategies andmanagement. They have been written to provide all practitioners withassistance in tackling the difficult and controversial issues that surroundparking in a systematic way.Some years ago the Institution recognised the need to bring togetherpolicy and practice associated with parking. Changes in policy have comeabout quite recently with the desire to manage demand of private car useand to improve the integration of land use and transport planning. Bycontrast parking practice has evolved over many years – mostly on an adhoc basis as a response to real and practical problems experienced on theground. This document seeks to bridge the gap between policy andpractice, guiding the reader from the legislative framework, through to thedevelopment of a strategy and the implementation of changes in realplaces.In preparing the guidelines we are grateful to the group of experts whooffered the benefit of their knowledge and experience by putting much ofit in writing. These include Keith Gardener, Mike Link, Colin Eastman,Peter Guest and Caroline Shepherd. Derek Palmer and Carlton Roberts-James also made an invaluable contribution to the work during their timeworking for the Institution, as has Peter Dickinson.In particular I would like to pay tribute to the late Hugh Collis who provideda very significant amount of the text, drawing on his many years ofexperience dealing with parking issues. He was a fountain of wisdom andknowledge on the subject without which the guidelines would be thepoorer.I am also grateful to Mike Talbot, who provided input to the project onbehalf of the Department of Transport, and our two technical editors – TimPharaoh and Tony Bolden – who undertook the mammoth task of bringingtogether the text in its final form. A number of individuals and organisationshave also supplied, or given permission to use photographs, diagramsand figures that have enhanced the presentation of a complex andpotentially dry subject. The project was made possible because offinancial support from the DfT, the British Parking Association, the CountySurveyors’ Society and National Car Parks and has been overseen bySheila Holden OBE who chaired the steering group charged withproducing the completed document. The Institution is grateful for all thesemany and varied contributions.Whenever a document of this kind is produced it will be a combination oftimeless advice and information that will be out of date almostimmediately. I am confident that the structured approach to dealing withparking issues set out in the text will assist those of you who are chargedwith developing unique solutions to specific local problems. Althoughpolicy shifts and changes in legislation are likely over the coming years,the guidelines bring together the existing policies and powers – many ofwhich are now well used and have stood the test of time – in a way whichshould provide practitioners with a most valuable resource.I hope that you will find it a useful source of information and advice as youstrive to improve the way in which parking is managed – whethersupporting the economy and regeneration, protecting the environment orimproving the quality of life of the communitiesthat we all seek to serve.

Index to PhotographsIndex toPhotographsAppropriate signing and information displayed in rural settings 65Surface, Multi-storey and Underground car parks 69Shopmobility direction signs 79Designated parking area and sign for motorcycles 80Cycle shelters and lockers – Aberdeen 81In Manchester: signs combined to minimise clutter 82Integrated residential parking – Freiburg 82CPZ entry signs – Chichester 82Parking bays – Buntingford 82Entry signs to pedestrianised areas 86Designated residential parking bays 87On-street loading bays and signs 88Red Route Clearway sign 88Red Route signs 89Free car parking signs 91Diagram – bay markings: West Sussex 107Sign and road markings for double yellow lines 109Variety of different parking signs – Taunton and Watford 112Clearway signs 112Particular parking for shoppers – Westminster 115Different ways for payment – Newcastle, Westminster and 117MaidenheadParking for disabled drivers 119Designated residential parking signs 120Nuisance footway parking 125Coach and lorry parking – Chichester 126Securing motorcycles 126Improvised cycle parking 127Taxi rank on-street provision 127Matchday restrictions – Watford 128Confused markings for a bus stop bay 144Clear charges and times 150Multi-storey car park – Birmingham 159Parking sign for private car park – Birmingham 163Information showing available long stay parking 168Where to park in Worthing 171Guide to places in Windsor and Eton 171Providing information in various ways of where to park 172/173Information on parking 173

Chapter 1IntroductionChapter 1IntroductionWhat do we mean byparking?Parking is both a noun and averb. For example, we look for acar park or we park our car onthe street. It also qualifiesvarious nouns, as in parkingarea, parking lot, parking ticket,parking charge, parkingattendant, parking department,and so on. In ParkingPerspectives (1) Valleley statesthat there is a fundamentaldistinction between the use ofthe word “parking” to describethe infrastructure provided forthe storage of vehicles and“parking” as an activity formingpart of the overall process oftravel. He argues that moreweight should be attached to theview of parking as a processembracing all these meanings ofparking.The array of different kinds ofparking facilities, and the variouslaws, regulations, policies andcodes that apply to them, can bedaunting. Accordingly, withinthese guidelines will be foundreferences to car, lorry, cycle,motorcycle, coach, bus andother sorts of parking. We mayalso refer to parking as abusiness, as a policy instrument,as part of traffic managementand as an administrativeoperation.As a starting point, the differenttypes of parking are summarisedin Figure 1.1.How important isparking?Most private vehicles are drivenfor only a small proportion oftheir life; the rest of the time theyare parked. Parking takes up alot of land and costs money toprovide and maintain. Parkingaffects all of us, whether we arelooking for somewhere to park,or coping with the impact of otherpeople’s parked vehicles. Asurvey of British householdsfound that parking was the singlemost frequent cause of disputesbetween neighbours!Another recent survey concludedthat effective parkingmanagement was very importantto the economic, environmentaland social well being of the areain question (2).Why is there a need tolook at parking?Two important changes haveoccurred in the way transportand planning issues should beaddressed.1. There has been a policychange whereby roads andparking are no longerprovided in line withunquestioned increases indemand, the so-called“predict and provide”approach.2. All aspects of land use andtransport should now beplanned and managed in anintegrated fashion in orderto achieve a wide variety ofobjectives. Parking is now atopic and activity to be

14 Chapter 1Figure 1.1.treated as part of a muchlarger system.Given that there has been a shiftin the approach to land useplanning and transport in theUnited Kingdom, placing themoderation of car travel and thecreation of more environmentallysustainable forms of urbandevelopment at the heart ofnational, regional and localpolicy, this has meant that localauthorities and their partners arenow presented with thechallenge of translating the newpolicy objectives into action onthe ground. The Institution ofHighways & Transportation, withsupport from the relevantGovernment departments,decided that it should provideguidelines for local authoritiesand other practitioners within theparking arena that would help tobridge this gap between policyand practice, as well as assist inimproving the quality ofmainstream parking services andprofessional practice.LOCATIONON-STREETOFF-STREETDESIGNKERB-SIDEBAYS ONCARRIAGEWAYBAYS ADJACENTTOCARRIAGEWAYSURFACESTRUCTURE M/SUNDERGROUNDROOF TOPOWNER–SHIPPRIVATE (ROADUNADOPTED)PUBLIC ROAD(HIGHWAYAUTHORITIES)PUBLIC (LOCALAUTHORITIES)PRIVATECOMPANYOTHER PRIVATE(INSTITUTIONS/HOUSE-HOLDERS)CONTROLOF USEUNCONTROLLEDCONTROLLED BY LOCALAUTHORITY/HIGHWAYAUTHORITYCONTROLLED BY PRIVATECOMPANY OR OTHERNON–LOCAL AUTHORITYAVAILABILITYGENERALPUBLICPUBLIC SUBJECT TOINVITATION, CONDITIONS ORPAYMENTPRIVATE BY INVITATIONONLYCHARGINGFREECHARGEDSource: T Pharaoh.

Introduction 15Scope and purpose ofthe GuidelinesThe Guidelines are arranged in11 chapters within threesections: the policy context;objectives and measures; andimplementation. In sections 2and 3 photographs have beenextensively used to amplify andillustrate the Guidelines.Section 1 has three chapters.Chapter 2 sets out the policycontext within which localauthorities should determinetheir own strategies for parkingand how best to implement them.The national and regional policycontext is outlined, includingsome comment about theposition in Wales, Scotland andNorthern Ireland, while moredetailed policy statements are tobe found in Annex A.Chapter 3 summarises thepowers available to localauthorities, and the variousprocesses, statutory andotherwise, which they shoulduse. Annex B sets out items ofkey legislation.Chapter 4 focuses on thepreparation of a ParkingStrategy. It advises on theprocess of preparation ratherthan the content, and is set outas a series of steps.Section 2 has two chapters.Chapter 5 provides guidance forlocal authorities on the setting ofobjectives for parking plans andoperations and emphasises thatthese must be integrated withwider objectives concerningtransport, development andquality of life.Chapter 6 explores the content ofa Parking Strategy, and exploresa range of policies, schemes andprotocols, which together arecalled “interventions”. It includesdiscussion of, and advice about,matters to be taken into accountwhen formulating parking policy,and also about the type ofprojects to be included in acomprehensive Parking Strategy.Section 3 has five chapters.Chapter 7 provides guidance onhow to implement the Strategy.Chapter 8 deals with theprocess of involving andconsulting the public andstakeholders in the process ofdeveloping parking plans andschemes.Chapter 9 describes andadvises on the variousenforcement mechanisms forparking control that are neededto ensure compliance of thirdparties with various rules andregulations.Chapter 10 focuses on thefinancial and economic aspectsof local authority parkingservices, including guidance onthe preparation of a parkingbusiness plan.Chapter 11 emphasises theimportance of marketing andcommunications in gainingacceptance and popularity forparking policies and schemes,and also in providing drivers withthe information needed for themto make appropriate parkingchoices.References(1) Valleley, M, 1997, ParkingPerspectives. Produced by theUniversity of Westminster TransportStudies Group.(2) British Parking Association,Unpublished Report –- BPA SeminarMarch 2003.

Section 1The Policy ContextSection Acknowledgements1The Policy Context

Chapter 2National andRegional TransportPlanning PoliciesAcknowledgementsChapter 2National andRegional TransportPlanning PoliciesThe development ofParking PoliciesIntervention to control andprovide for parking wasoriginally prompted by importantbut rather narrow concernsabout safety and obstruction oftraffic flow on the streets.Parking policy and managementwithin local authoritiesconsequently evolved as anumber of separate activities orconsiderations, including:●The management of parkingon the highway;● The planning of parking innew developments; and● The provision andmanagement of off-streetpublic car parks.Generally speaking, theseactivities were all geared toensuring that sufficient carparking was provided to meetdemand. For as long as this wasthe policy, and the wider impactswere not questioned, there waslittle difficulty in dealing withparking as a separate matter.Over time, however, it becameincreasingly clear that the landuse and transport trends werecreating a whole range ofproblems, and this led from the1970s onwards to a majorchange in policy.How car use anddependence has beenencouragedFor several decades it was anobligation on the promoters ofnew development to providesufficient parking to cater forexpected demand and to ensurethat no development resulted inpotentially dangerous orobstructive parking on thestreet.Planning policies alloweddevelopment to take advantageof locations served bymotorways and other highstandard roads. Patterns of landuse development thus emergedthat are difficult to access bymeans other than the car. This inturn resulted in many peopleadopting lifestyles that are cardependent, using cars to accessworkplaces, shops, leisurefacilities and personal servicesnot as a matter of choice, but asa function of habit.Public investment frequentlymirrored these trends, with newhospitals concentrating healthcare facilities in locations poorlyserved by public transport,whilst the education policies ofparental choice resulted inlonger journeys to school and a

20 Chapter 2Figure 2.1 Fares, motoring costs and earnings adjusted for inflation.consequent increased use ofcars.It was not just land use changethat promoted heavydependence on the car. The caris attractive financially becausepeople do not always perceivethe full cost of making journeychoices, at most consideringonly the marginal cost of fuel andparking. Once the capital andannual costs of running a carhave been met, it is seen aswasteful to then choose to travelby public transport, therebyappearing to require paymenttwice over. Moreover, since 1974motoring costs (in real terms)have declined and by 2003 werejust below the 1974 levels,whereas in the same period busand rail fares have increased byabout 85% in real terms.Earnings during this period haverisen by just over 70% in realterms. This is illustrated in Figure2.1. Added to this is the appeal ofa car as a desirable consumerproduct to be cherished as wellas used, though this in itself doesnot generate dependence on cartravel.Land use and transport policyhas now changed to moderatethe trend towards increasingreliance on cars for personaltravel, but the size of the taskshould not be underestimated.The car confers many benefits ofpersonal access and choice,although as access to carsincreases, these benefits areeroding. The cost and otheradvantages of the car, and carbaseddevelopments in andaround our towns and cities,present major hurdles in bringingabout a change of travelpatterns. The management ofparking can play a role in thatchange.The emergence ofparking as a policy toolParking is no longer a standaloneissue, but has become akey aspect of both transport andland use planning. It must beintegrated with all other aspectsof urban policy now that it is to bemanaged at levels below“unfettered demand”. This isnecessary in order to promoteand to support:●●●Lifestyles that are less cardependent;Transport provision that ismore socially inclusive;Development that is moresustainable in terms ofenergy and pollution; and● Settlements that are moreattractive and user-friendly.Control over the availability ofparking spaces is a key policyinstrument in limiting car trips,and for the time being is the most

National and Regional Transport Planning Policies 21widely available and readilyaccepted method of doing so.Even without control over privateparking, strict control over publicparking could have a majorimpact on travel choices (1). Inmost circumstances parkingcontrol is regarded as easier toimplement and more appropriatethan other measures such asroad user charging. In the searchfor practical measures toinfluence the use of cars andpeople’s choice of travel mode,outside of the LondonCongestion Charging Scheme,parking control remains thesharpest tool in the planner’sshed.As policy has moved from a“predict and provide” approachto one based on theachievement of wider objectives,the management of parking hasbecome a more important part ofnational policy. It is becomingaccepted that the unlimitedgrowth of car use cannot betolerated, as the infrastructurecosts of providing the necessaryroad and parking space would beunacceptable in both financialand environmental terms.Accordingly, a new policyframework has emerged in arange of Governmentdocuments, of which the mostimportant are the TransportWhite Paper issued in 1998, theFuture of Transport White Paperin 2004, the Transport Act 2000,the Traffic Management Act2004, the 10 Year Plan, PlanningPolicy Statements or GuidanceNotes, particularly PPG13,Regional Planning Guidance(including Regional TransportStrategies), and a number ofsupporting documents and goodpractice guides. Some impetuswas also given by the TrafficReduction Act 1997, whichrequired local transportauthorities to report on how theyintended to reduce traffic in theirareas, or to explain why this wasnot seen to be appropriate.Fuller details of the main policiesappear in Annex A.Of particular importance is PPG13. This places strong emphasison parking, since the availabilityof car parking has a majorinfluence on the means oftransport people choose for theirjourneys.It takes a broad view ofimplementing parking policy inorder to promote sustainabletransport choices. Parkingrelated to development shouldnot be considered in isolation,but must be considered as anintegral part of development,along with location, scale, designand access by other modes. Theaim should be to provide accessby public transport, walking andcycling as well as by the car.Transport Assessments, whichthe Guidance requires fordevelopments with significanttransport implications, shouldreflect this approach.Implementation of previousguidance had been slower thanexpected. Research (2)suggested one reason lay withhesitancy on the part of localauthorities in restricting parking,through the fear that developerswould prefer to invest in otherareas ready to provide greateramounts of parking.Maximum levels ofparking provisionPPG13 also sets a range ofnational maximum parkingstandards for certain types ofdevelopment, above giventhresholds. Maximum standardsshould be used as part of apackage of measures to:● Promote sustainabletransport choices;● Reduce the land take ofdevelopment;● Enable schemes to fit intocentral urban sites;● Promote linked trips andaccess to developments forthose without use of a car;and● To tackle congestion.PPG13 does not allow minimumstandards for parking, other thanparking for disabled people. Theprevious 1994 version of PPG13had permitted local authorities toset maximum and minimum

22 Chapter 2standards. Thus this representsa significant shift in practice,from requiring at least as muchparking as necessary to meetpotential demand, to allowing nomore than is consistent withpolicy to reduce demand.Regional Planning Bodies andlocal authorities may adopt morerigorous standards, whereappropriate. Maximum parkingstandards do not apply to smalldevelopments.Parking additional to maximumparking standards can beprovided where:● An applicant hasdemonstrated that a higherlevel of parking is needed,though the applicant shouldalso show the measures theyare taking (for instance in thedesign, location andimplementation of theproposal) to minimise theneed for parking;● Where retail and leisuredevelopments are located ina town centre, or on an edgeof centre site, provided thelocal authority is satisfiedthat the parking willgenuinely serve the towncentre as a whole.More details about PPG13appear in Annex A.A strategic approach toparking standardsLocal authorities are required tocomply with national maximumparking standards. Theexistence of national andregional standards shouldremove the element ofcompetition between localauthorities based upon levels ofparking provision.Regional Transport Strategies(as part of Regional SpatialStrategies) must set a regionalframework of maximum parkingstandards. These cannot bestricter than national standards,but they can be more rigorous.Such Strategies have a majorrole to play in coordinatingplanning policies for the locationof development with policies forparking standards and charges.In particular, it can help avoidwasteful competition betweenlocations and authorities basedaround the supply and cost ofparking.In considering the risk ofdevelopers relocating ongrounds of parking provision, anumber of points should beborne in mind:●●●Developers and investorswho bring forward schemeswith excessive parking mustbe encouraged to changedevelopment formats. Forexample, schemes couldserve more local catchmentsthat are accessible bywalking, cycling and publictransport, or incorporatehome delivery services;Not all types of developmentare vulnerable to beingswitched to other areas. Forexample, a supermarket willbe planned to serve aparticular residential marketand is unlikely to berelocated, whereas aspeculative businessdevelopment is relatively“footloose”;“Giving in” to developerdemands for higher levels ofparking perpetuates theproblems that PPG13policies are trying to solve,and will therefore store upproblems for the localauthority in the long term.Wales, Scotland andNorthern IrelandThe provisions of the RoadTraffic Regulation Act 1984 andthe Road Traffic Act 1991 extendto England, Wales and Scotland.However, the TrafficManagement Act 2004 willrepeal the DecriminalisedParking Enforcement (DPE)provisions in the Road Traffic Actin England and Wales but not inScotland. Further informationabout DPE provisions appears inChapter 9.Responsibility for the parkingand traffic regulation provisionsin Scotland and Wales has nowbeen devolved respectively tothe Scottish Executive and to the

National and Regional Transport Planning Policies 23National Assembly of Wales. Thefollowing procedure regulationsapply to the making of LocalAuthority Orders:●The Local Authorities’ TrafficOrders (Procedure) (Englandand Wales) Regulations1996● The Local Authorities’ TrafficOrders (Procedure)(Scotland) Regulations 1999.Highways and traffic controlmatters in Northern Ireland areunder Central Governmentcontrol and there is no equivalentof local highway and trafficauthorities there.References(1) DOT, 1997, Study of Parking andTraffic Demand: Stage Two: BristolCase Study: Parking ControlStrategies: Assessment of DemandChanges, report by MVA.(2) DETR, 1997, Planning PolicyGuidance on Transport (PPG13):Implementation 1994-1996.DETR, July 1998, A New Deal for Transport:Better for Everyone. TheGovernment’s White Paper on theFuture of Transport.DETR, December 1998, Breaking theLogjam.DETR, March 2000, Guidance on Full LocalTransport Plans.Government Office for London, February1998, Traffic Management and ParkingGuidance for London.DETR, Traffic Advice Leaflet 5/95, Parkingfor disabled people.DETR, July 2000 Transport 2010 The 10Year Plan.DfT, Transport Act 2000.DfT, Traffic Management Act 2004.DfT, The Future of Transport 2004.Strategic Rail Authority, November 2001,Land Use Planning Statement.Strategic Rail Authority, January 2002, TheStrategic Plan.Department of Transport, 1995, Circular1/95, Guidance on DecriminalisedParking Enforcement Outside London.PPG1: General Policy and Principles(February 1997).PPG2: Green Belts (January 1995).PPG3: Housing (March 2000).PPG6: Town Centres and RetailDevelopment (June 1996).PPG11: Regional Planning (October 2000).PPG12: Development Plans (December1999).PPG13: Transport (March 2001).

Chapter 3Powers andProcessesIntroductionNational and regional policy hasto be interpreted andimplemented at the local levelthrough development plans andLocal Transport Plans. Thischapter covers the main powersand processes that are relevantto parking, grouped under twoheadings:● 1. The planning system,particularly the role ofparking in TransportAssessments and TravelPlans;● 2. Traffic and transportpowers and processescovering on-street and offstreetparking includingparking charges.The Planning SystemDevelopment Plans andFrameworksThe Government has recentlyamended the planning system toimprove its effectiveness (1).The changes include theremoval of Structure Plans.Instead, District, Unitary andMetropolitan Councils shouldprepare Local DevelopmentFrameworks, which wouldreplace the Local and UnitaryDevelopment Plans. TheseLocal Development Frameworkswould not be fully site specific,although some areas of changewould have site specific policies.Regional Spatial Strategies,including those prepared forsub-regions, would provide thestrategic overview.For these guidelines, referencesto development plans are takento include all planningdocuments that will form a“material consideration” indecisions on individual planningapplications. Thus draft reviseddevelopment plans andstatutory supplementaryplanning guidance documents,and development briefs adoptedby resolution of the localauthority will all form a key partof the planning framework. Forbrevity and simplicity, the entireframework is referred to as theDevelopment Plan.The planning system operateswith the principal objective ofregulating the development anduse of land in the public interest.It has two main parts: aframework of developmentplans and development control.A third element is the role of theSecretary of State indetermining planning policy, anddeciding planning appeals andsome important applications.Following a decade of arelatively laissez faire approachto land use planning, the 1990Town and Country Planning Act(amended by the Planning andCompensation Act 1991), reinstituteda plan-led system withdecisions on individual planningapplications being made inaccordance with theDevelopment Plan. TheDevelopment Plan has anChapter Acknowledgements 3Powers andProcesses

26 Chapter 3important function in providingthe framework for parking at newdevelopments, including settingout the maximum amount ofparking that can be provided indifferent circumstances, and theplanning obligations anddeveloper contributions that maybe sought.Following the “plan-led” systemthere has been an increasingemphasis on positive planning toachieve urban regeneration andrevival – a so-called “urbanrenaissance” – spearheaded bythe report of the Urban TaskForce, and the subsequentUrban White Paper. There is alarge array of guidance and bestpractice documentation, in whichthe need to reform the approachto parking provision andmanagement is a prominenttheme. Some references areprovided at the end of thischapter.Responsibility for preparingdevelopment plans lies at locallevel, with the local planningauthority responsible drafting theplan, consulting on it and holdinga public inquiry. Once theauthority has received the inquiryreport and adopted the Plan it issubmitted to the Secretary ofState for approval. Therefore,although local authorities haveconsiderable discretion inpreparing plans, they should notreceive the approval of theSecretary of State if they arecontrary to the relevant nationalor regional polices.Parking policies and standardswill be a key part of these newplans and frameworks. Untilrecently development plansconfined their content on parkingto the specification of parkingstandards in new developments.The requirement now to specifymaximum standards means thatthe scope of parking-relatedpolicies will need to bebroadened. The parkingelements will now need toconsider:●Use of a wide range of toolssuch as charges and onstreetcontrols;●Use of parking as part of anintegrated transport andplanning package forparticular areas;● Requirements for applicantsto submit TransportAssessments, with proposedparking as an output of theanalysis;● Indications of developercontributions that will besought towards the cost oftransport provision andinvestment; and● Supplementary PlanningGuidance for on-street andurban design and othermatters where parking will bean important factor.Development ControlDevelopment control is theprocess whereby decisions aretaken on individual applicationsfor development. Given the keyrole of parking provision as apolicy instrument, negotiation ofthe amount of parking in a newdevelopment should featureprominently in the developmentcontrol process.The amount, type and design ofparking are a critical part of anyplanning application. However,the focus is moving away from adirect simple relationshipbetween the amount of floorspace in a new development andthe amount of parking required.The focus now is on determiningparking provision in accordancewith policy, and specifically inrelation to accessibility. A moresophisticated approach isdemanded, using an overallTransport Assessment of thedevelopment, whereby thedemand for parking, and themethod of its accommodation isan output of the analysis.The amount of parking providedas part of a new development isnow subject to a maximum level.Whilst the overall maximum levelfor developments over a certainthreshold size is specified inPPG13, there will be othermaxima determined in theregional transport strategy, andwithin that by the local authorityas part of its Development Plan.

Powers and Processes 27There will thus be a hierarchy ofmaximum parking levels, but theonly one relevant to a particulardevelopment will be the lowestone.Local authorities will determinemaximum parking levels fordifferent types of development,and these may vary betweendifferent parts of the localauthority area. For example, thelowest levels are likely to be setfor town centres and other areasthat are highly accessible bynon-car modes of travel. Thehighest levels allowed will be forareas with less good access bynon-car means, although thismust be done in such a way asnot to create the perverse effectof encouraging development insuch locations. To meet thisrequirement, the range of levelsshould be kept as small aspossible.The hierarchy of parkingstandards is shown in Table 3.1,which also includes a theoreticalexample of regional and localstandards.The amount of parking in anyindividual development would benegotiated as low as possible,and no higher than given in thelast row of the table. The figuresin that row would be specific fordifferent kinds of development.They may also include types andsizes of development for whichmaximum parking levels are notspecified in national or regionalguidance, but where the localauthority has adopted its ownstandards.Transport AssessmentsPPG13 places particularemphasis on accessibility todevelopment by public transport,walking and cycling as part of amore integrated approach toplanning and transport. To helpimplement this approach it isnecessary to work out howpeople will access newdevelopment, including theproportions by each mode oftravel. The proportion using carsthus becomes an importantfactor in determining the amountand type of parking that shouldbe provided. PPG13 introducedthe Transport Assessment (TA)as the mechanism whereby thiscan be implemented. TAs are tobe submitted alongside planningapplications for newdevelopment that havesignificant transport implications.Applications requiring a TA arefor those developments overcertain threshold sizes set out inthe table of maximum parkingstandards (see Annex A),although the planning authoritycan also require a TA for smallerdevelopments if they havepotentially significant impacts.The three main elements of aTransport Assessment are:● Assessing the travelcharacteristics of theproposal;● Setting out measures toinfluence travel to the site;and● Assessing the transportimpacts of the development.The ODPM is preparing goodpractice guidance (2) on thepreparation, scope and use ofTAs. The Scottish Executivepublished guidance on TransportAssessments in 2002. (3)TAs provide a broader approachto assessing developmentTable 3.1 Example of how maximum parking levels are set.PPG13 maximum parking levelsNational maximum parking levels – all areas (fixed)Regional Transport Strategy maximum parking levels (example)Rural areas Urban areas Town and citycentres90% of 70% of 50% ofnational maxima national maxima national maximaLocal authority Development Plan maximum parking levels (example)Rural areas Suburban areas Inner areas and Town centrespublic transportnodes100% of regional 80% of regional 60% of regional 50% of regionalmaximum maximum for maximum for maximum forurban areas urban areas urban areas,and apresumption ofzero privatenonresidentialprovision

28 Chapter 3proposals than previously wasthe case with Traffic ImpactAssessments (TIAs). They startby considering the accessibilityto the proposed sites by allmodes and the likely modal splitof journeys to and from the site.They also set out details ofmeasures proposed to improveaccess by public transport,walking and cycling, to minimisethe amount of parkingassociated with the proposal andto mitigate any resulting impacts.Where it is shown to benecessary, the required modesplit to the development mayrequire intervention by means ofa Travel Plan, which should alsobe submitted with the planningapplication.Parking as an outputThe key point in relation toparking is that the TA willdemonstrate the number ofparking places as an output ofthe process; not an input as withTIAs. Parking levels should bedetermined after access to thesite by all modes has been fullyassessed, and after the impact ofmeasures to increase access bynon-car modes has been takeninto account. The role of parkingstandards in this will be toindicate to those carrying out aTA the maximum amount ofparking that will be allowed. Thiscan be compared with the outputof the TA. If the initialcalculations indicate a demandfor car access (and henceparking) above the level that isallowed, then an iterativeprocess of design andnegotiation will be required tobring the development schemeinto line with policy. Changes willbe necessary to one or more ofthe elements influencing cardemand.Applicants should beencouraged to devise schemeswith parking significantly belowthe maximum allowed.Applicants may also proposelower levels. In either caseapplicants will need todemonstrate and justify theirconfidence in the take up of noncarmodes in order to ensure thatthe development will operatewithout creating problems ofoverspill parking in adjacentstreets.Area-wide TAsIn areas that are subject to manyplanning applications, the needfor intensive negotiation onindividual applications can begreatly reduced if an area-wideassessment of accessibility iscarried out. Amongst otherthings, this can provide a moreprecise indication of the level ofparking that will be allowed.Such assessments may formpart of development briefingexercises, undertaken by localauthorities or their agents. TheODPM is also offering guidanceon the strategic assessment ofaccessibility. (4)Design of parking andother accessThe TA guidance also providesadvice on the design of parkingin new developments. Parkingprovision should be sited so asnot to obstruct pedestrian andcycle routes or access to publictransport. It should not be given“pride of place” close to the mainentrance to the development,and access by foot and cycleshould have at least equalpriority. An exception to this maybe parking for the mobilityimpaired (Blue/Orange badgeholders), which should be asclose as possible to a fullyaccessible entrance of thedevelopment. This newemphasis on non-car modes inTAs should help ensure that offsitehighways work and on-sitelayouts incorporate high qualityaccessibility for pedestrians,cyclists and public transportusers as an integral part.Travel PlansPPG13 indicates that therelevance of Travel Plans toplanning lies in the delivery ofsustainable transport objectives,including reductions in car use(particularly single occupancyjourneys). There is little point inrequesting or agreeing lowerlevels of parking associated with

Powers and Processes 29a development if this means thatthe viability of the development isundermined. One response is tochange the format of thedevelopment to lower theparking demand. Another is touse various means to encourageaccess other than by car, andthis will involve the use of TravelPlans (see Figure 3.1).PPG13 argues that Travel Plansshould be submitted alongsideplanning applications that arelikely to have significanttransport implications. Theexistence of a Travel Plan,however, is not a reason for anunacceptable development to beapproved.There is no standard format orcontent for Travel Plans. Furtheradvice is available from anumber of sources (see thereferences at the end of thischapter).Travel Plans should containmeasurable outputs tied to aparticular date or period. Theyshould ideally be related to anymode share or car mode sharetargets in the Local TransportPlan. They should also set outarrangements for monitoringprogress, as well as changes oractions required andenforcement “triggers”, if theagreed targets are not met. Theymay be made binding eitherthrough conditions attached tothe planning permission orthrough related planningcontributions.There are many measures thatcan be included in Travel Plansdirected at discouraging car use.The following are examples:provided by companies fortheir employees, or cashcompensation for parkingspaces foregone.The Government has shown aconsiderable commitment toTravel Plans, funding localauthority Travel Plan coordinatorposts as part of theLocal Transport Plan process.However, there is still muchresistance to Travel Plans,especially in parts of thedevelopment industry, with manypeople seeing them as justanother “hoop to jump through”to obtain planning permission.There is also concern about whatpowers local authorities have toensure their enforcement if thetargets set in them are notachieved. Other parts of thedevelopment industry, however,do appear to recognise theirvalue in making developmentsmore sustainable and hencemore commercially viable.Developers are generally morewilling to support the TA andTravel Plan process when it isuniformly and fairly applied, andwhere it leads to more profitableuse of the development site.Planning Conditions andContributionsIndividual planning decisions canhave planning conditions andcontributions attached to them. ASmallerdevelopmentformatFigure 3.1 The “ReconciliationProcess” in Transport Assessment.●●●Reducing the level of on-siteparking;Charging for parking;Allocating all or a proportionof parking spaces to carsharers so as to reducesingle occupancy journeys;Different landuse mix (eg,moreresidential)Less ParkingBetter provisionfor walk, cycle,public transport●Issuing information on travelchoices to occupants ofdevelopments, for examplethrough estate agents; andTravel Planmeasures●Financial incentives such aspublic transport travel cards

30 Chapter 3local authority should set out itsmain requirements andexpectations in the DevelopmentPlan and the Local TransportPlan, while more specificrequirements should bedetermined following the outputof the Transport Assessment.PPG13 argues that“Local planning authoritiesshould take a more proactiveapproach towards theimplementation of planningpolicies on transport, andshould set out sufficientdetail in their developmentplans to provide atransparent basis for the useof planning conditions ifappropriate, and fornegotiation with developerson the use of planningobligations as appropriate, todeliver more sustainabletransport solutions.”Planning ConditionsPlanning conditions must bejustified in accordance with theGovernment’s Circular 11/95 (5).They can be used to require onsitetransport measures andfacilities as part of thedevelopment or to prohibitdevelopment on the site until aparticular event has occurred.These can include specifying thenumber and type of parkingspaces, including for disabledpeople, and the managementand use of parking spaces, forexample either to ensure thatpriority is given to certaincategories of people, or thatspaces are available for shareduse. It is important to note that‘specifying’ in this context relatesto the number agreed followingany negotiation between theplanning authority and thedeveloper, taking account of theTransport Assessmentcalculations, and being no higherthan the appropriate maximumlevel specified in theDevelopment Plan (see Table 3.1above).PPG13 states that developersshould not be required to providemore parking than theythemselves wish. It does,however, allow planningconditions to specify the numberof parking spaces in certaincircumstances, for instance atthe conclusion of a TA processfor a particular development andin relation to parking for disabledpersons, but in essence localauthorities should no longer“require” extra parking provision.In practice local authorities andothers have been very slow tograsp this point and to changetheir practices accordingly.Planning ContributionsPlanning contributions,(previously planning obligationsand known frequently as section106 agreements), areagreements between the localplanning authority and adeveloper that are negotiated inthe context of granting aplanning consent. They provide ameans of ensuring thatdevelopers contribute towardsthe infrastructure and servicesthat the local authority believesare necessary to facilitate theproposed development.Contributions can be in cash orin kind.As a matter of good practice, theDevelopment Plan can indicatethe likely nature and scope ofcontributions that will be soughtto transport improvements (andother things) as part of adevelopment in a particular areaor on key sites. This will givegreater certainty to developersas to what will be expected aspart of the development proposaland also provide a firmer basisfor investment decisions in theplan area. Circular 1/97 (6) setsout statutory and policy tests. Inparticular it sets out the so-calledNecessity Test, which requiresthat contributions (obligations)be:● Necessary● Relevant to planning● Directly related to theproposed development● Fair and reasonable, relatedin scale and kind to theproposed development● Reasonable in all otherrespects.

Powers and Processes 31However, it should be noted thatthe Government is consideringissuing new guidance.With parking provisionnegotiated at levels below thatwhich would accommodate“unfettered” demand, it will inmany cases be necessary toimplement measures that bothencourage and provide foraccess and travel by othermodes, and to control carparking on streets and roadsnear to the development.Contributions from the developercan be sought towards the costsof such measures, and may beessential in order for thedevelopment to function asintended.PPG13 points out that, sincethere are no longer minimumparking requirements fordevelopment, “it is inappropriatefor a local authority to seekcommuted payments basedpurely around the lack of parkingon site.” The attraction ofcommuted payments in lieu ofparking spaces not provided onsite was that they could becalculated to a simple formula,such as £3000 per space.The new approach needs to bemore sophisticated, but mustalso appear to the developer tobe logical and fair. Paymentsshould be negotiated on thebasis that the development willgenerate demands for access,and contributions may beappropriate towards the costs ofany necessary accessimprovements. Since access isto be no longer simply access bycar, the contributions logicallyshould also relate to modes oftravel other than the car. Forexample, they could becontributions towards theprovision of Park-and-Rideschemes where this will improveaccessibility to the site by publictransport, or towards the cost ofintroducing on-street parkingcontrols in the vicinity of the siteto ensure that the lack ofprovision on-site does not lead tolocal environmental or safetyproblems. Other contributionsmight be towards the cost ofpedestrian crossing facilities, buspriority and other facilities, shortterm“pump-priming” of publictransport services, cycle facilitiesand Travel Plans. The measuresto be negotiated will depend onthe circumstances, and there isno restriction provided that thecriteria laid down in Circular 1/97are met.Local authorities have foundnegotiations more successfulwhere:●●●The improvements requiredare clearly set out in localDevelopment or Transportplans;The contributions likely to besought from developers areindicated in the DevelopmentPlan; andThe contribution is tied inwith a realistic timetable forimplementing transportimprovements.Transport Powers andProcessesLocal Transport PlansLocal Transport Plans (LTPs) areprepared on a five-year cycle.The first round of LTPs, forfinancial years 2001/2 to 2005/6were submitted to Governmentin July 2000 and the second iscurrently scheduled for July2005. These plans include astatement of local transportpolicies and a bid for capital andhighway maintenance funds toimplement the policies. Amonitoring report is generallyrequired annually, with the optionto submit further bids for majorcapital schemes that had notbeen fully worked up at the timeof the main submission. (Someauthorities deemed to be“excellent” are excused fromsubmitting full Annual MonitoringReports, although in practicemany do so.) Capital funds forthe implementation of parkingschemes in support of LTPpolicies can be accessedthrough the LTP, but revenuecosts should be covered byincome from the scheme. Countyand Unitary authorities makeLTP bids. In Metropolitan Areas

32 Chapter 3the Metropolitan Councils andthe Passenger TransportAuthority are required to submitjoint LTPs.Local authorities haveconsiderable discretion indeveloping their LTPs, and arerequired to consult on them.Indeed the draft guidance for thesecond round of LTPs offers theprospect of more flexibility thanfor the first round. However, theSecretary of State, who willexpect LTPs to reflect nationalpolicies if funding allocations arebeing sought, approves thefunding bids. In 2000 mostregions did not have a RegionalTransport Strategy (RTS) inplace, and those that were inexistence had not been fullydeveloped in accordance withPPG 11, which was only in draftform at the time. It is expectedthat all RTS will be revised by thetime the next full LTPsubmissions are made in 2005with the RTS providing thestrategic framework.The LTP sets the context forparking as it relates to transportpolicy and management.It may include, for example:●●Investment in parking andrelated infrastructure,including park-and-ride;Parking control schemes,including conversion todecriminalised parkingenforcement;● Policies for the setting ofparking tariffs and charges,in line with regional policy;● Reference to planningpolicies for parking in newdevelopment;● Investment in alternativemeans of access inconnection with reducedparking;●Parking changes that mayresult from Travel Plans;● A parking strategy includingschemes and policies.Guidance on how to develop aParking Strategy is set out inChapter 4.Transport powersThe transport powers relating tothe provision and managementof parking are outlined below.The main provisions arecontained in three Acts ofParliament:● The Road Traffic RegulationAct 1984 (the 1984 Act);● The Road Traffic Act 1991(the 1991 Act); and● The Traffic Management Act2004 (the 2004 Act).In addition, workplace parkinglevy powers are contained in theTransport Act 2000, and in theGreater London Authority Act1999 for London. There are alsovarious London Acts coveringdifferent levels of parkingenforcement.The AuthoritiesresponsibleLocal authority requirements forcar parking, especially off-streetcar parking, are a significantdeterminant of the amount ofland required for newdevelopments and, as such, area key influence on the ability toprovide sustainable patterns ofdevelopment. As such, it will befor the local planning authorities,working in conjunction with localhighway authorities andRegional Planning Bodies, whowill largely set the overall parkingstandards throughout thecountry, with particular emphasison new and converteddevelopment. However, it will befor the local highway authority (orthe authority responsible forpreparing the Local TransportPlan), who, as the bodyresponsible for maintaining thehighway, will be responsible forthe development of a ParkingStrategy in conjunction withother authorities andorganisations. The situation inpractice will be more complex,because of agency agreementsbetween authorities and thestatutory involvement of bodieslike the Highways Agency.

Powers and Processes 33Road Traffic RegulationAct 1984The 1984 Act (as amended) setsthe legal basis for making trafficregulation orders (TROs), whichare necessary for schemes tocontrol and charge for parking.The powers contained in this Actare wide and flexible, and thepurpose of any order can be toachieve one or more of thefollowing:● Avoiding danger;● Preventing damage;●●●Facilitating the passage ofany class of vehicle;Preventing the use of roadsby vehicular traffic which isunsuitable;Preserving the character of aroad for pedestrians andhorses; and● Preserving or improving theamenities of an area.Essentially there are powersavailable to traffic authorities tomake a TRO for any scheme totackle the above purposes,whether on-street or off-street,and whether or not charges areto be made for the use of parkingspaces.There are separate powers foroutside London and withinLondon.More details about thislegislation and the processes formaking a TRO are set out inAnnex B.Road Traffic Act 1991To tackle the enforcement ofparking regulations moreeffectively, powers were given tolocal authorities in 1991 to takeover enforcement of parkingregulations from the Police. Thismeant a change of action againstoffenders based on civil ratherthan criminal law, a processreferred to as “DecriminalisedParking Enforcement” or DPE.The 1984 Act provisions for themaking of Traffic RegulationOrders are needed alongside the1991 Act.For details about this Act and thedecriminalisation of parkingoffences in particular see AnnexB.Traffic Management Act2004This Act applies to England andWales but not to Scotland andNorthern Ireland. In additionthere are a number of specificreferences to circumstances inLondon.Different parts of the Act arecoming into force at differenttimes and implementation mostlyis linked to the publication ofstatutory guidance, the first ofwhich on the networkmanagement duty was publishedin July 2004. The Act is set out inseven parts. Of particularreference to parking is thenetwork management dutyplaced upon local trafficauthorities; the civic enforcementof traffic contraventions,including in particular those onparking offences and on parkingprovisions in specialenforcement areas; and onsurplus parking income. Forfurther details about this Act seeAnnex B.Road User Charges andWorkplace ParkingLeviesLocal authorities are providedwith the power to introduce twofiscal measures designed to limitcar use, and to generate revenuefor local transport improvements.These are Road User Chargingschemes (RUC) and WorkplaceParking Levies (WPL) that, ifimplemented, would be inaddition to the scope for parkingcontrols and charges providedby earlier Acts. The Transport Act2000 gave the necessary powersto English and Welsh localhighway authorities. In GreaterLondon similar powers weregranted in the Greater LondonAuthority Act 1999 and wereused for the Central LondonCongestion Charging Scheme,which started in February 2003.More details about workplaceparking levies and road usercharges appear in Chapter 7 andAnnex B. Currently, Nottingham

34 Chapter 3City Council is the only authorityconsidering introducing a WPLscheme.Parking chargesUnlike workplace parking levies,charges for publicly availableparking are widely used. By 2002there were no more than ahandful of towns where all publicparking was free of charge. The1984 Act contains the main legalprovisions with regard to parkingcharges.Local authorities may:● Charge for parking in offstreetcar parks (undersection 35 of the 1984 Act);● Charge for parking in onstreetparking places (undersections 45 and 46 of the1984 Act).Charging for on-street parkingrequires an order to be made. Anorder is not required for off-streetparking unless penalties are tobe imposed through penaltynotices. Privately owned carparks for public use mustoperate without an order, unlessthere is an agreement with thelocal authority.The legislation provides forpayment to be made to a meteror ticket machine, or indicated bya parking device (which can be acard, disc, token or other similardevice). It also provides for theissue of permits (with or withoutcharge) allowing vehicles to useparking places.Provisions can also be made foron-street parking places to bereserved for special categories(or classes) of vehicle and forspecial charges to be made orpermits issued for those classesof vehicle.Section 46 of the 1984 Actprovides for “initial” and “excess”charges at on-street parkingplaces and Section 47 makes itan offence to park for a periodlonger than the excess chargeperiod or to fail to pay the initialcharge. Where enforcement isdecriminalised, the 1991 Actreplaces these with “parking”and “penalty” charges.When introducing on-streetparking schemes, localauthorities must have regard tothe purpose of the powersincorporated in both the 1984and 1991 Acts. In particular, theyare not fiscal measures. The aimshould not be to raise revenue,but to serve a policy objectivesuch as to reduce congestion.However if, as a result of settingenforcement or parking chargesto meet the objectives of thescheme, income exceeds thatrequired simply to coverexpenditure, this is acceptable.Further advice on parking policyand charges is given in LocalAuthority Circular 1/95, (7 and 8).The advice for Londonauthorities is somewhat widerthan Circular 1/95 (for example itincludes advice on permit policyand charges) but it is a usefulreference for any local authority.Additional parkingchargesUnder decriminalised parking,the penalty charge, any chargespaid to secure the release of aclamped (immobilised) orimpounded vehicle (after towaway),and storage and disposalcharges are known collectivelyas “additional parking charges”.Additional parking charges areset, in London, by the Associationof London Government’sTransport and EnvironmentalCommittee (subject to theapproval of the Mayor of London)and in the rest of England by theSecretary of State. There arecurrently three penalty chargebands in London and anotherthree for areas outside London.Use of surplus fundsChapter 10 and Annex Bprovides further details on suchfunds. There are different rulesfor the use of surplus funds foron- and off-street parking, withthe latter being much lessconstrained. Inclusion of localenvironmental improvements is arecently added item.

Powers and Processes 35Residential parkingA national maximum parkingstandard is provided forresidential development. PPG 3(9) requires off street parking innew residential developments tonot exceed on average 1.5parking spaces per dwelling. Itshould be emphasised thatlimited parking in residentialdevelopment must be taken intoaccount by local authorities inorder to contribute to the widerobjective of good urban designand making the best use of land.This guidance does not apply toScotland, Wales and NorthernIreland.Residents’ ParkingPermitsThe 1984 Act contains the mainpowers for local authorities toprovide permits for residents orcertain other classes of user.Such permits confer parkingprivileges, usually in return forthe payment of a fee. On-streetresidents’ parking bays can bedefined either for the sole use ofpermit holders, shared withvisitors paying at a meter or insome other way. Chapter 7 hasmore details.References(1) Planning and Compulsory PurchaseAct 2004.(2) ODPM 2003 Transport Assessment:good practice guide for developmentproposals (forthcoming).(3) Scottish Executive, 2002, Guide toTransport Assessment forDevelopment Proposals in Scotlandresearch report and Scottish Executive2003 Draft consultation guide onTransport Assessment forDevelopment Proposals in Scotland(forthcoming).(4) ODPM 2003 Accessibility in Plans:good practice guide for regional andlocal plans.(5) DoE, 1995, Circular 11/95 Use ofConditions in Planning Permissions,(Welsh Office version 35/95).(6) DOE, 1997 Circular 1/97.(7) DoE, Local Authority Circular 1/95,Guidance on Decriminalised ParkingEnforcement Outside London.(8) DETR, 1998, Traffic Management andParking Guidance for London. (WelshOffice Circular 26/95).(9) PPG3 – Housing DETR 2000.Road Traffic Regulation Act, 1984.Additional parking charges in London.Penalty charge Band A £100Band B £80Band C £60Recovery of towed-away vehicle£150 (max)Recovery of clamped (immobilised vehicle)£65 (fixed)Pound storage charge (per day)£25 (max)Vehicle disposal charges£65 (max)There is a discount of 50% for payment within 14 days of the issue of aPenalty Charge Notice.Additional parking charges outside London.Penalty charge Band 1* £60Band 2* £50Band 3* £40Recovery of towed-away vehicle£120 (max)Recovery of clamped (immobilised vehicle)£40 (max)Pound storage charge (per day)£12 (max)Vehicle disposal charges£50 (max)Note * - There is no official way of referring to the three penalty charge bandsoutside London. This note uses numbers to avoid confusion with the LondonBands.(Source: British Parking Association, February 2002, Technical Note 1Charging for parking - some considerations and ALG 2004).Town and Country Planning Act, 1991.Road Traffic Act, 1991.Greater London Authority Act 1999.Transport Act 2000.Traffic Management Act 2004.DfT, 2000, A Travel Plan Resource Pack forEmployers.DfT, 2002, Making Travel Plans Work, asuite of documents including ResearchReport, Case Study Summaries, andLessons from UK Case Studies.DfT/ODPM, 2002, Using the PlanningSystem to Secure Travel Plans: Bestpractice guide.DETR, 1998, Places Streets and Movementa companion guide to Design Bulletin32, Residential Road and Footpaths.Llewelyn-Davies, 2000, Urban DesignCompendium, for English Partnershipsand The Housing Corporation.Llewelyn-Davies, 1998, SustainableResidential Quality: New Approachesto Urban Living, published by LPAC,with DETR, Government Office forLondon.Llewelyn-Davies, 2000, SustainableResidential Quality: Exploring theHousing Potential of Large Sites,published by LPAC, with DETR,Government Office for London, TheHousing Corporation, LondonTransport.DETR/CABE, 2000, By design: Urbandesign in the planning system: towardsbetter practice.

36 Chapter 3DTLR/CABE, 2001, Better places to live: Bydesign.The Institution of Highways &Transportation, 1999, Planning forPublic Transport in Developments.The Institution of Highways &Transportation, Transport in the UrbanEnvironment.The DfT has also published a range ofTraffic Advisory leaflets and LocalTransport Notes that cover many of thedetailed aspects of design.

Chapter 4Preparing aParking StrategyIntroductionLocal transport authorities areno longer required to prepare aparking strategy as part of theirLocal Transport Plan (LTP). Itnonetheless provides anopportunity to set out acomprehensive policy anddelivery statement aboutparking within the context ofoverall transport and land usepolicies. This chapter sets outguidance on the process ofpreparing such a Strategy,including the definition of itsscope and purpose, and thevarious steps involved. Thesesteps are summarised in Figure4.1.Requirements of aParking StrategyA good strategy needs to meet anumber of requirements, andthe process of preparationshould be designed to ensurethis. Although the list ofrequirements may appeardaunting, a Parking Strategymay need to resolve difficult andpotentially controversial choices,and so must be both technicallyand procedurally robust. Astrategy should:● Be consistent with andrespond to national andregional guidance andobjectives;●Reflect and contribute to thevision for the area, forexample, as expressed inthe Community Strategy andthe guidance on itspreparation (1);● Be well rooted in relevantlocal policies and contributeto wider communityobjectives, both transportand non-transport related;● Respond to localcircumstances and publicconcerns with clearobjectives;●●Make the right connectionswith related strategies, forexample, for economicregeneration, crimeprevention, streetscapeenhancement;Be internally consistent andtechnically robust;● Show how adequate levelsof parking enforcement willbe provided;● Be based upon soundconsultation and widestakeholder involvement;● Have strong political andlocal support;● Have a realisticimplementation timetable;●Include a business plan thatenables parking costs to becovered by revenues; and● Include a framework tomonitor performance andachievement.Local authorities should ensurethat the programme ofpreparation should meet theabove criteria.There will be a need forconsultation and involvement ofChapter Acknowledgements 4Preparing aParking Strategy

38 Chapter 4Figure 4.1 Developing a ParkingStrategy.interested parties. This is a topicof major importance and is dealtwith separately in Chapter 8.Political supportIt is important that, as theStrategy is developed, the keyelements receive strong politicaland local support. This mayrequire the involvement of a localforum or steering group as wellas the elected members of thecouncil(s). Gaining supportshould be easier if proposalsfocus on locally acknowledgedproblems, but will be neededalso for policies with a widerpurpose, in particular thoseaimed at reducing the demandfor car travel.Support for the principles of astrategy will not necessarilytranslate into support forindividual schemes or policies.Nevertheless, support for thestrategy is vital to facilitate theapproval of contentious localdetails (such as charging onstreetin areas where parking iscurrently free, or pricing longstayparkers out of central offstreetcar parks).National and regional policy contextLocal policy context:Development Plan and Local Transport PlanInvolvement ofstakeholdersSteps 1 and 2 Identify area and main issuesStep 6CausalrelationshipsStep 5Definition ofproblems andopportunitiesStep 4Research andinformation,and publicconcernsStep 3StakeholderForum eg, public,Police, electedMembersMajor variationStep 7Define objectives forparking interventionStep 8Formulate the main policymeasures and schemesStep 10Funding and financialforecastInformal consultation, eg, localforums and transport operators.Strategic consultation eg, privatesectorpublic parking providers,planning authorities and publictransport operators.Step 9Assess impacts,refine if necessaryMinorvariationStep 11Programme of interventionAll stakeholdersImplementationStep 12MonitoringAll stakeholders

Preparing a Parking Strategy 39Early stages in the production ofa Parking Strategy that willrequire consideration by electedMembers are:●●Agreeing and confirming thatparking deserves attentionand resources;Defining links between theParking Strategy, the LocalTransport Plan, and theDevelopment Plan; and● Seeking agreement to theprinciples of the overallParking Strategy, its aims,objectives and strategicpolicy tools (eg, the decisionwhether to decriminaliseparking enforcement or tointroduce parking tariffs);Other key stages for memberinvolvement and formaldecisions within the process are:● Seeking approval forinvestigating the feasibility ofan individual scheme orCPZ;● Undertaking publicconsultation to define ascheme boundary andoperational elements (levelof charges, hours of control,etc);● Seeking approval toadvertise Traffic RegulationOrders; and●Deciding on any unresolvedobjections that arise.TimescaleThe time taken to prepare andadopt a Parking Strategy willdepend on the “maturity” ofparking control and managementin the area concerned. Whereparking control as a policyinstrument is long established(as in central Londonauthorities), the Strategy willconsist largely of bringingtogether different aspects ofcurrent practice, together withany adjustments required. In anauthority with relatively littleexperience of parking control, orwhere major changes areproposed (such as converting toDecriminalised ParkingEnforcement), then time may beneeded for several rounds ofrefinement and decision making,and the process may take up totwo or three years.Ideally, a Parking Strategy will beprepared or updated as part ofthe LTP process, thus keepingconsultation and administrativetasks to a minimum. Neithershould be delayed, however,simply to bring this about.Responsibility forpreparationA parking strategy will be theresponsibility of the transportauthority, ie the authoritycharged with preparing the LTP.It is within the LTP that a ParkingStrategy should sit, forming anintegral part of the overallstrategy, contributing to itsobjectives and integrating withother policy areas.However, the management ofparking does not fall neatly underthe control of one authority ororganisation but involves manyparties, both public and private.A Parking Strategy must,therefore, be prepared with theinvolvement of other authoritiesand organisations.Unitary authorities haveresponsibility for both on and offstreetpublic parking, though thestrategy preparation processmay involve more than onedepartment. In areas with twotierauthorities, joint working willbe necessary in order to coordinateon-street and off-streetparking policies, planning andoperations.In both single and two-tier areas,partnerships may also benecessary with other bodies,such as the police and otherorganisations involved in parkingsupply.Likewise, responsibility forenforcement may be splitbetween a number of bodies,notably the police and trafficauthorities. The owners or theircontractors undertake theenforcement of private car parks,and as such remains a sector ofparking enforcement that islargely unregulated. A ParkingStrategy will need to takeaccount of what can be

40 Chapter 4monitored and enforced and itspreparation must involve thesedifferent enforcement agencies.Involvement of planningauthoritiesWhether or not the transport andland use planning functionsreside within the same authority,the officers and electedmembers in respect of bothfunctions should work together.The involvement of the planningauthority is necessary to:● Provide or coordinate thecommunity strategy andvision;● Ensure compatibilitybetween on-street and offstreetpolicies;●●●●Formulate appropriate streetand public realm designguidance that takes fullaccount of on-street parkingand loading;Establish maximum parkingstandards and a suitablemechanism for determininglevels of provision inindividual developments;Determine the policy forparking provision in relationto the conversion ofresidential properties toprovide more (or less)dwellings; andDetermine policy for thelicensing of cross-overs andthe conversion of frontgardens to hard stands forvehicles.Joint Parking StrategiesA parking strategy mightencompass the administrativeareas of several local planningauthorities. This will beappropriate particularly where:●Local authority boundariescut across work and retailcatchment areas; and● Where there is a danger ofdamaging competitionbetween neighbouringauthorities.Consultation and joint workingwill be required to produce acommon approach to the parkingaspects of planning andtransport policy, particularly thedetermination of maximumparking standards and parkingtariffs. For example, the unitaryauthorities of Thurrock andSouthend-on-Sea cooperate withEssex County Council for thepurpose of determiningmaximum parking standards.Differences of view betweenneighbouring authorities as toappropriate maximum parkingstandards are a commondifficulty, and joint working is theminimum needed to resolve suchdifferences.The need for joint working or jointstrategies between localauthorities may also arise fromthe work of the RegionalPlanning Bodies in preparingand implementing RegionalTransport Strategies. Theregional bodies and GovernmentOffices may need to be proactivein ensuring that allauthorities adhere to regionalmaximum parking standards.The effect that parking chargescan have on competitionbetween towns and cities bothwithin and beyond the strategyarea will need consideration andproposals may require widerconsultation. This may not bepossible if the competing areasare not within one localauthority’s jurisdiction, yet can bea real hindrance to one authoritytaking “bold decisions”.Increasingly, parking charges arebeing seen and adopted as ademand management tool, but insituations where towns and citesare in competition with oneanother, for trade or foreconomic development, this canbe effective only if a suitableframework is provided atregional level. This is recognisedin guidance on RegionalTransport Strategies (2).Consistency and coordinationbetweenparking providersWhere there is public off-streetparking controlled by privateoperators, consultation will benecessary in order thatconsistency may be achievedbetween the transport authority’s

Preparing a Parking Strategy 41on-street, the public off-streetand private car park operators’regimes. This might requireadjustments to tariffs to ensurecompatibility amongst thevarious providers and to ensurethat, in the case of a railway orhospital operator for instance,displaced parking does notcompromise private provision.Local authorities have limitedcontrol over tariffs and conditionsin private car parks but these arediscussed in Chapter 6.A Parking Strategy may need toaddress cross-boundarycoordination. Consultation toachieve this will be of particularimportancebetweenmetropolitan authorities andwithin conurbations, for example,where the limits of a ControlledParking Zone might straddle, beclose to, or be concurrent withboundary roads. Without suchcoordination, this can lead todifferent controls operating oneither side of a boundary roadwith different systems for Payand Display, voucher parking,permits, etc. The aim should beto integrate parking controls andsystems and theirimplementation along boundaryroads and to ensure that there iscompatibility in parking policybetween neighbouring areas.The scope of a localParking StrategyWhile the detailed content of alocal Parking Strategy will varyfrom place to place, the followingprovides an indication of thecoverage required, and couldserve as the basic contents list:1. Vision, objectives andtargets2. Policies for all types ofparking3. Key schemes4. Parking business plan5. Protocols for monitoring andother procedures.The Strategy may fulfil manypurposes and address manydetailed issues, but the followingshould feature prominently:●Measures to manage orreduce the demand for caruse, and specification of theparticular demand to bemanaged in this way;● A resolution of conflicts andpriorities between differentuser and interest groups inrelation to the design andregulation of streets andpublic spaces;● An appropriate balancebetween the provision ofparking spaces on and offthe street, and between longstay and short stay use;● A parking control andenforcement regime that isconsistent with, andcontributes to, widerobjectives of urban transport,planning and economicdevelopment;● The framework for anefficient and financially viableparking business;●●●The long term provision andmanagement of private carparks in residential and nonresidentialdevelopments;The parking for lorries andloading/unloading facilitiesfor them;The parking of coaches,cycles and motorcycles; and● Inclusion or reference tourban design and streetdesign frameworks thatpromote the integration ofparking and other publicrealm activities.All aspects of parking provisionand enforcement should bebrought together in order that aco-ordinated approach toprovision and management maybe taken. Parking is a means toan end and a function of socialand economic demands. Parkingshould not, therefore, beconsidered in isolation but inassociation with the factors thatgenerate the demand to park. Toachieve this requires theintegration of the parkingstrategy with land-use planning,economic policies and broadersustainability objectives.

42 Chapter 4The Steps to producing aParking StrategyFigure 4.1 sets outdiagrammatically the twelve andrelatively discrete steps involved.Many practitioners will recognisethese steps and their use may bewell established, but they are setout here to help those who areless familiar with them. Chapter5 will deal with the formulation ofspecific schemes and policies,and the various issues andtopics that need to be taken intoaccount.Step 1: Identify thestrategy areaThe first step in the developmentof a parking strategy is to definethe geographical area underconsideration. In the UK, parkingstrategies can be developed byseveral tiers of local government,ranging in area from largemetropolitan authorities and cityunitary authorities to smalldistrict councils. The size andcharacteristics of the area willhave a significant effect upon thestrategy and the breadth of itsobjectives.A typical shire county parkingstrategy, for example, mightdefine countywide parkingpolicies with subsidiary parkingplans for a number of town ordistrict council areas. In contrast,a parking strategy for a unitarycity council might address thewhole urban area.It should be noted that withintwo-tier local authority areasthere is a range of workingarrangements that reflect theextent to which powers aredelegated under agencyagreements. These can varyeven within one County.Whatever the arrangement,there are clearly two areas toconsider within a parkingstrategy; the first being theTransportAuthority’sadministrative area and thesecond being the locally focusedoperational areas for whichparking plans might be required.A strategy may cover both policyand operational elements wheresuch areas are not coincident.Step 2: Determine themain issuesBoth top-down and bottom-upapproaches are required.The top-down approachconsists of responding to overarchingnational, regional andlocal objectives and policyguidance.The objectives of the transportplanning system will have beenbrought together and containedwithin the LTP. The parkingstrategy may provide one of themain mechanisms through whichLTP targets, such as those fortraffic reduction, modal shift andaccessibility, are to be achieved.Where a road-user hierarchy hasbeen defined within the LTP, thiswill help to define (in thestrategy) how street and kerbsidespace should be allocatedbetween competing user groups.Transport is key to spatialdevelopment and parkingmanagement is one of theprimary tools to influencesustainable patterns ofdevelopment and travel. As aconsequence, land use planningpolicies will also play a role indetermining the issues to beaddressed.The strategy not only needs toaddress the parkingrequirements of the present, butalso must be sufficiently robustto address future changes inparking demand. Determiningfuture levels of demand needs totake account of policy objectivesand targets. This is based on arecognition that demand forparking, as for any other good orservice, is subject to theinfluence of price, regulation andother factors. Nevertheless, suchinfluence will be based on therealities of demand provided byunderlying social and economictrends, the attraction of any newdevelopment demand, and theeffects of associated transportstrategies.The inter-relationship betweenfuture development and the

Preparing a Parking Strategy 43associated demand for andsupply of parking is a major issueto be dealt with in the LocalDevelopment Framework. AParking Strategy, therefore, mustfollow from this and include themaximum levels of parking thathave been established and themechanisms that will be used tonegotiate levels of parkingprovision lower than the maxima.It will also need to show howparking policies and proposalsrelate to the accessibility of sitesidentified for development andthe promotion of Travel Plans.Applicants for new developmentwill need to refer to and beguided in the preparation of theirTransport Assessments. Forexample, where parking demandis likely to result in an increase inon-street parking, guidance willbe needed on the prospects orrequirements for introducing onstreetcontrols.The bottom-up approachconsists of identifying localconcerns, problems andopportunities. These can beidentified through a review of therelevant issues and the history ofpublic representations orcomplaints. Sources ofinformation include local electedMembers, local staff such ashighway superintendents,newspaper reports and previouscorrespondence. Consultationwith the police, public transportoperators, emergency services,taxi operators and freightdistribution operators will alsohelp to identify problem areasthat the parking strategy shouldaddress. This can provide avaluable starting point whensetting up a transport forum orworking group.Step 3: Establish workinggroups and forumThe production of a ParkingStrategy may be overseen by asteering group of electedMembers. This should beconstituted to include memberswith responsibility for land useplanning, transport planning andthe parking service.The technical work will need tobe undertaken by local authorityofficers (or their appointedconsultants), who may be fromdifferent departments, orsometimes from different localauthorities. An officer workinggroup will need to be establishedto coordinate this work, and toreport to the appropriate electedmembers.Guiding principles will need to beagreed between the membersand officers before any detailedtechnical work, such as parkingsurveys and scheme design, isundertaken.In deciding on the member andofficer working arrangements, itwill be necessary to considerhow stakeholders can beinvolved, and how the workingarrangements will tie in with theLocal Transport Plan andDevelopment Plan processes.It may be helpful to identify allrelevant issues in relation todifferent stakeholder groups, or“stakeholder mapping”. In orderto tackle this it may be helpful toestablish a “parking forum”, or aworking group within any localforums set up to consider widertransport issues.Step 4: Research and datagatheringThe process of preparing aParking Strategy will makedemands for up-to-dateinformation. The formulation ofpolicies to reconcile differentinterests and to balance demandwith supply will require data onthe capacity and use of parking.In many cases detailedinformation is not available, butthe Strategy provides both anopportunity and a requirement forthe establishment of a baseline.The research and informationgathering stage is necessary to:●●●Identify existing problemsand their causes;Assess the effect of potentialsolutions; andProvide a baseline againstwhich predictions andprogress towards objectives

44 Chapter 4and targets can bemeasured.More specific data on parkingactivity is likely to be needed forscheme development andmonitoring. Decisions on datacollection will need to balancethe advantage of better qualitydecision making with the surveycosts involved. The summariesshown describe some of themore useful and commonly usedsurveys.Parking surveys (3)Surveys of parking activity will beuseful when designing or modifyingparking control schemes. Reviews ofparking charges are likely to requiresurveys to be undertaken of both onand off-street car parking. The moredifficult that the problems or issuesare, the more contentious thedecisions will be and, as a generalrule, more data will be required toinform the decision making process.The type of surveys required will bedependent upon the scale of theproblem. For a non-contentiousresidents’ parking scheme, theminimum data required would be anestimation of the residential parkingdemand, for which a simple beatsurvey would suffice. For this anenumerator would cover a plannedroute at regular intervals (say everyhalf-hour) and record parked vehicles,thus providing occupancy andduration records. Other data recordedcould include violations such asparking on yellow lines and anabsence of a permit or ticket. Anumber of beats would allow for thefull cover of the area being surveyed.Such a survey would need to addressearly morning hours to gaugeovernight demand. If the problem tobe addressed relates to short-stayprovision or the desire to encourage ahigher turnover of spaces, morefrequent surveys would be required.The frequency of surveys willdetermine the length of each beat andtherefore the number of beats andenumerators required.However, whilst the collection of datahas become easier through the use ofhand-held data capture devices, themore data that is collected the morecomplex the analysis will become. Itis, therefore, necessary to be clearfrom the outset what information isrequired from the data in order toavoid the collection of superfluous andresource consuming data.● Identify roads and establish beats● Carry out surveys● Prepare raw data for analysis (this task could be avoided ifhand-held data capture devices download straight into thedata analysis software)● Run data through specialist software● Interpret informationIn the case of a CPZ for a small tomid-sized commuter town, theorganisation of beat surveys mightfollow the timescale above.Parking use and accumulationsurveys provide a snapshot of thelevel of demand for parking within anarea. By undertaking these surveysduring both night (or very earlymorning) and day, the demands ofresidents, businesses, traders andvisitors can be approximated. Datacan also inform the potential forreducing levels of car ownershipamongst residents, for examplethrough the development of car clubs(4). For example, one study found thatat least 40% of residents’ cars wereparked at home at any one time. Byundertaking repeat surveys trendscan be identified, for example forperiods of the day or seasonal trends.When identifying the appropriateperiods for undertaking surveys,thought must be given to socialchanges that affect demand, such aslonger trading hours or a growingevening economy. For example, thepeak demand for supermarkets hastended to shift away from Fridayevening with the advent of Sundaytrading.Current patterns of usage may be apoor guide to the demand that willarise following the introduction ofcontrols or charges in an area for thefirst time. This is because somedemand will be deterred by the newregime, whilst the better availability ofspace may attract new demand.Parking duration surveys providedata to assess the length of time for2 weeks2 weeks4-6 weeks1 day1-2 weekswhich parking events occur. This willbe useful when determining theappropriate mix of short, medium andlong stay spaces in a control schemeor car park, or in setting charge rates.There are a number of techniquesavailable such as the parking-beat,continuous observation, and still,video and aerial photography. Themost basic of these, the parking beatmethod, requires a set “beat” walkedat regular intervals and theregistration number of all parkedvehicles recorded. From this data theduration of each parking event can bedetermined to an acceptable level ofaccuracy. This traditional surveymethod has been developed throughthe use of hand-held data collectionunits, for example the PARC (ParkingAnalysis and Recording by Computer)method developed by the TransportResearch Laboratory. Comparison ofthe PARC technique with the parkingbeat method has shown that PARC isconsiderably more sensitive to shortterm parking events, which are ofparticular importance whenconsidering local trade.Parking habits surveys provide anindication of the way in which vehiclesare parked, for example obstructingaccess ways or junctions, or incontravention of parking or loadingrestrictions. This type of survey willgive a snapshot of problems that canbe tackled through a control scheme,and of compliance with an existingcontrol scheme. It can be combinedwith a parking duration survey toestablish data on the type andprevalence of non-compliance.

Preparing a Parking Strategy 45Other surveysIt may be necessary to undertakefurther surveys to obtain more specificdata relating to trip purpose andparking habits. This information canbe used for deciding on the allocationof parking spaces within a controlledzone, for example by time or by usertype.Interview surveys of customers,employees and commuters canprovide useful information on journeypurpose, frequency, origin, mode andparking habits. Such surveys arenecessary to establish mode split andother travel data that is required forsetting up and monitoring TravelPlans.For further advice on parking surveysand methodology, see references atthe end of the chapter (3).Baseline data sourcesIt is important that any baseline studylends itself to measuring theperformance of a strategy’s objectivesand data will, therefore, need to bechosen from the outset to reflect this.In addition, baseline data will informthe development of the local parkingstrategy by identifying existingstrengths and weaknesses. A numberof new data sources will need to beestablished as well as existingsources.An audit of the existing on-street andpublic off-street capacity should beconsidered, together with data relatingto demand. In many cases thedemand for off-street spaces will beavailable from car park managementcomputer databases but, if not, usagesurveys will need to be undertaken toascertain the level of spare off-streetcapacity and profiles of demand. Thismay prove difficult because ofcommercial sensitivity. On-streetdemand will usually require usagesurveys to be undertaken.A key objective of many LTPs andParking Strategies will be to achievemodal shift, in which case therecording of mode split data will be atthe forefront of monitoringprogrammes. Parking policy is one ofthe major mechanisms to influencetravel behaviour and mode choice.Price elasticity of demand for parkingin many towns tends to be low, butdepends very much on thealternatives available, and ratio ofsupply to demand. Where alternativeparking opportunities are limited orprices in adjacent towns or areas areat about the same level then demandwill be insensitive to the introductionof modest charges or to priceincreases, with any impact short-term.In areas such as central London,demand is inelastic even at very highprices. As a general rule it is sensibleto have prime on-street spaces inshopping/business areas priced toencourage short stays and therebyhigh turnover, with lower hourly ratesand longer average stays in lessconvenient locations and in off-streetcar parks.Financial data and audits will benecessary for the proper handling of aparking business plan, and alsoprovide data relevant to the analysisof price elasticities described above.Liaison with the finance or treasurydepartments will be necessary. Moredetails appear in Chapter 10.Background accident data relating toincidents in heavily parked roadscould provide a valuable baseline forroad safety against which futureimprovements in on-street parking,whether by changes in regulations orenforcement, could be measured.Crime figures relating to car theft,from both on-street and off-streetlocations and to personal security incar parks could provide furtherbaseline indicators. Qualitativeimprovements in off-street car parkstogether with a shift of long-staycommuter parking from on-street tooff-street and secure facilitiesprovided by Park-and-Ride can allcontribute to a reduction in recordedcrime figures, as can a greaterenforcement presence.Step 5: Identify problemsand opportunitiesA Parking Strategy should notonly address existing andpredicted problems, but shouldalso identify opportunities forimprovement. These will need tobe identified and confirmedthrough the data gathering andconsultation processes. This isnecessary in order to determinewhether intervention would beconsistent with policy and havethe desired impact.As far as possible, problemsshould be related to people’sexperience and perception, asthis will assist in publicconsultation related to parkingproposals.It is important to note that aParking Strategy may notnecessarily be primarily aimed atsolving parking problems. Forexample, an ample supply ofparking in a town centre maygenerate no “parking problem”as such, but may generate otherproblems that the LocalTransport Plan is expected toameliorate, such as excessivetraffic within the town centre,weak public transport demand,and shortage of land fordevelopment.Parking problems (as opposed toparking impacts) are mostlyabout the difficulty drivers face infinding somewhere to parkconvenient for their destination.This arises either because of anabsence of parking opportunitiesor an excess of demand oversupply. A solution can usually befound through the imposition of a

46 Chapter 4parking charge to reducedemand, but this may then inturn lead to other perceivedproblems (eg, lack of alternativemeans of access, excessivelyhigh parking costs).Of greater significance in mostplaces is the problems causedby parking on other aspects oflife. Such problems ariseparticularly, but by no meansexclusively, from illegal parking.In Parking Perspectives (5),Valleley identifies the followingnegative impacts of parking:● Accidents;● Congestion;● Access problems, includingseverance and obstruction;and● Environmental intrusion,including visual amenity.These problems can arise notonly from illegal parking but alsofrom obstructive or inconsiderateparking where there are noparking restrictions. Even withina parking control area problemscan arise if the scheme is poorlydesigned or allows for excessiveamounts of parking.It is unclear to what extentillegally parked vehicles causeaccidents, but illegally ordangerously parked vehiclescreate hazards for pedestriansand other road users. There islittle or known research on this,but Brown (6) estimated anaccident cost of nearly £100,000per annum due to illegally parkedvehicles in Brighton in 1985.The act of parking can contributeto congestion in a number ofways. Parked vehicles canreduce capacity at junctions andcause obstructions, which slowor interrupt traffic flow. Thepropensity to park illegallyeffectively increases the parkingstock which can lead to moretraffic being attracted to the area(7) and abuse of user definedbays generates the need forlegitimate users to search foralternative available spaces.Abuse of disabled persons bays,for example, has led to somesupermarkets introducingmonitoring procedures usingCCTV cameras.Illegal and obstructive parkingcauses problems for businessesand for residents in accessingtheir properties (8). Parking onfootways and cycleways and atjunctions can be a majorproblem, reducing the comfortand convenience for people onfoot or bicycle, and producing amajor hazard for people with aphysical impairment. Obstructionof dropped kerbs, bus stops andcrossing places causesparticular problems. Illegal orinappropriate parking can alsoundermine the effectiveness oftraffic management schemes, forexample the obstruction of busand cycle lanes.The environmental or “social”costs (7) of illegal parking (and ofinappropriate parking, forexample by commuters inresidential areas) arerepresented by the additionalnoise, pollution and intimidationresulting from the higher trafficlevels and congestion caused byillegally parked vehicles (8).Illegally and inappropriatelyparked vehicles are also seen todetract from the visual amenity ofan area (7).Indiscriminate parking plays arole in determining the quality ofexisting development. Illconceivedpolicies can lead tocar-dominated environments inthe street, creating and/orperpetuating conflict betweenvehicles and other users of thestreet (including safety),generating unnecessary clutter(eg, excess signage) and poorlandscaping. It may also havenegative consequences on landuse, the ability of pedestrians tomove into and through the areaand visual amenity.Problems are created whendemand for parking outstripssupply. This may lead to illegalparking, but may also lead toparking being available on a firstcome, first served basis, ratherthan any sensible set ofpriorities. This can createproblems for residents,businesses and disabled people.

Preparing a Parking Strategy 47Lack of parking availability alsocreates unnecessary traveldistance due to drivers lookingfor a free space, so-called“searching traffic”.The extent to which drivers will“search” for spaces can besurprising, but it is worthdemonstrating when promoting ascheme. For example, videoevidence obtained from followingvehicles in the centre of BognorRegis prior to the introduction of aCPZ revealed some extremeexamples of drivers circulatingrepeatedly to find free spaces in afavoured location.Step 6: Identify and agreethe causes of problemsOnce the problems have beenidentified the next step indeveloping a strategy is toidentify the causes of theproblems, in order that they maybe addressed.It should be borne in mind thatfrequently “the measures whichcan be introduced to alleviate theproblem can do nothing to attackits cause and merely attack thesymptoms” (4). It is, therefore,important that a strategicapproach to parking takesaccount of the wider causalrelationships that generateparking demand.Any imbalance between capacityand demand will need to beexamined and in particular, ifdemand exceeds supply,whether the provision ofincreased on-street or off-streetcapacity would be possible ordesirable. An increase incapacity may well conflict withthe objectives of the strategy, butit could be better tailored tomatch the profile of demand. Forexample, demand for short stayparking could be satisfied atlocations closest to the retailcore of a town centre and longstay parking at peripherallocations. Imbalance and conflictbetween competing users ismost likely to occur in urbancentres, particularly close toretail and leisure areas,surrounding railway stations orhospitals and in residential areaswith limited off-street parking.In addition to any imbalancebetween capacity and demand,the qualitative relationshipsbetween them also need to beconsidered. For example, whilstthere may be sufficient capacityon paper, if off-street facilities arepoorly located or of poor qualitythey may be under utilised,resulting in increased pressureelsewhere. Location, design,maintenance, security andperceived safety all affectcustomer choice. The lack ofgood quality and informativedirectional signing can lead toexcessive demand occurring atcertain locations while sparecapacity exists at others.The lack of an effectiveenforcement regime can be themain cause of high levels of onstreetillegal parking acts. Wherepowers for the Decriminalisationof Parking Enforcement (DPE)have not been taken up, parkingenforcement will remain theresponsibility of the Police, andwill largely be undertaken byTraffic Wardens. Thecommitment of resources to theenforcement of parkingrestrictions is considered bysome police forces to be a lowpriority and a drain on scarceresources. In some areas forceshave withdrawn Traffic Wardenscompletely, with the result of avirtual parking free-for-all. Amove to DPE may form thecornerstone of the enforcementelement of a parking strategy.This is discussed in greaterdetail in Chapter 7.Step 7: Set objectives andtargetsThis is crucial as the means ofdetermining what parkinginterventions are appropriateand why. It is also necessary inorder to monitor the impacts ofany interventions. The process ofsetting objectives and targets isdealt with in detail in Chapter 5.Step 8: Devise potentialschemes and policiesThis is covered in Chapter 6.A concern of retailers and tradersvoiced frequently in response toconsultation on parking schemes isthat any restriction of parking willharm their trade and the viability ofthe city/town centre. This perceptionis not supported by evidence.Indeed, in many if not all cases, anobjective of parking schemes will beto support or to improve theeconomic viability of such an area. Itwould, however, be advisable toobtain baseline indicators ofeconomic performance, such ascity/town centre footfall data or aneconomic performance index, ifavailable. Furthermore, city or towncentre customer surveys can beundertaken to establish therelationship between the amountspent per person per trip, and mode.The contribution of car access to theviability of the centre might therebybe evaluated. The frequency of visitstends to be higher for users of publictransport, walking and cycling thanfor car users, and consequently the“spend per person” may provide amore realistic picture of thecontribution of different categories ofuser. A study in Kensington HighStreet found that the total spend inthe shops was dominated by publictransport users (49%) and walkers(35%). Car users (drivers andpassengers) accounted for only 10%(9). This finding is reinforced in othersimilar studies, for example, inBirmingham (10) and Borehamwood(11).Such surveys may need to berepeated at intervals to pick up theimpact of wider changes in thenational or local economy that canmask local effects. In terms of towncentre vitality, shop rental values andoccupancy rates may be morereliable proxy measures. Vitality canalso be measured by the occupationof public space by pedestrians andpeople just out enjoying themselves.This approach has been welldeveloped and documented in thecase of Copenhagen (12).

48 Chapter 4Step 9: Assess the impactof potential solutionsThis should test the extent towhich the proposed interventionswill achieve the objectives andtargets set for the strategy. To dothis it may be helpful to tabulatethe interventions and objectives.Interventions can then beassessed in turn as to whetherthey make a positive, negative orneutral contribution to theobjectives.Although this will be a qualitative,even subjective, exercise it willalso help to identify any potentialknock-on effects that proposedinterventions might have. Someexamples might be:● Reductions in commuterparking may result in peakhour overcrowding on publictransport;● A new parking controlscheme may displaceparking to neighbouringareas, where a problem maynot currently exist; and● The introduction of parkingcontrols without full provisionfor residents, or with highpermit prices, may lead tohouseholders convertingtheir front gardens to hardstanding for their vehicleswith a demand for drop kerbsand licensed cross-overs.The appraisal process shouldalso include consideration of anyimpact that proposedinterventions may have on other(non-parking) areas of policy,such as freight deliveries, publictransport, cycling, pedestrians,crime and safety, motorcycles,taxis, air quality, economicdevelopment, tourism andsustainable development. Theaim should be to ensure thatparking interventions serve allobjectives in a positive way, or atleast do not work against anyobjectives.Step 10: Prepare thefinancial and business planAny Parking Strategy shouldshow how revenue will beearned, and how it will be spent.The justification for this will needto be in terms both of policy andthe operation of the “parkingbusiness” within the localauthority. The various matters tobe taken into account arediscussed in more detail inChapter 10.Step 11: A programme ofinterventionThe Strategy must be capable ofbeing implemented. It will,therefore, be necessary to set outpolicies and schemes in sufficientdetail for those responsible totake them forward. This mayinvolve further refinement ofparticular schemes, including ifnecessary further consultation. Atimetable for the implementationof the various measures shouldbe included.The timescale for theimplementation of a parkingstrategy will depend upon thecomplexity of its elements. Policymeasures such as the adoptionof tighter maximum levels ofparking in new developmentscan (once formulated) beimplemented within a short timeframe, requiring no more than acouncil resolution to adopt it assupplementary planningguidance. The impact, however,will be incremental over time asmore and more planningdecisions are made according tothe new policy. The same willapply to street or car park designguidelines. Other interventionsmay take a considerable time todevelop, and their impact will notbe felt until the day of theirimplementation on the ground.In terms of on-street parkingcontrol schemes, a move to thedecriminalisation of parkingenforcement (2–3 years) mighttake longer to implement thanthe introduction of a ControlledParking Zone (1–2 years) whichin turn would take longer toimplement than the introductionof charges (3–6 months). Thetime taken to advertise TROsand resolve objections or makemodifications should not beunder-estimated.It may be seen, therefore, that“decisions” and “implementation”

Preparing a Parking Strategy 49can have different meaningsdepending on the measures towhich they refer.Step 12: Specify amonitoring regimeTwo kinds of monitoring arerequired, and the mechanism forthese should be clearly set out.1. OutputsProgress towards theimplementation of thepolicies and schemes andother interventions includedin the Strategy will need tobe monitored. Themonitoring will beundertaken by the localauthority against thetimetable or programme ofimplementation.This part of the process doesnot involve any assessmentof the effectiveness orimpacts of the variousinterventions, but doesinvolve checking whetherthey have been implementedon time. This will be ofparticular importance interms of Best Value andother performancemonitoring, but also whereimplementation is tied intoother transport or planningprogrammes. For example,redevelopment of a towncentre car park might bedependent on theimplementation of a parkand-ridescheme.2. OutcomesThe Strategy should set outa programme to measure theeffectiveness of its proposedinterventions in relation to itsobjectives and targets. Thisis by far the most onerousaspect of monitoring, andrequires a carefully thoughtout research and surveyprogramme. It must be bornein mind that the monitoringscheme may require “nonparking” impacts to beassessed and disentangledfrom the principal parkingeffects. For example, aconversion of on-streetparking space to pedestrianand amenity use may requirethe monitoring of changes inlocal trade and footfall, aswell as the impact on parkingand loading activity.This programme will includethe establishment of baselineinformation prior toimplementation, and aftersurveysthat will providecomparable informationpost-implementation. Thedata gathering stage of theStrategy preparation mayalready have providedimportant baselineinformation.The monitoring systemshould be based on a clearunderstanding of the “causalchains”. For example, modesplit for work trips to the towncentre may be monitored toassess the effectiveness of aparking control scheme thatdiscourages long-stayparking.Preparation Implementation Impact onor designbehaviourPolicy, rules Months or years Immediate Immediate, but impactand guidanceincreasingincrementallyover timePhysical or Months or years Weeks or months 1. Negative impactregulatoryduring constructionschemes2. Intended impactstarting from Day 1after schemecompletionDPE Years Immediate Immediate andincreasing, withpossible wider impacts.

50 Chapter 4The next course of actionThis chapter has discussed thepreparation of a ParkingStrategy, and provided anindicative method of approach,broken down into a dozen steps.A checklist appears in Figure 4.2.Once these have beencompleted,individualinterventions can be formulated.A Strategy may contain anumber of different schemes,policies and protocols and thesewill be explored in Chapter 6.Guidance on the design ofspecific measures and onimplementation is also given inthe chapters that follow.If the 12 steps are followed, adjusted as necessary to reflect localcircumstances, then the Strategy that results should:● Facilitate the achievement of the vision for the area or place.● Reflect existing problems and identify their causes.● Reflect public concerns for the need for action.●●●●●●●●●●●●Figure 4.2 Checklist for a model parking strategy.Relate to local issues and integrate with over arching national, regional andlocal transport and objectives and policies.Relate well to relevant objectives such as in the local development plan orcommunity plan.Be supported by accurate data.Be based upon sound consultation with wide stakeholder involvement.Have strong political and local support.Integrate on and off-street parking availability and cost.Be clear about how adequate levels of enforcement will be provided.Consider neighbouring areas and other strategy areas.Have a self-financing business plan which enables parking costs to becovered by revenues.Have built-in performance measures and be easy to monitor.Have an implementation timetable which allows for several iterations and forseasonal conditions and activities; (details about implementation are coveredin Section 3 in these Guidelines).Be supported by a communication strategy that delivers accessibleinformation at the appropriate time and gathers public support.References(1) ODPM, 2000, Preparing CommunityStrategies – Government Guidance toLocal Authorities.(2) Guidance on Local Transport Plans,2nd Edition and PPG (PPS) 11Regional Planning.(3) Chick, C, 1996, On-Street Parking AGuide to Practice, Landor Publishing,London, and Dean, G, 1989, Parkingsurveys – a comparison of datacollection techniques, RRR 22,Transport Research Laboratory,Crowthorne, Berkshire.(4) Pharaoh, T, 1986, The Motor Car: Idolor Idle? A survey of redundancy indomestic car fleets in TrafficEngineering & Control, February 1986.(5) Valleley M. 1997 Parking Perspectives– A sourcebook for the development ofparking policy. Landor Publishing.(6) Brown M. 1991 Car Parking - Theeconomics of policy enforcement”.Cranfield 1991.(7) Cullinane K and Polack J. 1992 IllegalParking and Enforcement of ParkingRegulations: Causes Effects andInteractions. Transport Reviews Vol 12No.1 pp49-75.(8) May A D. 1985 Parking Enforcement:Are we making the best use ofresources? PTRC Proceedings ofSeminar M, July.(9) Colin Buchanan & Partners 2002Kensington High Street Study.(10) SDG study in Birmingham of economicactivity by mode.(11) Pharaoh T 1992 Unpublished study.(12) Gehl, J and Gemzøe, L, 1996, PublicSpaces Public Life, DanishArchitectural Press, Copenhagen.

Section 2Objectives andMeasuresSection Acknowledgements2Objectives andMeasures

Chapter 5Defining ParkingObjectivesChapter 5Defining ParkingObjectivesIntroductionThe context for this chapter issummarised in Figure 5.1.The objectives for managingparking in any area need to becarefully defined – whether theyare concerned with the design ofa parking control scheme, thesetting of charges, thenegotiation of parking in newdevelopments, or any otheraction. Sometimes objectivesconflict with one another andthere is a need to strike anappropriate balance.The steps involved in thepreparation of parking objectivesare likely to be:1. To identify all national andregional policies as theyapply to the area underconsideration;2. To identify objectives fromlocal framework documents,in particular the CommunityPlan, Development Plan, andLocal Transport Plan (LTP).Specific objectives includingtargets will be particularlyrelevant;3. To prepare a list ofpreferred objectives forinclusion in a ParkingStrategy. Stakeholderinvolvement may beparticularly helpful at thisstage;4. To justify each objective byexplaining how it contributesto the wider objectivesidentified in 1 and 2; and5. To identify any conflicts ofinterest that arise, andresolve them.Once the parking objectiveshave been agreed and conflictsresolved, they should form thebasis for the specific policies andschemes (see Chapter 6).Key IssuesThe challenge for policy-makersis to understand the differentways in which parking can, andshould, be used to contribute towider policy objectives. Parkingpolicy – and the elements withinit – is just one part of transportpolicy decision-making. In turntransport policies need to beconsistent with land use policiesand with overall economic,environmental and social policygoals. They are all inter-related.Objectives should, therefore, beset in a way that is justified bythe intended benefits, andshould take into account:● The benefits of parkingcontrols: These should beidentified and followedthrough into schemes andpolicies. Limiting car use hasno intrinsic merit, and canonly be justified by referenceto social and environmentalgains, such as more streetspace for pedestrians andtraders, reduced pollution,and less congestion;● Complementary polices:These should support the“carrot and stick” approach to

54 Chapter 5Figure 5.1: Parking Objectives withinthe wider context.achieving sustainabletransport. Parking regulationmay be seen as the ‘stick’and will only succeedalongside other activitiessuch as the opportunity tointroduce environmentalimprovements and highquality regenerationschemes;● The context: The types ofcontrol need to reflect thelocality and how they fit into awider context. It is unrealisticto expect parking to belimited in one area inisolationunlesscomplementary policies areapplied in other areas; and● Improvements toalternatives to the car: Amove away from access bycar can only be successful ifattractive alternatives areavailable. This may involveinvestment in or subsidy ofother modes, and so aParking Strategy must beconsistent with suchmeasures as set out in theLocal Transport Plan.Parking as an influenceon Trip Generation:Patterns and ModalChoiceParking is a key demandmanagement tool. Theavailability of parking has amajor influence on the transportchoices people make. Inparticular, restricting the amountof parking at new developmentprovides a form of restraint thatcan help limit traffic levels and/ormitigate traffic growth as well asstrongly influence modal split.Hence, the amount and type ofparking at a development is akey factor in its generation oftrips. Work by the TRL (1) thatinvestigated the impacts of arange of transport policies in fivecities pointed to the importanceof parking policy in influencingtraffic levels. Similarly, LPAC (2)and SERPLAN (3) showed therelationship between parkingpolicy and modal split.LPAC’s Parking Advice (4)argued that current modal splitsin an area could be used as animportant input into a parkingstrategy. In particular, itsuggested that parkingstandards should not be moregenerous than those required toaccommodate the averagemodal split for similar journeys.This work highlights the criticalimportance of location inachieving a modal splitfavourable to public transport,walking and cycling. Theposition of Central London in thisrespect has long beenacknowledged. LPAC’s workalso demonstrated that towncentre locations could increasepublic transport’s proportion oftrips around two to three timesand significantly increase accessby non-motorised modes. Evendevelopments that have becomeassociated with access by carcan retain a significantproportion of access by othermodes given the right location.Planning and transport policiesneed to build on this. The startingpoint is locations that provide formulti-modal access supported byrestraint-based parking andmore rigorous trafficmanagement.The amount of residentialparking is also a critical factor indetermining car ownershiplevels. This is particularly so inmany inner city areas whereNationalandregionalframework(Chapter 2)Local framework:CommunityStrategy,DevelopmentPlan. LocalTransport Plan(Chapter 4)Other objectivesParking objectives(This chapter)Other objectivesLocal Parking policies(Chapter 6)Parking schemes(Chapter 6)Management mechanisms(Chapter 6)

Defining Parking Objectives 55levels of car ownership arebelow those expected in relationto household income becausethere are alternative modesavailable and there aredifficulties in parking a carovernight. The debate on trafficrestraint has focused oninfluencing car use rather thancar ownership. The introductionof “car free” and “car reduced”residential development incertain inner city areas is alsoanother option. In future, manycity dwellers may choose not toown a car for their own personaluse because of the difficulty ofparking the vehicle, but insteadtake part in neighbourhood carfleets/city car clubs which givethem access to a car (of differentsizes and types for differentpurposes) as and when needed.The Advantages andLimitations of ParkingValleley (5) identifies thefollowing advantages andlimitations to the use of parkingpolicy as a means of achievingtransport and wider policyobjectives.The advantages:● Can further a wide range ofurban policy objectives;● Represent one of the fewways of directly managing orrestraining car use;● Can be introduced relativelyquickly and cheaply(compared to majorinfrastructure schemes);● Are flexible and can bemodified to reflect changingcircumstances; and● Produce a revenue stream.The limitations meanwhile showthat:● There is a lack of clearunderstanding about theprecise effects of themeasures;● Incomplete control of theparking stock can limit theability to achieve theobjectives;● Policies are not developedand implemented in acomprehensive way due to●●●●the organisational andinstitutional complexities ofthe parking system;There is conflict between theobjectives that parking policyis aiming to serve;They are not a total solutionand need other supportingmeasures if urban policyobjectives are to beachieved;They cannot restrain ormanage through traffic;Implementation of localisedsolutions may just displacethe parking problem, withconsequent safety andamenity impacts; and● Parking controls can berendered ineffective by lackof adequate enforcement.In addition, parking measurescan also help to achieve ruralobjectives, such as themanagement and protection oftourist locations such as inNational Parks.Overarching goalsIn general, while the emphasiswill vary from place to place, andfrom time to time, the generalgoals will relate to the success ofthe area in social, economic andenvironmental terms. In additionthe Government has highlightedin the new guidance for futureLTPs four key principles (6).These are that LTPs should:●●Set transport in a widercontext;Set locally relevant targetsfor outcome indicators;● Identify the best value-formoneysolutions to deliverthose targets; and● Set trajectories for keytargets, to enable greatertransparency and rigour inassessing performance.In doing so the Government, inconjunction with the LocalGovernment Association, haveidentified four key priorities thatshould be reflected within thepolicies and programmescontained within the LTP. Theseare: accessibility, congestion, airquality and road safety. Otherpriorities may be developed by

56 Chapter 5individual local authorities toaddress specific local issues.Invariably, parking in its variousguises has an important, if notcritical, role to play in how localauthorities can meet successfullythose key priorities.The Government hasestablished criteria for theappraisal of transport schemes(7), and these can guideconsideration of parking strategyobjectives. These criteria are:● Accessibility● Economic vitality● Efficiency● Environmental quality● Safety and security● Social inclusion and equityThese are discussed in turn.AccessibilityCar parking is about providingaccess, in enabling car users toundertake trips for a range ofpurposes associated with landuses at the origin or thedestination. Parking is alsoinherently involved in access byother road vehicles, includingtaxis, cycles, powered twowheelers,coaches and freightvehicles, though the issuesraised are often different fromcar parking. For example,access by coach does notnecessarily mean that the coachmust be parked at thedestination served, while cycleparking can be encouragedwithout creating significantnegative impacts.Parking provision and controlcan be used to increase ordecrease vehicular-basedaccessibility. However, parkingalone does not determine overalllevels of accessibility of an area.In some places parking canmean lower accessibility forthose using other modes oftravel. Accessibility needs to beassessed in terms of people andgoods rather than by vehicles. Inthis way, for example, centralLondon is clearly the mostaccessible location in Britain, yetit has relatively poor accessibilityby road vehicle. Conversely adevelopment next to a motorwayjunction in the Midlands may beextremely accessible by roadvehicle and yet be virtuallyinaccessible by any other mode.There is, and will continue to be,an imbalance between thedemand for road and parkingspace and its supply, particularlyin large towns and cities.Accessibility by car will,therefore, have to be limited toreflect local conditions andenvironment. This involvescontrols on the degree ofvehicular access given todifferent types of user and atdifferent times. Parking controlsmust, therefore, be seen andused as part of overall traffic andtransport management.The Government are also puttinggreater weight on accessibilityconsiderations in transportplanning decision-making thanhitherto. Draft guidance onaccessibility has been published(8). Accordingly, local authoritieswill need to give much greaterattention to accessibility as aplanning tool. It is crucial tofocusing development in the rightlocation and enabling people toaccess the things they need in away that reduces travel,particularly by car. It is also ameans whereby the amount ofparking in a development can beminimised without prejudicing itsviability.Accessibility planning canoperate at four levels within localauthorities:1. The formulation andrevision of developmentplans and frameworks;2. The formulation andrevision of Local TransportPlans;3. The negotiation or carryingout of TransportAssessments in relation tonew developments. DetailsaboutTransportAssessments appear inChapter 3; and4. The encouragement orcarrying out of Travel Plansin relation to both new andexisting developments.

Defining Parking Objectives 57Accessibility appraisaltechniques vary in their degreeof sophistication:● Basic catchment areamethods simply sum theopportunities (people, goods,services, etc.) that can beaccessed within a given timeby a defined mix of transportmodes;● Opportunity methods takethis approach further byweighting the opportunitiesaccording to their degree ofaccessibility; and● Value measures may thenmake use of a standard unitsuch as generalised travelcost to arrive at a quantifiedmeasure of accessibility. Anexample of this is the PTALpublic transport accessibilitytool (9).An example of how public transportaccessibility can be linked toparking policy is found in theLondon Planning AdvisoryCommittee’s (LPAC) 1997 ParkingAdvice (5). LPAC developed aparking standards matrix, whichincorporates public transportaccessibility. This uses the level ofpublic transport accessibility as themain determinant of maximumparking provision in newdevelopments, which isrepresented on one axis of thematrix. The other axis aims to givegreater reflection to local authorityplanning and transport policyobjectives as represented by thelevel of sustainability. It is importantthat this type of approach todetermining parking standardsoccurs within a wider locationalframework that guidesdevelopment to the mostaccessible locations.Most methods readily lendthemselves to visualrepresentation, often using GIStechniques. However, careneeds to be taken wheninterpreting accessibility data,particularly by value measures.For example, a PTAL analysismeasures access from a site to apublic transport service. Othermethods are needed to assessaccessibility to a site by publictransport, which will be morerelevant where public transportnetworks are relatively sparse.Accordingly relevant objectivesfor meeting accessibilityconsiderations might, therefore,include a need:●●●●To retain a reasonable levelof access by private car;To enhance access by othermodes of transport;To promote a level of parkingstock in accordance with thetwo objectives above;To allocate parking space inlocations appropriate forparticular journey purposes(ie, short-stay parking in thetown centre and long-stay onthe outskirts); and● To permit a level of parkingwith new development that isappropriate with its locationand with wider communitygoals.Appropriate policies are coveredin the next chapter (Chapter 6),but they should be linked totargets like:● Undertake changes in carparking charges so thatlonger stay car parkers aresteered to car parks on theoutskirts of a town;● Consult community andbusiness representatives onchanges to parking chargesbefore implementingchanges within a specifiedperiod;● Identify areas that requiredifferent levels ofaccessibility and implementnecessary changes withinspecified timescales;● Review and amend carparking standards so thatother modes of travel haveadequate provision;●●Monitor and change theproportion of total parkingunder public control orinfluence; andReview and change parkingcharges when demandexceeds 85% of supply.Economic VitalityThe need to maintain andenhance the economy of an areais often the predominant urbangoal influencing policy, including

58 Chapter 5transport and parking policies.Parking provides access togoods and services and thusfacilitates economic activity. Theprovision of ample parking spaceis seen by many local authoritiesas a key factor in economicdevelopment. This view may besimply a response to developers’requests, or public perception,based on traditional rather thancurrent planning policy. Therewill need to be a change ofapproach whereby good accessrather than simply good caraccess becomes the main issue.The Government, in PPG6, (nowPPS6) argues in favour of goodqualitytown centre car parking tohelp retail developments tocompete with out-of-town stores.Out-of-town centres areattractive to car borne shoppersand can provide a wide range ofgoods with cheap or freeparking. However, town centresneed to maintain theircompetitiveness by providing adifferent kind of experience,based upon a wide range ofcomparison goods and a highquality environment.Moreover, the relationshipsbetween amenity, activities andaccessibility (including roads,parking and other modes) arecomplex, and the view, widelyheld, that more parking isnecessary for the viability andvitality of town centres is basedupon an assumption rather thana fact. Indeed the way in whichparking supply is managed islikely to impact on the way thelocal economy is perceived.Ideally towns should worktogether when determiningparking supply and price, sinceproviding parking incentivesunilaterally may causeunreasonable competition anddraw in customers fromneighbouring catchments, thusincreasing the overall length ofshopping journeys by car.Equally, there is no point indeterring car users from using aparticular centre if this leads toexcessive travel to competingcentres. The Regional TransportStrategy should be an importantmechanism for coordinatingparking strategies of competingcentres.As well as the implications foreconomic policy objectives,parking itself is an economicactivity. Local authorities receiveincome from operating publiclyprovided parking facilities, andfrom fines for infringements ofparking regulations. In recentyears there has been increasingpressure from centralgovernment for a local authority’sparking operation to be selffinancing.The arrangements forthe transfer of the enforcementfunction to local authorities,introduced under the 1991 RoadTraffic Act, state that theoperation must become selffinancing as soon as possible.These issues are dealt with morefully in Chapters 7 and 8.Relevant objectives, therefore,might include:● To provide parking to supportthe local economy;● To manage parking toencourage short stay visits inthe town centre;●To integrate the charges forparking with objectives forother modes of travel;● To charge for parking toensure a reasonable balancebetween the demand andsupply for parking at alltimes; and● To ensure that parkingrevenues cover parkingcosts.Again appropriate policies arecovered in Chapter 6, butsuitable targets might be:●●●Peak demand not to exceed85% of supply at all parkinglocations;A declared level of parkingspace in the town centre thatemphasises short stayparking; andX% of on-street car parkingspace in the town centre(defined) to be converted toalternative uses within adesignated period.

Defining Parking Objectives 59EfficiencyThe policies adopted shouldenable the most efficient use tobe made of public resources,including the transportinfrastructure. The extent andmanagement of parking caninfluence the extent and qualityof access by car as compared toaccess by other modes. One ofthe difficulties in achieving anefficient balance is the fact that alarge proportion of parking spaceis in private ownership.Private non-residential parkingtypically forms half or more of thetotal stock in town centres. Thismeans that policies to influencedemand through parking are lessefficient than if local authoritieswere able to control the entireparking stock.Residential parking spaceswithin the dwelling curtilage leadto inefficient use of spaces sincethey cannot be readily expandedor contracted in response tofluctuations in demand withinand between households overtime. Collectively providedparking is potentially moreefficient, in that demand can bemet with less spaces overall.This enables higher densities tobe achieved for a given level ofenvironmental quality. (Seereferences to Llewelyn-Davies)(10).Parking controls as part of trafficmanagement schemes canpromote more efficient use ofroad space, for example byallowing the introduction of busand cycle lanes when parking isrestricted.The effect of on-street parking onthe capacity of the highway ispoorly understood. Early studiessought to demonstrate therelationshipbetweencarriageway width, frequency ofparked vehicles, and throughputof vehicles. Now it is recognisedthat the relationship is far fromsimple. For example, the designof junctions has a far greaterimpact on capacity than thewidth of links and incidence ofparking between them.Conversely, it is generallyacknowledged that parking nearjunctions can have adisproportionate impact oncapacity.If capacity is measured in termsof people and goods rather thanvehicles, better overallaccessibility may be achieved byallocating space and time to noncarmodes. In a more holisticapproach to traffic management,throughput in some instances isless important than the ability ofa street to support pedestrianactivity, as in a shopping streetfor example. Preventing delaysto vehicles is still an importantobjective of the management ofstreet and parking space, but it isno longer (or should not be) thesole criterion. The TrafficManagement Act (11) providesfor a more network-orientatedapproach than hitherto.Parking is also a land use. It isnecessary to question whetherthe competing demands forspace would mean that the landconsumed by an off-street carpark could be used moreefficiently if used differently. Tomake such an assessmentrequires the cost of providing thecar park to be related to thevalue of its contribution to theurban economy. Typically suchassessments are made in aqualitative rather than aquantitative way. Maximumparking standards may have theeffect of encouraging moreproductive use of land, but againthis may not be the most efficientin transport terms. One way ofmoving towards greaterefficiency would be to ensure asfar as possible that all towncentre parking is under unifiedpublic control or influence and ischarged at a rate that reflects thecost of provision including land,debt charges, asset depreciationand other costs.Shared provision of parkingbetween different land uses andactivities will tend to increaseefficiency, for example weekendleisure use of spaces used byoffice workers during onweekdays. Many local authoritiesnow require shared provision asa condition of planning consent,

60 Chapter 5including the sharing of spacebetween customers and thegeneral public at stores.Park-and-ride schemes canrepresent a more efficient use ofroad and parking infrastructure.Parking space is provided at theedge of the urban area, with apublic transport interchange. Theroads serving the town centreare used more efficiently, with areduced number of vehicles,particularly at peak hours. Thesame number of people canaccess the urban centre, but infewer vehicles. This will onlyoccur, however, if the towncentre parking opportunities arereduced accordingly. Inconsidering carefully park-andrideproposals, attention shouldbe paid to the overall objectivesand decisions about the use ofthe park-and-ride facility inrelation to town centre parkingthrough, for example, by:● Reducing town centrespaces by the amountprovided at the peripheralsite;● Converting town centrespaces from long to shortstay if the Park-and-Ride siteis mainly used bycommuters; and● Using Park-and-Ride toincrease the overallavailability of parking withoutincreasing town centreparking (for example, in linewith an increase inemployment or retailfloorspace).The efficiency goal should alsoinclude the efficient managementof public car parks to secure asatisfactory financial return onthe capital assets.Relevant objectives to increaseefficiency might include:● As parking uses land, toencourage shared space fornew development;● To reduce inappropriateparking in places that lead totraffic movement difficulties;●●●●To achieve more efficient useof land by relocating parkingto lower-cost areas, forexample by providing parkand-rideand other intermodalfacilities;To increase the proportion ofparking that is subject tolocal authority control, inparticular to reduce or gaininfluence over the amount ofprivate non-residential (PNR)parking;To reduce the demand forprivate off-street car parkingspaces through Travel Plans,or workplace parking levies;To charge for parking thatoptimises use; and● To encourage modes oftravel other than the car.Appropriate policies are set outin Chapter 6, but relevant targetsmight be:●●●●Review and change parkingstandards within adesignated timescale;Review and change parkingcharges within a specifiedperiod;Re-locate parking from towncentre to the edge of townlocations by a specified time;andDelays to buses caused byparked vehicles to bereduced by X% withinspecified time period.Environmental QualityThe control of traffic levelsthrough the use of parkingcontrols represents a valuablemeans of meeting environmentalobjectives. The environmentaleffects of traffic in terms of noise,air pollution and visual intrusionare well established. It isenvironmental goals that seeparking controls as a means ofcontrolling traffic growth, andthereby controlling the effect ofthe transport system upon theenvironment.Street management, in its widestsense, represents the public faceof the built environment. Mostpeople experience either someaspect of parking, the use of thehighway or the street scene on adaily basis. Reducing, therefore,the unwanted effects of roadtraffic and parking and improvingthe quality of the environment in

Defining Parking Objectives 61which we live and work shouldbe seen as a priority. Improvingurban design in highways,transportation and parking policyand practice can have a pivotalrole to play in the economic,social and environmental wellbeing of our villages, towns andcities. But it needs to be seen incontext, as part of a biggerpicture, and balancing a range offrequently conflicting interests.This often requires a multidisciplinaryapproach to designwhen changing the street sceneand parking environment.Changing and managing thehighway and parkingenvironment are primarily aboutcreatingsuccessfulcommunities. It is important,therefore, to recognise theinteractions between the variouselements and the necessarypolicy interventions that combineto create and maintain betterplaces.“By Design” (12) states “Urbandesign is the art of makingplaces. It is not just about makingplaces visually attractive, but iscrucial to how places function, tomaintaining and enhancing thevitality and viability of towncentres, to regenerating rundownareas and to creating safecommunities where people feelsecure.” Thinking about gooddesign from the start of theplanning and developmentprocess is the best way topromote successful andsustainable regeneration,conservation and place making.A significant factor in the qualityand success of a newdevelopment is on how sensitiveit is to the local context, includingits connections to existing areasand the convenience, safety andcomfort with which people areable to get to and move throughit. New development presents anopportunity to create places thatpromote and encouragemovements through all modes oftravel, rather than on aconcentration upon vehicles. Asuccessful parking strategy will,therefore, embrace the principlesof good urban design.Further guidance on thefundamental principles to gooddesign and how these may beapplied is set out in “By Design”,whilst “Better places to live” (13),the companion guide to PPG3,sets out the attributes whichunderlie well-designed,successful residentialenvironments.Relevant objectives might,therefore, include:● To minimise visual intrusioncaused by parked vehicles;● To encourage travel bymodes other than the car, asa means of reducing theenvironmental impact ofmotor traffic;●To design and maintainparking areas and structures,signs and markings so as toblend with and not detractfrom the surroundingenvironment;● To create high quality urbandesign within retail andcommercial areas (with lesson-street parking);● To enable a X%improvement in air quality inkey locations; and● To locate and design parkingprovision and access roadsso as to avoid environmentalconflict with the activitiesserved.Suitable policies are set out inChapter 6, but measurabletargets might include:●●On-street parking provisionin new developments to beprovided in bays andlandscaped, implemented asplanning policy withimmediate effect;On new residential accessstreets, developers tocontribute X% of the cost ofparking alongside adoptablestreets;● Single bay meter control tobe converted to pay-anddisplay(reduced meters)within three years; and● Parking control signingimprovement schemes to bedrawn up within two years

62 Chapter 5and implemented within fiveyears.Safety and SecuritySafety and security, of people,vehicles and possessions, are ofparamount importance indeveloping and implementingeffective parking strategies.Indeed, safety is arguably a toppriority for anyone engaged inchanging the road environmentand the allocation of land.Parking strategies must be wellrooted in the relevant communitysafety strategy, crime reductionplans and the Local TransportPlan for the area.Parking strategies must pay dueregard to the personal safety ofeveryone likely to use a facility orservice. This includes movementto, from and within parkingfacilities and services. Specialattention should be paid to theparticular needs and concerns ofwomen, the young and theelderly.Parking facilities should avoidpoor lighting, places wherestrangers can hide, dark areas,uneven footways and floorscape,exposure to traffic risk, creatingplaces and opportunities for antisocialbehaviour and creatingsecluded or lonely places.Closed circuit television (CCTV)and good lighting have a majorrole to play in reducing real andperceived danger, as domaintaining a human presenceat otherwise quiet times. TheDepartment for Transport havepublished literature that plannersand designers should take intoaccount when considering thesafety consequences of theiractions or intentions (14).The British Parking Association(BPA) became the administratingbody for the Secured Car ParksAward scheme in October 2001.The scheme, launched by theAssociation of Chief PoliceOfficers, aims to raise securitystandards within car parks andthereby reduce car related crime,22% of which occurs in carparks.To be awarded Secured CarPark status owners andoperators must meet a stringentset of standards, including gooddesign and management, aneffective level of security patrols,good lighting and the provision ofhelp points. By 2004 over 1100car parks in the UK held SecuredCar Park status and operators aswell as users have seen thebenefits of increased securitywithin car parks. For example,the Luton bus station car parkincreased its usage and revenueby 65% following the award,while the Woodhouse Lane carpark in Leeds generated an extra£160,000 a year in fees fromcontract parking as a direct resultof work undertaken to achieveaward status (15). The scheme,and the associated reductions incrime in member car parks,supports the Home Office andpolice strategies to fight carcrime. The Association of ChiefPolice Officers (ACPO) managesthe police element of the projectthrough the ACPO CrimePrevention Initiatives Ltd, a notfor-profitorganisation whollyowned by ACPO.Relevant objectives mightinclude:●●To improve the quality andstandards of car parkingprovision;To ensure that all off-streetcar parks have adequatelighting and security controls;and● To gain Secured Car ParkStatus.Again policies are explained inChapter 6, but linked targetsmight be:●●All off-street car parks to bebrought to an acceptablestandard of safety andcleanliness within 10 years;andObtain Secured Car ParkStatus within a specified timeperiod.Social Inclusion andEquityThe key issue here is betweenthose who have ready access toa private car, and those who donot. To the extent that provision

Defining Parking Objectives 63for car use (for example throughthe provision of ample freeparking) reduces the quality ofaccess by other means, createsinequality between these twogroups.This has had some profoundconsequences over time, asdevelopments such assuperstores, business parks, andlarge hospitals have beenlocated where they are relativelyinaccessible by means otherthan the car. Not only are suchopportunities denied to peoplewithout cars, such developmentshave often led to the closure offacilities in accessible locations.Government policy is such that,in the case of new housingdevelopment, priority should begiven to the needs of pedestriansrather than the movement andparking of vehicles. Home Zonesmay be a useful mechanism toconsider in such circumstances.There is also the issue ofequitability in the distribution ofparking and other urban streetspace. The implementation ofparking policy often means that,where the demand for spaceexceeds supply, controls areneeded which influence the levelof access of different types ofusers to the available space.Users of car parking includecommuters, shoppers, businessusers, disabled badge holdersand residents. It is oftennecessary to establish ahierarchy to prioritise the needsof different user groups as a firststep in establishing an equitabledistribution of available space,taking account of all thecompeting demands. A numberof criteria have to be consideredwhen developing such ahierarchy. These include:●●The amount of kerbsidespace available in relation tooverall demand. (Where theamount is tiny in relation todemand, there may be littlepoint in making it availablefor parking);The value of space forpedestrian activity andamenity compared to its usefor parking;● The priority accorded todifferent modes of transport;● The presence of economicactivities; and● The importance of differentuser groups to the qualityand success of the area.Such a hierarchy has beenintroduced with the Priority RedRoute Network in London. A setof kerbside controls seek to meetthe needs of moving traffic first,followed by the need for kerbsideaccess for loading andunloading, then parking forpeople with disabilities, forresidents whose dwellings fronton to the network, with the needsof short term parkers being metlast. Long term parking duringthe day is not generally provided.Different hierarchies of priorityfor the allocation of space will beneeded for different parts of theroad network. For example, toppriority to moving traffic may notbe appropriate where main roadsserve also as local high streets.Priorities for a main road througha local centre might look like this:1. Catering for pedestrians;2. Keeping vehicular trafficmoving;3. Providing for loading;4. Providing for those withmobility impairments(usually identified by theBlue Badge);5. Providing for residents;6. Providing for visitors – shortstay, and7. Providing for visitors – longstay.Allocating kerbside space(including constructed bays) onthe basis of such hierarchiesensures that all interests areconsidered in relation to widerobjectives.Appropriate objectives mightinclude:●●To change the amount ofparking space in order toencourage the use of othermodes;To use parking controls andcharges to encourage modesof travel other than the car, to

64 Chapter 5Figure 5.2: Conflicting Parking PolicyObjectives.Regenerationdiscourage use of the car(whilst recognising that forsome disabled people use ofa car is the only optionavailable) and to improve thequality of public transport,walking and cycling; and● To allocate street and roadspace to other modes oftravel (eg, bus lanes createdfrom on-street parkingspace).Policies are set out in Chapter 6,but targets might include:● X% of on-street parkingspace in the town centre(defined) to be converted forpedestrian use within 10years; and● Residential design guide(including provision anddesign of parking) to beprepared within X years.Reconciling conflictingObjectives for ParkingPolicyThe task of balancing parkingsupply and demand can rarelybe carried out without the needto reconcile conflicting objectivesand interests. It is, therefore,important that local authoritiesestablish a mechanism wherebydifferent aspects of parking canbe coordinated with each other,and with other aspects of policyon which they have an impact.Too often there is littlecoordination between, forexample, the provision of parkingin new developments and themanagement of off-street carparks.RevenueRestraintThree specific objectives can beidentified as being a frequentsource of conflict:●●The desire to use parkingmeasures as a means ofregenerating a specific partof the urban area such as thetown centre (ie, providingmore parking to attractbusiness);The desire to use parkingcontrols as a means ofrestraining vehicle trafficand improving environmentalquality, or to encourage theuse of non-car modes; and● The need to secure sufficientrevenue from the parkingoperation to cover costs or tomake a surplus to fund otheractivities.As represented in Figure 5.2, thepursuit of one objective alone willpotentially result in the other twobeing compromised. Theprovision of ample parking spaceas a means of regenerating anarea will directly conflict with thedesire to use parking controls asa means of restraining trafficlevels. Parking charges may bekept low to attract visitors, butthis may mean that it isimpossible to generate sufficientrevenue to balance the parkingaccount. The pursuit of therestraint objective may meanthat regeneration is harder toachieve if the economy of thearea suffers by deflecting carusers to other accessibledestinations with a consequentnegative effect on the parkingaccount. Likewise the pursuit ofthe revenue objective tomaximise availability of charged– for spaces would run counter tothe other two objectives.The task in resolving suchconflicts is twofold:1. Priorities must beidentified, and policiesdeveloped that reflect thesepriorities; and2. Creative solutions shouldbe sought to ameliorate thesource of any conflict.Sometimes it is best to retainobjectives that conflict, ratherthan trying to achieve a text with

Defining Parking Objectives 65which everyone agrees. Theparticular balance of interestscan be explicitly stated, andacknowledgement given thatcertain interests have not beensatisfied, and why. Theadvantage of this approach isthat the debate and the reasonsbehind controversial decisionsremain visible, rather than beingobscured by rhetoric. Forexample, an objective ofincreasing car access to towncentres for shoppers is likely toconflict with an objective ofencouraging public transportuse. If priority is given to thelatter objective, then that must bestated as a reason why towncentre parking is not to beincreased, or why park-and-rideis to be expanded.A legitimate complement tocreative solutions is to ensurethat issues are looked at anddealt with strategically.Rural IssuesPPG13 notes that, whilst thepotential for using publictransport, walking or cycling ismore limited in rural than inurban areas, the same overallpolicy approach should be used.Indeed many of the objectivesand targets set out above maybe appropriate for sensitive rurallocations. In addition the policyapproach should be used topromote social inclusion, reduceisolation and improveaccessibility for those withoutuse of a car.PPG7 (16) sets out the planningpolicy framework for rural areas.The key issue for ruraldevelopment is theencouragement of ruraldiversification so as to increasethe range of job opportunitiesand access to other facilities inrural areas. However, it isimportant that rural development,and consequently its parkingneeds, is of a scale that matchesthe density of population in ruralareas and is sited in the mostaccessible locations, particularlyfor those who do not haveaccess to a car. In general thiswill mean smaller scaledevelopment in keeping withrural population densities,located in key rural towns andvillages. Such development islikely to be below the thresholdsfor maximum parking standardsset out in PPG13.Specific issues, however, ariseat key rural tourist locations,including the National Parks.Many rural tourist locationsdepend on access by car, butpolicies and schemes can still beapplied to promote access by arange of transport modes.Parking management strategiesshould be developed for theseareas and locations thatencourage the most sustainablemeans of access. In particular,park-and-ride possibilities shouldbe explored as one means ofreducing the stress on the ruralroad network. Some ruralattractions already incorporate intheir publicity material means ofaccess by public transport. Localauthorities can encourage this.One particular incentive may beto enable access by non-carmodes in those cases whereexcessive car use leads toextreme deterioration in thequality of what people havecome to see. In such instancesvisitors may readily accept theneed to transfer from car at adistance from the attraction inorder to protect the attractionitself.Appropriate signing and informationdisplayed in rural settings

66 Chapter 5References(1) Transport Research Laboratory (TRL)1994.(2) LPAC 1998.(3) SERPLAN Parking Policies for theSouth East 1993.(4) LPAC’s Parking Advice 1997.(5) Valleley, M et al, 1997, ParkingPerspectives, Landor, London.(6) Department for Transport: FullGuidance on Local Transport Plans,Second Edition 2004.(7) DETR, 2000, Guidance on theMethodology for Multi-Modal Studies,(GOMMS).(8) Department for Transport: AccessibilityPlanning – Draft Guidance 2004.(9) Greater London Authority, 2002, SDSMaximum Parking Standards:derivation of PTAL-based parkingrestraint, SDS Technical Report 20.(10) Llewelyn-Davies, 1998, SustainableResidential Quality: new approachesto urban living, for DETR, LPAC andGovernment Office for London.(11) Traffic Management Act 2004.(12) DETR/CABE, 2000, By Design: UrbanDesign in the planning system:towards better practice.(13) DTLR/CABE, 2001, Better places tolive: By design.(14) Department for Transport, 1999,Personal Security Issues in PedestrianJourneys.(15) British Parking Association.(16) PPG 7 The Countryside, DETR, 1997.

Chapter 6Formulating ParkingInterventionsIntroductionThis chapter sets out theschemes, policies and protocols(collectively referred to asinterventions) that can bebrought into play to meetobjectives. The various topicsare grouped under 4 headings● 1. The quantity of differenttypes of parking space;● 2. The quality of parkingspaces (location, level ofservice, design);● 3. Parking control and pricing– both on and off-street; and● 4. Management of Parking(Protocols).The Quantity of ParkingSpace: How muchparking?One of the importantconsiderations is to determinehow well the supply of parkingspace relates to the level ofdemand in the area, both atpresent and in the future, and todecide whether more or lessspace should be provided. Thisneeds to take account also of thevariability of parking demand.Such considerations have to beset within the policy contextwithin a Parking Strategy. Tobalance supply and demand, theoptions are to increase supply orto limit demand through price orregulation. Attempts to limitdemand by allowing parkingshortages to occur (i.e. when carparking spaces are full) shouldbe avoided, since the absence ofspaces available for use causesfrustration and “searching” traffic,which is inefficient andenvironmentally damaging. Thequantity of parking cannotrealistically be decided withoutalso deciding on the conditionsand charges for use.The steps involved are,therefore:●●1. Decide on the quantity ofparking, together with itsallocation as betweendifferent types of use, its useover time and its consistencywith mode split targets andother objectives;2. Take measures to achievethe desired quantities indifferent categories; and● 3. Set charges and controlsat a level that will keep peakdemand at no more thanabout 85% of capacity.A number of mechanisms existby which a local authority caninfluence the amount of parkingspace:● Street design;● On-street controls;●●●●Negotiated levels of parkingin new development (thelowest that are workablewithin prescribed maxima);Planning permission for theconversion of parking spaceto other uses;Planning permission for newcar parks; andLocal authority provision orremoval of public off-streetcar parks.Chapter Acknowledgements 6Formulating ParkingInterventions

68 Chapter 6Whilst these issues should beconsidered in the context ofdeveloping Local TransportPlans and Parking Strategies,they will also need attentionthrough the Travel Plan andTransport Assessmentprocedures. Awareness ofPlanning Policy Guidance adviceis also important. For example,PPG3 requires local authoritiesto lower significantly theirpermitted levels of off-streetparking.New developments should nowbe planned with parkingprovision lower than the potential(ie, unmanaged) demand, andplanned instead to operate with ahigh proportion of access bymeans other than the car. Thismeans that potential demandcan exceed supply in thesedevelopments. Controls onparking on-street are required inorder to achieve the objective ofthe planning policy and limitdemand for car use.The quantity of off-street parkingis an important variable whenmanaging demand for car use,not only in town and city centres,but at all locations whereactivities attract access by car.Local authorities have influenceover the supply of publiclyprovided car parks, but onlyindirect influence over theexisting stock of private carparking.How much on-streetparking?The amount of on-street parkingthat is potentially available islargely dictated by the designcharacteristics of the road andstreet network, namely theoverall highway dimensions, andthe proportion of space allocatedto parking. The quantity ofparking can be increased insome places, for example bymarking out chevron rather than“in-line” parking bays, but streetwidths in the UK rarely allow this.There may be important benefitsthat can be obtained by reducingthe quantity of on-street parking.Removal of on-street spaces inthe heart of the town centre, orconverting them for disabledbadge holders only should beconsidered, where appropriate.Such on-street spaces can leadto a traffic nuisance that isdisproportionate to the benefitsof the tiny minority of visitors whocan benefit from them. This isbecause:● These parking spaces takeup space that could be usedfor pedestrian and/orenvironmental improvements;● Vehicles manoeuvring in andout of spaces in streets withhigh pedestrian activitycause a particular hazard;and● Drivers will, if they know thaton-street spaces exist, drivearound the town centrestreets simply to see whethera space is free, thusgenerating unnecessarytraffic in the places where itcauses most nuisance.In town centres and other placeswith a concentration of nonresidentialactivities, parkingdemand is likely to exceedsupply and, therefore, there willbe a need for controls. Similarlyin many residential areas builtwithout off-street parking orgarages, controls will often benecessary to manage spaceallocation on the street. Thequantity of parking spaces willtend to be lower with a controlscheme than before because ofspace kept clear for safety oramenity reasons. Withoutcontrols safety and amenity arecompromised.How much off-streetparking?Decisions on the amount ofparking that should be providedin a given area should takeaccount of the following:●●●Modal split targets or trafficlevels (the quantity of parkingusually allows a calculationof both);Capacity or environmentalsensitivity of the roads withinand leading to the area; andThe planned future level ofactivity in the area, for

Formulating Parking Interventions 69example expansion of retailor employment facilities.Ownership, Control andManagement of Off-Street Car ParksOff-street car parks providemuch of the parking stock intown and city centres, and,therefore, it is desirable for thelocal authority to have controlover their use or at least a majorinfluence through private/publicpartnerships in order toimplement their policies. Publicoff-street parking is provided insurface, multi-storey orunderground car parks.Shopping centre managersoperate many of the larger carparks in town and city centreswith the result that the localauthorities often have little or nocontrol over the tariff structureadopted. This limits theeffectiveness of local strategies.Local Authorities therefore,should try to avoid sucharrangements in future, andmake efforts to retrieve or gaininfluence over existing car parksthrough a Parking Strategy.Car parks should provide for allvisitors to a centre, and planningconditions need to be placed onnew private car parks to ensurethat this happens. For existingcar parks outside the control ofthe local authority (for examplewhere they were providedwithout such control, or wherecontrol has been irrevocablytransferred), the local authorityshould consider what incentivescould be provided to encouragepublic use, or conversion toanother land use. Failing that,mechanisms should beestablished to encourageunderstanding and joint workingwith companies andorganisations to achieve at leastsome objectives.All off-street car parks contributeeither positively or negatively tothe achievement of strategicobjectives. Provided that thelong term desirability of aparticular car park is clear, itsoperation and management maybe undertaken by privatecompanies, but on the basis ofcontracts that enable the localauthority to influence patterns ofusage. This will usually meancontrol over:● Tariff structures;● Charge levels;● Hours of operation;● Specification of minimumstandards of provision andmaintenance.Where authorities put their offstreetparking stock into thecontrol of contractors they willneed to specify clearly howcharges will be determined andhow a strategic approach tocharging will be maintained.The ownership and managementpolicies may not be readilyidentifiable to the user. Privatecompanies operate many carparks on behalf of a localauthority or shopping centreowner, either as managers,passing the income to the ownerand being paid a managementSurface, Multi-storey and Undergroundcar parks.

70 Chapter 6fee, or as lessees. Where a localauthority owns the freehold of acar park and has leased it to aprivate operator they may retainsome control over setting oftariffs, in order to ensure that it ismanaged in accordance withstated policies. The importantpoint is that decisions aboutownership and management ofcar parks should be taken withreference first to strategictransport and planningobjectives. The question offinancial viability also comes intothis and it may be better toengage in private/public sectorpartnerships over how car parksare provided and operated.Changing the amount ofparkingThe Parking Strategy shouldindicate the total amount ofparking that is appropriate in thetown or city centre, or at otherlocations that attract trips.Changes in the total amount willneed to be managed through acombination of active projects(such as the building of a newcar park, the removal of an oldone, or a reduction of on-streetspace), and through exploitingopportunities as they arisethrough development orredevelopment. When there ispressure for redevelopment, theStrategy should indicate whethermore or less parking should beprovided in the new scheme.The Strategy may also include apolicy of changing the relativeproportion of different types ofparking, for example:●●Reducing the proportion ofparking outside localauthority influence;Reducing the proportion ofparking available to all-daycommuters; and● Reducing the proportion ofparking accommodated onsurface car parks, or onstreet.The implementation of the offstreetparking arrangements ofthe strategy must, therefore, takeaccount of all aspects of parkingin the area concerned.Incentives for changesto private parkingA large proportion of the totalstock of parking in town and citycentres comprises parkingprovided within office and otherdevelopments whose use isavailable only to those who areinvited to do so by the owner oroccupier.The presence of thisparking severely limits the abilityof the local authority to manageparking to meet planning andtransport objectives. To ensurethat the full potential of a parkingstrategy is achieved, it will benecessary to adopt a policy ofreducing, over time, the amountand proportion of parking that isoutside the local authority’scontrol or influence.Local authorities should,therefore, establish appropriatepolicies and use opportunities toreduce the proportion of carparking that lies outside theirsphere of influence. There maybe incentives that can be appliedor offered to the owners of suchcar parks to encourage theirconversion or redevelopment formore productive uses. Suchincentives might include, forexample:●●Owners and occupiers canbe offered alternativepremises within the contextof a redevelopment orregeneration scheme thatare more accessible by noncarmodes (ie, land swapdeals);The local Development Plancan indicate where planningapplicationsforredevelopment will beencouraged, includingexisting developments withexcessive private parking;and● Workplace Parking Chargescould provide an indirectincentive for the moreintensive and productive useof private parking space.Local authorities should alsoreview the use and potential oftheir own car parking in this light.

Formulating Parking Interventions 71Park–and–Ride Car ParksPark-and-ride car parks can beprovided at railway stations or inassociation with frequent busservices to town and city centres.Park-and-ride may also beprovided for access tooccasional or special attractionswhere there is an advantage tokeeping parking “off-site” forsafety, traffic or environmentalreasons. Given the time and costpenalty of switching modes,people will not use them for shortvisits. For a comprehensiverange of information see thereferences to Parkhurst at theend of the chapter (1).The justification for park-and-rideis usually based on one or moreof the following:●●●To provide additional accessfor car users to a centrewithout increasing parkingsupply in the centre;To enable the amount ofparking in the centre to bereduced, for example toallow the expansion of retailor other activities (therebyrelocating parking out of thecentre);To provide for categories ofcar user who are discouragedfrom parking in the centre, forexample car commuters towork; and● To reduce traffic on roadsleading to the centre, eitherin general or specifically atpeak times.Park-and-ride can reduce trafficin city centres and on the roadsleading to city centres, but maynot reduce car use overall. Sometravellers who would have madethe whole trip by public transportchoose to drive to the fringe ofthe city and use park-and-ride.Careful study is, therefore,necessary to forecast the impacton travel demand, including therelative sensitivities of differentroutes and destinations, beforedeciding to adopt a park-and-ridesolution.Much will depend on whether thefacility is used primarily bycommuters (as with station carparks in the South East) or byshoppers and tourists. Ifdedicated bus services areprovided, these are much lesslikely to be financially viable whenthe car park is used mainly bycommuters, since the buses willhave few passengers in betweenthe peak commuter times. On theother hand, it may be possible toset higher charges forcommuters than for shoppers.The potential advantages ofpark-and-ride include:● Increasing the volume ofvisitors to a centre withoutincreasing parking in thecentre;● Enabling a centre to serve aregional or sub regionalcatchment area that ispredominantly cardependent,without having toaccommodate cars in thecentre itself; and● Enabling a reduction ofparking in a centre byrelocating it to areas withlower land value and/or lowerenvironmental sensitivity.The disadvantages of park-andrideinclude:●●●The car park may take landwithin the walking catchmentof public transport stations orstops, thus pushingdevelopment further away.They may encourage peopleto drive part of the wayinstead of taking publictransport all the way;They may encourage peopleto drive to a park-and-rideserviced centre, rather thanuse public transport to reachan alternative centre; and● Car parks located at the edgeof-townor out-of-town may beenvironmentally intrusive, andmay create pressure for carbaseddevelopment.To be operationally successful,park-and-ride needs to have thefollowing characteristics:●●Located on radial routes withpublic transport priority;Serve a centre with highparking charges and/orlimited parking supply;

72 Chapter 6●●●A secure car park clearlysigned from approachroutes;High frequency services; andHigh quality service attributesincluding information,vehicles, drivers, and tariffs.Park-and-ride at rail stationsusually provide for commuterstravelling to a city centre. Mostare provided by and managed bythe train or tram operatingcompany. “Parkway” stations canprovide easy access to the railnetwork from areas poorlyserved by rail, and reduce trafficaccessing stations in centralareas, but the potentialconsequence of encouragingmore commuting from ruralareas needs to be addressed.Park-and-ride facilities need tobe planned carefully so as not torun counter to local planning ortransport policy and should beprimarily assessed on thebenefits they bring in helping toreduce congestion in town andcity centres. In Denmark and theNetherlands, they provide “cycleand-ride”facilities rather thanjust car parking.Station Car ParksStation car parks are also a formof park-and-ride facility, if notwidely recognised as such.Fares and charges are oftenseparate. They are usuallymanaged by train operatingcompanies, and are charged atrates that are perceived tobenefit the companies involved.Where there is a high level ofcommuter demand, charge ratesare usually higher than for publiccar parking in the vicinity, andfrequently comprise onestandard daily rate. Other, moreshort-stay users can beconsequently deterred. Localauthorities should establishliaison with the train companiesin order to effect decisions thatwill influence transportobjectives.Problems can arise on streetssurrounding stations from driverswho are parking and continuingtheir journey by rail. Known as“railheading”, this occurs wherethere is no station car park, orthe car park is insufficient tomeet demand, or where driverswant to avoid the parking charge.Although it may be desirable toencourage the use of rail forcommuting, this must bebalanced against the problemsthat railheading creates forresidents and others aroundstations. Controlled parkingzones can be created for suchareas, with a tariff structuredesigned to achieve anappropriate balance. Space canalso be considered for those whoare railheading but who do notwish to park all day. Thisgenerally is not supplied instation car parks because itreduces revenue, but it can morereadily be provided on-streetwith graduated charges.New non-residentialdevelopmentDecisions on the amount ofparking to be provided in newnon-residential developmentsare crucial in influencing themodal split and traffic volumetrends in an area. If the quantityof parking allows for a higherproportion of trips by car than theaverage for the town or area,then that development will raisethe average. Conversely, a policyto reduce the proportion of tripsmade by car in a town or arearequires that a new developmentprovide for less than theprevailing average car modeshare. The alternative to this is toreduce the car mode share atexisting developments, leadingto what may be termed “trendcompensation”.In determining these matters thelocal authority should establishmaximum levels of parkingprovision for such developmentsand, within these, negotiate thelowest levels possible forindividual schemes.A policy can be consideredwhereby there is a presumptionagainst the provision of privatenon-residential off-street parking.If all parking is available to allusers there will be greaterefficiency in the use of land, and

Formulating Parking Interventions 73potentially important urbandesign benefits due to reducedneed for access ways. Theavailability of communal parkingcan, therefore, serve objectivesof safety, environmental quality,and efficient use of land.New residentialdevelopmentThe extent to which reducing theavailability of parking inresidential development cancontribute to the objective ofoverall traffic restraint is animportant issue. It can start toimpact on car ownership as wellas influencing car use.Historically, both the tripfrequency and the distancetravelled by car are closely linkedwith car ownership. While it maybe unacceptable to limit carownership as a matter of policy,consideration should be given topolicies that will lead people tochoose to own cars less. Thismay involve, at the very least,ending practices that actuallyencourage car ownership.The strategy should seek todeliver the objectives set out inPPG3. This requires localplanning authorities to revisetheir car parking standards toallow for significantly lower levelsof off-street parking, particularlyfor developments in certainlocations. The strategy may alsoseek to achieve a reducedproportion of travel by car and ahigher proportion of travel bymodes other than the car. To theextent that this is achieved, thereis likely to be lower demand forcar ownership, and, therefore,lower demand for residentialparking space. This can be seenin the relationship betweenpublic transport use and carownership shown in Table 6.1below, albeit that it relates toGerman and Swiss examples.Some parking interventions mayencourage more or less carownership. Thus, moreownership can be facilitated by:●Providing parking spaceswithin the dwelling curtilage,especially provision of two ormore spaces; and● Uncontrolled or free parkingfor residents on-street.And less ownership encouragedby:●Parking spaces or garagessold separately fromdwellings;● Parking spaces leased orrented rather than sold;● Residents’ parking permitcharges; and●Table 6.1 Car ownership and public transport use in four cities.City Number of public transport trips Cars owned perper resident per year1,000 residentsBerne 500 360Zürich 500 390Karlsruhe 220 488Bonn 175 4911 Cars excluded Better use of existing standards, designed to provideareas on-site free of vehicles. Cars parked onperiphery or underground.2 Car reduced Less than 1:1 parking provided. Parking provided onsite(as level 1), or on-street or at other off-site facilities.3 Zero dedicated No parking provided exclusively for the housing.parkingParking on-street or off-street shared with otheractivities or developments. No legal restriction onownership.4 Car-free housing Car ownership neither provided for nor allowed. Thismeans zero general parking provision and legalrestrictions (voluntary or otherwise) on car ownershipby residents. However, there may be provision forNeighbourhood Car Fleet shared cars, and possiblydisabled persons vehicles.Source: Apel, D et al, 1997, “Kompact, mobil, urban: Stadtentwicklungskonzepte zurVerhehrsvermeidung im internationalen Vergleich, DIFU, Berlin (2).Restricted issue of residents’parking permits.Car-free and car-reducedhousingAs well as contributing to trafficrestraint, reducing the amount ofcar parking in residentialdevelopment can have othersignificant impacts. Research inLondon (3) concentrated on twokey impacts: allowing higherdensity housing and thusaccommodating morehouseholds, and improvedresidential quality. The studyidentified that between 25% and40% of total site area inresidential development isdevoted to access ways andparking. This inevitably placessevere constraints on thedensities and environmentalquality that can be achieved.Thus in housing as in all aspectsof physical urban structure,

74 Chapter 6provision for the car isfundamentally at odds with thecreation of high density and highquality built environments, orwhat may be termed “urbanity”.The study identified a continuumof “car freeness” applicable toresidential development thatcould make various degrees ofuse of such space, see above.These classifications are in partdescriptive of past types andpatterns of housing, and in partprescriptive of what could beapplied to new housingdevelopment. Local authoritieswill need to decide whichapproach would be mostappropriate for any onedevelopment on the basis of itslocation and accessibility, andconsideration of the lifestyles ofpotential occupiers.The study paid particularattention to the areas withinwalking distance of town centreswhere, in respect of newdevelopment, the morerestrictive levels of the abovecontinuum would be more likelyto apply. In these areas, itsuggested that the followingmeasures, which becomeprogressively more restrictive,could complement the approachto the design of new housing:● Extension of controlled andresidents’ parking schemes;● The use of pricingmechanisms to rationparking spaces;●●Re-allocation of road spacefrom car to bus andcycleways to providedisincentives to car use andincentives for moresustainable modes;Use of planning agreementsand restrictive covenants oncar ownership for purchasersof new housing withindesignated highly accessiblelocations; and● Neighbourhood car fleets (orCar Clubs).Edinburgh and the LondonBoroughs of Camden andRichmond have applied the “carfree” approach to housing in theirareas. They have concluded thatto be effective the developmentneeds to be in a controlledparking zone (CPZ) and that thebest way of enforcing the car freeelement is to use the CPZ trafficmanagement order to preventthe issue of a parking permit.Rationing of permits is byregulation rather than price andnon-ownership is enforced bytraffic order rather than by aplanning condition. It is alsopossible to prevent the issue ofparking contracts in private carparks to residents of car-freehousing, though this must beachieved as a condition ofplanning permission, andspecified so as to apply to alloccupiers in perpetuity.Car-free or car-reduced housingcarries with it the inherentpossibility that residents will owncars and park them on the streetnear the development. If thestreets are covered by a CPZ,this may not cause any undueproblems, and planningconditions can be used to ensurethat residents of car freeschemes do not park cars in thecontrolled area.Outside areas withcomprehensive parking controlsit is difficult to see how car-freehousing could be made to work.In those circumstances the issuethen becomes one of how muchparking and in what format, andwhether on-street parking bayscan be included as part of theoverall supply of parking. Thiswill be a matter for negotiationand design taking account oflocal circumstances. Factors tobe taken into account shouldinclude:●●The amount of on-streetparking space available;The likelihood of this beingcontrolled at some point inthe future;● The current demand forparking on-street;● The anticipated carownershipprofile of newresidents;●The likelihood of this profilechanging over time; and

Formulating Parking Interventions 75●The availability of publictransport services and retailand other facilities withineasy walking distance of thehousing site.City Car ClubsCar Clubs can help to reduceparking demand where itexceeds supply, while at thesame time Car Clubs offergreater benefit where such aparking shortage exists. SuchClubs, or neighbourhood carfleets, are a potentially importantmeans of reducing carownership, and thus residentialparking demand. They may beuseful in enabling car-free or carreducedhousing to work, but thegreat majority of Car Clubsoperate in conventionalresidential environments. CarClubs give people theopportunity to choose to use acar when it is most appropriatewithout the problems of owningand parking a car, especially indense urban areas. Althoughsome car rental companies nowhire vehicles by the hour, a CarClub will potentially have widerappeal because vehicles arekept close to members’ homes. Itis estimated that the parkingrequirement for Car Clubmembers can be reduced by75%.Car clubs are now found inGermany and the Netherlands.Several schemes are alsooperating in Britain and more areplanned.Experience with Car Clubs inmainland European citiessuggests that membership issplit roughly into thirds:●●One third are people who donot own a car;One third are people whoown a car but need theoccasional use of anadditional car; and● One third are people whohave got rid of a car and useCar Club vehicles instead.There is a reduction in overallparking demand in the thirdcase, and possibly in the secondcase. Interestingly, it has beenfound that walking and cyclingCar free and car-reduced housingCase 1Camden had 58 sites in total by 4th April 2000 that had been allocated for car freehousing. Just over half of these already had planning permission.Up to March 2001, planning permission for 670 car free housing units (in 79schemes) had been granted.Case 2The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has built apartments in the centre of Leeds formainly single people with incomes up to £20,000. After consulting focus groupsto gauge reaction, one parking space was provided for each flat, though residentsdo have to pay extra for them. However, only 22 of the 46 spaces were let.Case 3In 1999, Crosby Homes North-west built 120 apartments with just 76 parkingspaces two minutes from central Manchester’s Deansgate station. The parkingspaces were sold out at £15,000 each, but all the flats were sold. In 2000, a smalldevelopment of nine flats next door to Deansgate Quay was built without anyparking spaces – and all the flats were sold.are the most popular alternativemodes used, not publictransport.Integration of on- andoff-street parkingLocal authorities should seekevery opportunity to maximisethe proportion of parking overwhich it has influence with regardto the quantity of parking, as wellas the setting of tariffs andconditions for the use of parking.The policies in the ParkingStrategy should be based on acomprehensive approach toparking in the area concerned,and not focus on on- and offstreetparking as though theywere unrelated.Separate policies will be needed,however, on certain aspects. Forexample, proposed car parkrefurbishment, or residents’parking schemes can be dealtwith as discrete topics. But thecontext, and in particular policesregarding the supply of parkingmust relate to the entire parkingstock, whether public or private,on- or off-street. In this way astrategy may involve a change inthe total parking supply, and ashift in the proportion provided inthe various types of parking. Anillustration of good practice

76 Chapter 6Parking Policy in Groningen, NetherlandsTransport and planning policies were developed within the framework of twobroad objectives for Groningen, namely to strengthen the economic and culturalrole of the city within northeast Netherlands, and to make the city more “livable”.The main transport policy was to reduce car use, and to favour the use of cyclingand public transport. Consistent with this, the parking policy for the city centre wasdesigned to meet the objectives of:●Good accessibility by non-car means of travel; and● A high quality environment for those living in and visiting the centre.The parking policy is based on an order of priority for different parking users:1. Residents and disabled people2. Short or medium stay visitors (shoppers and business visitors)3. Long-stay visitors (commuters to work)The policy is to remove parking that causes environmental problems or that takesup space that can be put to better use, for example for pedestrian activity, or forparking that is more important. The preferred type of parking in the central areawhere there is intense pedestrian activity is, therefore, off-street multi-storeyrather than on-street parking.Implementation was to be phased as shown in the table, resulting in the gradualconversion of street space for pedestrian and cycle priority use, including cycleparking.Phase Residents Paid short-stay Paid long-stay Conversion ofstreet spacefor pedestriansand cyclistsBefore Uncontrolled on-street plus paid off-street NonePhase 1 On-street On-street Off-street No extraPhase 2 On-street Off-street Off-street Some extraPhase 3 Off-street Off-street Removed Maximum(Park-and-Ride only) provisionFigure 6.1 The “drive to, not through”principle.PPTown CentrePapplied to a particular town isgiven in the box above.The Quality of ParkingQuality issues relate to location,level of service and design ofparking facilities.LocationAt non-residential “destinations”the location of car parks affectsthe accessibility of an area in twoways:P● Its proximity to the roadnetwork that serves it affectsthe ease with which driverscan find it; and● Once parked, the ease withwhich drivers and theirpassengers can reach theirdestination.The location of car parking,therefore, affects its use anddesirability, and hence its valueand the prices that can becharged. In most town and citycentres opportunities occur fromtime to time to change thelocation of public car parks.Whether planning the relocationor construction of a car park,consideration should be given tohow to contribute to traffic andenvironmental objectives.Factors to be taken into accountinclude:●●●Car parks should be locateddirectly off approach roads,to avoid the need for vehiclesto drive into or through thecentre (see Figure 6.1);The balance of advantagebetween a few large carparks, and the convenienceof a larger number of smallercar parks;The potential to reduce orremove traffic from sensitivestreets (for example forpedestrianisation) byrelocating car parks, or theiraccess points; and● The possibility of givingpreferential access to thetown or city centre by publictransport, for exampleallowing bus access througha High Street, and locatingparking further away.Special and differentconsiderations may be requiredfor mixed-use developments andthe extent they are located awayfrom town or city centres. Forinstance, the problems createdby traffic exiting car parks atpeak hours.Parking and accessibilityFor private developments,decisions on the location andtype of new development, andthe amount of parkingassociated with it, is an important

Formulating Parking Interventions 77means whereby local authoritiescan influence the distribution andlocation of parking over time.The requirement for parkinglevels should be determinedwithin the context of maximumstandards and assessed throughthe process of TransportAssessments, as outlined inChapter 3. To assist in makingthese decisions, local authoritiesmay find it helpful to draw upmore detailed policies orprotocols whereby the parkingmaxima can be related to overallaccessibility of a site or area.A number of local authoritieshave adopted maximumstandards related to differentzones. The parking allowed atthe edge of the urban area tendsto be more generous than in thecentre, as the centre typically ismore accessible by publictransport. The aim is to avoid theneed for detailed assessments ofaccessibility for each planningapplication. By drawing up zonesof broadly similar accessibility bynon-car modes of travel, theupper limit of the parking that willbe allowed is clear at the start ofthe negotiating process. It is not,or at least should not be, asubstitute for the negotiation ofthe lowest levels of parking thatcan be made to work.If this approach is adopted, thedifferential between central andouter sites should not beexcessive, as this would create aperverse incentive to develop inout of centre locations. Thegreater the difference in parkingallowed between central andouter (or rural) locations, thegreater will be the reliance onother land use planning policiesto prevent development inlocations which are reliant on caraccess.A zoning system can be simple,as shown in Table 6.2, orrelatively detailed to take intoaccount different land uses, butthe main task will be inidentifying the boundariesbetween zones.The maximum parking levels andzone boundaries will need to beadopted as policy. Decisions willneed to take into account arange of factors that mayinclude:●●●Table 6.2 Maximum parking standards – the zoning approach.Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4Description Regional Town centre Suburbs and Periofarea town or or fringe of local centres urbancity centre Zone 1 and ruralareasPublic transport High Medium Low MarginalaccessibilityMaximum specified 20% of 50% of 60% of 80%in Regional PPG13 PPG13 PPG13Transport Strategy maximum maximum maximumLocal maximum 0% 80% 90% 100%parking level as %of regional maximumNote: the percentages shown are hypothetical.The mode share or trafficreduction targets adopted,for both centres andgenerally;The strength of the economyand vitality of centres;The current levels of publicand other parking provision;and● Likely or potential changes topublic transport accessibility.It must be stressed that parkinglevels should be determined inrelation to the type ofdevelopment and its scale in linewith land use planning policy.Transport Assessments merelyact as the mechanism forensuring that the developmentproposal will work in accessterms, and that the level ofparking provision is determinedas an output of that process.With increasing availability oftransport data, and theapplication of geographicalinformation systems (GIS), localauthorities may be able to basedecisions on more accurateaccessibility data. However, forthe sake of clarity and certaintyfor developers, it may still beuseful to determine zones ofsimilar accessibility.There is an important balance toachieve, and requires that theproblems of each area beconsidered independently, whilstremaining compatible. For

78 Chapter 6example, a town centre mayrequire a balance of long-termoff-street parking with short-stayon-street and off-street parking.Furthermore, access fordeliveries, by disabled “BlueBadge Holders” and by bus andtaxi to the core retail area will berequired. A town centre scenariosuch as this will differ greatly tothat of an outlying residentialarea with a problem of long stayon-street commuter parking,where a residents’ parkingscheme might be an appropriatesolution.Care will need to be taken indefining zones to ensure abalance between parkingdemand and available spaces iskept. Zones should not be solarge that residents are able todrive long distances and parkwithout restriction (as happens insome London Boroughs, forexample); neither should they beso small as to make the systemover complex. This final point isparticularly important in shortstayareas where occasionalvisitors will be unfamiliar with thecontrols and should not be facedwith a variety of zones orcharges. Conversely, acomplicated system of residents’zones would be more acceptableas their users are “captive” to aparticular location.In central areas, it is best tocharge most and have shortestparking durations on the mostaccessible on-street spaces, withlonger stays at lower prices inless popular areas and off-street.Lowest long-stay prices shouldbe in the more peripheral offstreetcar parks.Outer zone boundaries shouldnot be located on roads with highdensity housing and high levelsof on-street demand, but ratheron wide suburban residentialroads, preferably with off-streetparking. Residents of such areasmay be inclined to opposehaving restrictions in their roadsif they do not currentlyexperience problems, but it mustbe explained to them thatproblems will occur whencontrols are introduced inadjacent areas due to displaceddemand.Displacement will occur if zonesboundaries are too tightly drawn,and will become most apparentin and around the boundaryroads. If residential demand foron-street parking is low in theseroads (because adequateprovision is available off street)they may be little conflict in termsof parking capacity, but residentsmay still feel aggrieved at thepresence of non-residents’ carsbeing parked outside theirhomes. Obstructive parking canfrequently be managed by theintroduction of advisory accessprotection lines (APL), butshould problems persistmandatory restrictions can beintroduced to control obstructiveparking. An example isCanterbury City Council’s PARCPlan that mitigated displacementeffects in the most affected areasby introducing a further zonearound the CPZ with someadditional restrictions and untimedmarked bays on specificstreets where displacementeffects were being felt.For further discussion of thezone approach, see thereference to the GovernmentOffice for the South East (4).Parking for disabledpeople“Shopmobility” schemes aredesigned to enable disableddrivers to park in town centresand make use of wheelchairs orscooters for access around thecentre. Local authorities shouldensure that there is a schemeoperating in every large towncentre. Details of the schemeand how it operates are on theShopmobility website.All developments should beplanned to allow access fordisabled people in accordancewith Government Traffic Advisoryleaflet TA 5/95 (5). This is basedon unfettered parking demand.Despite improvements to publictransport, many disabled peoplestill require the private car.Suitable designated car parkingand/or drop-offs are, therefore,

Formulating Parking Interventions 79required. The Department forTransport document InclusiveMobility provides further detailedguidance on car parking fordisabled motorists and isavailable from the Department’sMobility & Inclusion Unit.In principle a developmentshould have at least oneaccessible car parking bay closeby designated for use bydisabled people. Developmentwith associated car parkingshould have at least two parkingbays for use by disabled people.The appropriate number of bayswill depend on the size andnature of the development, inaccordance with TA 5/95 (5).Access for disabled people whoare reliant on cars does notnecessarily mean that adedicated off-street space mustbe provided within the curtilageof each new development.Suitable spaces can be madeavailable in bays off thecarriageway adjacent to thescheme, and this can sometimesprovide better access thandedicated bays in an off-streetcar park, from which access tothe front door may be lessconvenient.Freight and distributionLorry parking and loading shouldbe considered in acomprehensive parking strategy.A balance has to be struckbetween the local needs ofbusinesses, local circumstancesand the priorities that should begiven to different modesrequiring parking. Parkingrestrictions exist to control theenvironmental impact of lorries inresidential or other areas, whileloading restrictions are usuallyused to control freight access totown centres during peakperiods or daytime shoppinghours. Such restrictions have tobe compatible and still allowbusinesses to receive goods atappropriate times.Overnight lorry parking bans canbe applied in residential areaswhere problems are identified.Generally residents themselvescan be relied upon to notify thelocal authority of lorry parkingthat is causing a nuisance.Common practice is to cover anentire local authority area with aban, and to make exceptionswhere parking is permitted insuitable roads, for example onindustrial estates. Increasingly,lorry bans are being applied notjust overnight, but also all daySaturday and Sunday. Whereblanket bans are proposed, it isclearly important to ensure thatsufficient, suitable parking isavailable at allocated sites.Alternatively, PPG13 suggeststhat the use of agreements onnoise levels and the number ofvehicles parked might offeranother feasible solution.In addition to local overnight lorryparking requirements,consideration should be given tostrategic lorry parkingrequirements, particularly atlocations close to advisory lorryroutes, motorways, Trunk roadsand ports. The provision of restfacilities is of increasing concernwithin the freight transportindustry since the EU Directiveon the organisation of workingtime for mobile workers in roadtransport came into force inMarch 2002. In the main theprivate sector provides for manyof these requirements but ‘noncommercial’needs will oftenremain.The freight industry transportshigh value goods and a secureenvironment, for both staff andShopmobility direction signs.

80 Chapter 6Designated parking area and sign formotorcycles.freight, needs to be consideredwhen providing lorry parkingfacilities. The provision of drivermeal facilities, secure rest stopand overnight facilities andfacilities for vehicle washing,vehicle part sales and routinemaintenance are key concernsof transport operators.CoachesThe Parking Strategy may needto consider the impact of anyproposed parking controls oncoach operations, particularly intourist and shopping/leisurecentres. A policy may be neededto deal with the issue in apositive way, for example byearmarking a site for a coachparking facility. Further advice oncoach parking facilities is givenin Chapter 7.MotorcyclesThe term “powered twowheelers”(PTW) covers mopedsas well as motorcycles. Travel byPTWs, depending on the relativeoccupancy rates and vehiclesizes, can use less fuel than carsand therefore produces lesspollution and carbon dioxide.Roadspace can also be usedmore efficiently. The case forencouraging such use, however,is less than clear. First, PTWtravel is more likely to be at theexpense of public transport thanthe car. Second, crash and injuryrates for PTWs are much higherthan for other motorised modes,including those involvingpedestrians.Nevertheless, people with PTWsare legitimate road users whocan rightly expect safe, secureand convenient parking. Localauthorities should includepolicies in their Parking Strategyto ensure such provision, and toensure that problems of PTWparking such as footwayobstruction can be avoided.The growth in ownership ofsmaller motorbikes has beenparticularly noticeable amongstcommuters for accessing bothurban areas and the rail network.Demand appears to reflect thecost and quality of other parts ofthe transport system and theneed for PTW parking thereforeneeds to be addressed in thatcontext. For example, theLondon congestion chargingscheme provides an exemptionfor motorcycles and mopeds andconsequently an increase in theirmodal share has occurred,together with an increase in thedemand for motorcycle parking.High density motorcycle parking(possibly just for the smallertypes) can be provided at mostprime locations such as railwaystations to encourage modalinterchange, enabling moresustainable rail-heading anddoor-to-door flexibility wherepublic transport is not viable.BicyclesCycle parking can be provided inresponse to known demand, butin many circumstances theprovision of parking in itselftriggers further demand. AParking Strategy should set outpolicies and proposals for thefollowing● Provision by the localauthority, for example attown and local centres and atkey public transport stops;● Location and design of cycleparking in relation tocycleways and carriageways,and footways;● Provision in small clusters orlarge parking areas;● Standards regarding thedesign of cycle parkingstands, with more securityrequired for long-termparking. Cycle theft is aknown major deterrent tocycle use;

Formulating Parking Interventions 81● Cycle parking in newdwellings (if cycling is to beencouraged, secure andconvenient parking must beavailable at both ends of thetrip;● Any charges for secure cyclelockers or secure cycleparking at public car parks;and● Description of any routineconsultation arrangementswith cycling interests.The National Cycling Strategyidentified cycle security as a keyissue and sets out objectives ofimproving parking at majordestinations, including towncentres,shoppingdevelopments, educationalestablishments, hospitals andleisure facilities.Planning policies should includeminimum cycle parkingstandards for provision in newdevelopments, together withappropriate polices onrequirements for shower andchanging facilities.Further advice on the design ofcycle parking is provided inTraffic Advisory Leaflet 6/99 (6).TaxisTaxi parking should beconsidered in a comprehensiveparking strategy. Taxi ranksshould be provided where thereis likely to be a demand for theiruse. In establishing sites for taxiranks, the local taxi drivers’association should be consulted,as they will be aware of thelocations and times whendemand arises. In some areas itmay be appropriate to providepart-time taxi ranks, for example,London Borough of Croydon operatefree secure cycle storage within anumber multi-storey car parks,subject to a £5 key deposit, which isrenewable monthly. This scheme hasproved to be particularly successfulamongst local commuters to the towncentre.Aberdeen City Council’sPark–and–Ride scheme providessecure cycle parking, both lockersand “Sheffield” stands, at their staffedsites. Secure parking is provided freeof charge with only the cost of thebus fare (£2) payable.close to places of entertainmentlate at night in locations thatmight be required for loadingduring the day. The Traffic SignsRegulations and GeneralDirections (7) allow this.The Local Authority shouldidentify appropriate sites for taxiranks at railway and busstations, in shopping centres andclose to places of entertainment.Prominent town centre locations,like market squares, shouldnormally have taxi ranks.Historically telephones wereprovided at taxi ranks but, nowthat taxis are radio controlled orhave mobile telephones,telephones on ranks areunnecessary.Environment and StreetDesignAuthorities should produceguidance on the integration ofparking equipment (includingsigns, markings and machines)with the street environment. Toooften the impact is disregardedand the result is unsightly streetclutter, much of which can beavoided.Although more exactingstandards of design may bespecified for town centres, and inconservation areas, there is amore general need to bringabout streetscape designs thatreflect functions other than justparking and traffic. The impact ofthe signing requirement of aControlled Parking Zone (CPZ)upon the streetscape can beconsiderable, though perhapsless than might be required in theabsence of the CPZ. The TrafficSigns Regulations and GeneralDirections (7) specify the designof signs, rather than theirlocation, except in thoseinstances where certainmarkings have to beaccompanied by certain signsand where entry signs areneeded to a CPZ zone.In especially sensitive historicenvironments, efforts should bemade to minimise the use ofsigns and markings within acontrolled zone, or to arrangetheir placement to minimise theirCycle shelter and lockers Aberdeen.

82 Chapter 6In Manchester signs have beencombined on buildings and streetfurniture in an effort to minimiseclutter.Integrated residential parking,Freiburg.intrusiveness that is consistentwith ensuring that drivers canunderstand what restrictions arein force. A distinction can also bedrawn between RestrictedZones, where it is legitimate notto install a certain amount ofsigning and lining and CPZ or nozones where more signs andlines are likely to be required.Design of residentialparking placesLocal authorities should ensurethat any urban design guide fortheir area should outlineguidance for residential parking.In addition, the Government inthe form of “Better places to live”(8) has provided some advice onhow to accommodate parking inresidential areas. Further advicemay be available from the ODPMresearch report into PPG3 andHighway Adoption procedures.Thanks to encouragement bylocal authority and nationalurban design guidance,developers are increasinglydeparting from the suburbannorm of two or more car spaceswithin the dwelling curtilage.Instead parking isaccommodated in courtyards,basements or shared spaces onthe street. Provided safety andsecurity can be guaranteed,these methods allow either theprovision of more useful amenityspace, or building to higherdensities, which in turn improvesaccessibility to public transportand other facilities.Another option is to lease carparking spaces separately fromthe dwellings. This allows thosewho want a car to have a spacebut makes it cheaper for thosewho choose not to have a car tobuy or rent a dwelling. Demandwill generally be lower when thisarrangement is used, and theoverall provision can thereforebe lowered.In Chichester city centre, West SussexCounty Council has combined theentry signs to the Controlled ParkingZone with speed restriction signs in anattempt to minimise this problem.In Buntingford, Hertfordshire there areparking regulations with signs only atentry to the controlled area.

Formulating Parking Interventions 83On-street provision inresidential areasResidential parking is providedentirely on-street in many olderareas. An adaptation of thismethod can be successful in newresidential areas, provided thatthe on-street bays are welldesigned. “On-street” in thiscontext does not mean “oncarriageway”,but refers to theprovision of bays immediatelyadjacent to the carriageway, ordefined within shared-surfaceareas as, for example, in HomeZones. The issue of how to signparking in Home Zones withinCPZs remains unresolved.On-street parking bays cansupply the entire parkingdemand in some circumstances,or can supplement off-streetprovision. It is useful especiallyto accommodate that portion ofdemand that is variable duringthe day and over time. This willresult in a lower overall land-take(See Table 6.3). For example, anoff-street communal parking areamight provide 0.5 spaces perdwelling, while on-street baysmight provide a further 0.5spaces per dwelling.The advantages of on-streetprovision include:●●●Flexibility in meeting demandfrom both residents andvisitors;Elimination of the need forfootway crossovers;Passive surveillance fromboth residents and passersby;and● Lower land-take per parkingspace.Further advice on how to providesufficient on-street parking is setout in Better places to live (8).Communal versusdedicated parkingCommunal parking space makesmore efficient use of space thandoes parking dedicated toindividual dwellings. This isbecause car ownership ratesvary between households andover time, due to differentlifestyles, incomes, andTable 6.3 Residential parking with dedicated or communal provision of spaces,Spaces required Demand Demand Surplus Surplus Spacesif provision at 2 Year Year space space required ifdedicated spaces 1 3 Year Year communallyper dwelling (Example) (Example) 1 3 providedDwelling 1 2 2 2 0 0 -Dwelling 2 2 1 2 1 0 -Dwelling 3 2 2 1 0 1 -Dwelling 4 2 2 2 0 0 -Dwelling 5 2 0 1 2 1 -Dwelling 6 2 1 0 1 2 -Dwelling 7 2 1 1 1 1 -Dwelling 8 2 2 2 0 0 -Dwelling 9 2 3* 2 0* 0 -Dwelling 10 2 0 1 2 0 -Total 20 14 14 6 6 14(30%saving)* Demand cannot be met in dedicated space, but can be in communal spaceprogression through the lifecycle.If parking is dedicated, thespaces must be provided on thebasis of maximum likelydemand, for example two spacesper dwelling. With communalparking variations in householddemand means that loweroverall provision is required, asshown in the example in Table6.3.Landscaped spacesCar parking can be visuallyintrusive in the street scene.Typically the intrusiveness isgreater where:● The space occupied byparked vehicles is a highproportion of the total space;● The parking isaccommodated in front of thebuilding line (ie, in the frontgarden;● There is an absence ofmature trees or shrubs; and● On-street parking ishaphazard or unstructured.In new residential developmentsthese design issues can beaddressed. In existing residentialareas, intrusive parking can beavoided or ameliorated by theapplication of policies to:● Introduce landscaping,especially the provision ofstreet trees;● Create parking bays, definedby footway build-outs and

84 Chapter 6●trees or other softlandscaping; andPrevent the conversion offront gardens intohardstanding for vehicles.SecurityVehicle security is a crucialconcern for residents in someareas. Car owners, therefore,prefer to be able to park their careither in a space or garageattached to the dwelling, or in agated or controlled car park. Ifonly on-street parking isavailable, a space visible fromthe dwelling is preferred.For mainly aesthetic reasons,parking is sometimes provided inparking or garage “courts” to therear of dwellings. This design,however, can have majordisadvantages including:● Parking areas notoverlooked are vulnerable tovandalism and other abuses;● Parking underused becauseof fears about personal orvehicle security;● Parking areas make it moredifficult to secure reargardens;● Excessive space required inview of access requirementsfor both front and rear ofdwellings, and connectingalleyways; and● In car dependent areasstreet frontage is rarely used(the back door becomes themain entrance becausepeople mostly arrive anddepart by car).However, Better places to live (8)and Places, Streets andMovement (9) set out howcourtyard parking can work.Well-designed courts incorporatea limit to the number of spaces;they are well overlooked andthere are parking places ratherthan car parks. The ODPM isworking with the Home Office toproduce guidance on “planningout” crime, which may includereferences to the appropriatesecurity of vehicles.Conversion of frontgardens for parkingLocal authorities should decideon a policy for the installation offootway crossovers, and for theconversion of garden areas tohard standing for vehicles. Somelocal authorities allow or evenencourage such conversion fortraffic reasons as a means ofkeeping cars off the carriageway,or as a means of increasing carparking capacity to meetexpected demand, such as whena house is converted to flats.Residents are able in manyinstances to convert their frontgardens into parking spaceswithout requiring planningpermission. This is possibleunder Part 1F of the Town andCountry Planning (PermittedDevelopment Rights) Order1995. However, under Article 4 ofthe 1995 Order local planningauthorities may issue a Directionthat requires that planningpermission is needed. TheSecretary of State approval ofthe Direction is required, exceptwhere the Direction relates todevelopment within aconservation area.The provision or otherwise ofcrossovers and off-street parkingwill have implications for thetownscape and ecology,pedestrian safety andconvenience, parking capacity,parking control, and the layout ofbays within a residents’ parkingscheme. The Parking Strategywill therefore need to bringtogether these differentconsiderations, if necessary byspecifying the measures thatshould be applied in differentstreets or areas.It is also important to recognisethat, when on-street parkingcontrols are introduced, this canlead to increased pressure fromhouseholders to convert theirgardens to hard stands forparking. This may have seriousconsequences not only for thecharacter and appearance of thestreet, but also for the efficiencyof parking in the area. If parkingsupply is shifted from generalpublic use (on-street) to

Formulating Parking Interventions 85dedicated private use (off-streetin garden areas), there will beless parking available for visitorsto the area. This may beacceptable, such as to prevent“railheading” at railway stations,but could be a significantproblem, if the viability of localshops and businesses isundermined. Moreover, dedicatedprivate spaces are unable torespond to fluctuations inresidential demand, andconsequently can result in overprovisionin some properties thatis unable to compensate forunder-provision in others. Onstreetor other collective provisioncan avoid this problem, andallows for a more efficient use ofspace. This is, however, not asimple issue and the views ofresidents need to be activelycanvassed before decisions arefinally taken.Where the design of a parkingcontrol scheme protects accessto properties by prohibitingparking (typically, with a singleyellow line), a net gain can beachieved by allowing theconversion of gardens to hardstands only when the gardensize is sufficient to allow for morethan one parking space to beaccessed from each crossover.The potential to make such again is greatest in suburbanareas of semi-detached anddetached houses, although inthese areas off-street parkingfrequently already exists.Alternatively, where advisoryaccess protection lines (APLs)are used, a net gain can beachieved by allowing theconversion of gardens to hardstands when the garden widthcan accommodate one vehicleand the access protection line asecond vehicle owned by thesame household. Thedisadvantage of APLs is thatthey are not mandatory. Parkingacross them cannot be pursuedas a parking offence – merely asan obstruction by the police.In general there should be apresumption against theprovision of footway crossoversand the conversion of gardensfor parking. Exceptions shouldbe made only where a clearbenefit is identified that is judgedto outweigh the disadvantagesincluding:●Conversion frequently doesnot lead to any net increasein parking capacity, andreduces parking for publicuse;● Conversion increases theproportion of parking supplythat is outside the reach oflocal authority control;● Front gardens becomeunattractive parking spaces;●●●The increase in “sealed”surface may damage thehealth of trees and plants;Frequent crossovers canseriously damage theappearance of the street;The absence of gates andboundary walls or hedgesmay increase the securityrisk in residential streets; and● Frequent crossovers can beinconvenient, or evendangerous, for pedestrians.Further discussion of this issue iscontained in LPAC’s guidance(10).Regulation versusdesignOn-street parking controls andrestrictions are applied toimprove safety and regulateparking behaviour. This involvesthe use of signs and markingsindicating the regulations, and anenforcement regime toencourage compliance of driverswith these regulations. In manycircumstances the need forcontrols and their enforcementcan be reduced by “designingout” the problem.In places where parking is notwanted at any time, such asformal and informal pedestriancrossing places, junctions,access crossovers and busstops, the footway and kerb canbe re-aligned to prevent parkingphysically, or at least discourageit. Examples are given in Chapter7.

86 Chapter 6Entry signs to pedestrianised areas.Parking Control andPricingPolicies and mechanisms arerequired that can be used forinfluencing who has access toparking space and when.Formulating parkingcontrol schemesPrinciples of on-streetcontrolMany parts of our towns andcities were constructed beforemotor vehicles werecommonplace, and these areoften some of the mostcherished urban environments.Such areas often have littleprovision for parking andservicing off-street and thehighway has to be used for thesepurposes. Whilst there is a clearpublic interest in maintaining thevitality and viability of activitiestaking place in such areas, thereis also a need to retain the publicrights to the highway on behalf ofthe community as a whole.Where businesses are using thepublic highway for commercialpurposes, other than thosesanctioned by law such as streetmarkets, there is a need forcontrol. Various activities,including repairing vehicles andadvertising vehicles for sale, areprohibited on the highway. Ingranting car or lorry users theability to stop on the highway,local authorities should bear inmind that other claims on thestreet space may be of equal ormore deserving priority, such asspace for walking or publicamenity. A Parking Strategyshould address this issue bysetting out priorities.In determining policies for thecontrol of on-street parking andloading, authorities should bearin mind that there is no generalright to park a vehicle on thepublic highway. There is acommon law right to pass and repassalong the highway and touse the highway for access topremises fronting the highway,but an unattended stationaryvehicle is potentially a highwayobstruction, unless local parkingregulations deem otherwise.The absence of any right to parkon the highway has a directbearing on the management ofon-street parking. For example,the issue of a resident parkingpermit grants privilege to a part

Formulating Parking Interventions 87of the highway that is denied tothose not in possession of thepermit. The provision of thatprivilege involves a cost inadministering and enforcing thepermit scheme. If the full cost ofadministration and enforcementis not met by the permit holder,this means that those whochoose not to own a car, cannotafford to own a car, not eligible toapply for a permit, or pay toprovide an off-street space fortheir car, are subsidising thosewho park on the public highway.The principle is, therefore, thatcharges for parking on the street(or highway) should be set at alevel that covers all the costs ofimplementation, administration,enforcement and maintenance.Alternative off-street parkingarrangements should beencouraged.The need for Residents’Parking SchemesOff-street parking provision isunusual in areas where themajority of the housing wasconstructed before the middle ofthe twentieth century. Most innercity areas and the centres ofhistoric towns, therefore, have aproblem with on-street parking ofresidents’ cars. Rising householdcar ownership, together with thesubdivision of larger houses intosmaller flats has meant that thepressure on parking spaces inurban areas is intense andincreasing.Where demand for kerbsideparking exceeds supply, parkingcontrols should be introduced. Inareas with a residentialpopulation these should makeprovision for residents withpermits to park in designatedbays. Where there are localshops or other facilities thatattract visitors during the day,such bays can be shared withvisitors’ cars with a pay-anddisplayticket.Residents’ parking schemes aresometimes necessary to preventparking by commuters,particularly close to stations inpredominately residential areas.In order to reduce theinconvenience to visitors in theseareas regulations are sometimesintroduced that restrict parking toresidents for a short period,typically one hour, during theday.Further details about residents’permits appear in Chapter 7.Loading for businesspremisesIn many areas businesspremises, particularly shops andrestaurants, have no off-streetloading. Servicing, therefore, hasto take place on-street. Many ofthese are small businesses, andare located in urban centres andalong main roads in suburbanareas. Government policy, asexpressed through PlanningPolicy Guidance and the UrbanWhite Paper, is that suchbusinesses should be assistedas they provide important localservices and assist in the vitalityand viability of town centres.Loading is a legitimate use ofstreet space, necessary for theeconomic and other activitiesalongside, and may also beregarded as one of the elementsthat create an interesting anddiverse street scene. There arelimits, however, to the amount ofsuch activity that can beintegrated successfully withpedestrian and vehiclemovement, and be acceptablefrom an aesthetic point of view. Itis for these reasons that controlover loading activity is oftenrequired.Designated residential parking bays.

88 Chapter 6On-street loading signs.On-street loading bays.Local authorities should plan foron-street loading activity takingaccount of the following:●●●Where traffic flow is heavy, itmay be appropriate to restrictparking throughout theworking day, but permitloading between peak hours;Parking restrictions shouldbe properly enforced toensure that kerbside space isavailable for loadingpurposes during controlhours; andWhere parking is permittedon-street, this should belocated away from loadingareas, bearing in mind thatloading space needs to be asclose as possible to thepremises being served, andon the same side of thestreet. There shouldtherefore be generous areasof kerbside normallyavailable for loading duringthe relevant period.Balancing the benefits –Red RoutesThe relationship betweenparking and traffic is importantand points to the need forpolicies and proposals thataddress all the legitimateconcerns in the street. A goodexample of this being attemptedis presented by the Red Routescheme in London.The Red Route restrictions werefirst introduced in London in1991. They focused parkingcontrols and their enforcementon critical areas, rather thanundifferentiated controls alonglengths of urban highway, as wasthe case with the former peakhour“clearway” restrictions.The aim was to make the mostefficient use of road space onmain roads, taking account of allroad users, not just generalvehicular traffic. Themanagement of kerbside spacewas related to the particulardemands on space at each pointalong the route. Buses and thesafety and convenience ofpedestrians and cyclists weregiven high priority.The Red Routes have beenjudged to be successful on arange of criteria, includingbenefits to frontage traders (11).As a consequence Edinburghintroduced a similar scheme(Green Routes) and other majorcities are considering doing thesame.Some examples of the benefitsare:● Parking bays availablewhere these do not impedepeak hour traffic movement;●●Legal provision for short stayparking and loading;Carriageway widths reducedat pedestrian crossingpoints, and parking baysRed Route Clearway sign.

Formulating Parking Interventions 89parking, then parking chargesand tariff conditions will be morestringent than they wouldotherwise be. This presents aconsiderable challenge for localauthorities where people havebecome accustomed to free orunrestricted parking.Red Route signs.created in the “stopped”lanes; and● Raised carriageways andkerb build-outs at side roadjunctions, greatly improvingpedestrian convenience andsafety.Local authorities outside Londoncould consider how they canachieve the benefits of the RedRoute approach through theapplication of parking andloading TROs, combined withappropriate re-design and reallocationof main road space.Such an approach may beparticularly relevant on mainroads where buses are impededby loading and parking activity offrontage businesses.Tariffs and pricingThe tariff and pricing policy canbe used to address a number ofobjectives. The most commonare:● Balancing demand withsupply;● Influencing the demand asbetween on- and off-streetcar parking;● Influencing the distribution ofdemand as between differentareas;● Influencing the length of stayand parking turnover; and● Maximising revenue.It is axiomatic that, if a ParkingStrategy includes a policy toreduce or limit the supply ofThe ability to use tariffs andcharges to achieve policy endswill depend on the amount ofcontrol that can be exercised bythe local authority. For example,local authority car parks may bemanaged to discouragecommuters; car parks ownedand operated by privatecompanies will have tariffs tomaximise revenue, which mayencourage all day parking,unless there are planningconditions or restrictivecovenants that prevent them.It is important that the tariffstructure includes both on-streetand off-street parking. A ParkingStrategy should address theissue of whether parking is to beencouraged on the street or inoff-street car parks, and the tariffstructure is a key measure forachieving this objective. Theactual structure will depend oncircumstances, as in thefollowing examples:●●Where off-street car parkshave provision for shoppers,the on-street tariff might beset to attract those stayingfor very short periods, forexample by setting amaximum stay of one hour.This makes parking easierfor those who only wish tostay a few minutes andreduces congestion in theaccesses and circulationareas of the off-street carparks; andWhere off-street car parksare under-used, and thereare plans to create higherquality public realm throughthe expansion of spaceavailable for pedestrian andrelated activity, the tariffcould include higher chargesfor on-street parking than forthe off-street parking. Thiswill reduce on-street parkingdemand, enabling the

90 Chapter 6conversion of parking spaceto other more beneficial use,and at the same time willensure better use of the offstreetfacility.In areas with a two-tier localgovernment system this willrequire agreement between thecounty and district council.Where private companies controlcar parks, the local authority maynot wish to dictate the tariffstrategy, although powers existunder the Road TrafficRegulation Act 1984. In somecases the authority has influenceas ground landlord but may onlybe able to introduce control overtariffs when the lease is due forrenewal. For new or expandedpublic car parks that are privatelyowned the planning consentshould be conditioned, or aplanning contributions agreementconcluded, to ensure that tariffscomply with the policy objectivesfor parking in the locality.How to set tariffs is covered inChapter 7.Further policyconsiderationsOther policies and measures thatshould be considered include:● Encouraging or discouragingcertain types of user in linewith policy. For example,higher charges for short stayparking will tend todiscourage car journeys bypeople who live withinwalking distance, whilehigher charges for long stayparking discourage all-daycar commuters who haveaccess to public transportalternatives;● Securing an appropriatebalance between on-streetand off-street car park use. Itwill generally be desirable toensure that expensive offstreetcar parks are wellused, and the on-streetcharges can be set higher inorder to achieve that.Alternatively, some on-streetspaces can be removed, forexample to secure morespace for walking andenjoyment; and●Securing comparable chargelevels between different carparks, including those thatare privately operated.Discouraging carcommutingIt is common practice in townand city centres to use parkingcharges as a means of reducingthe demand for all-day commutertraffic but attracting shoppersand visitors and supporting theevening activities. There are bothadvantages and disadvantagesto this approach and carefulanalysis should be undertakenbefore policy decisions aremade.Benefits● Encouraging the use ofparking by people whocontribute to the localeconomy (ie, spend moneyin the centre); and● Discouraging travel to andfrom the centre at morningand evening peak times, thuslimiting congestion on roadsleading to and from thecentre.Disbenefits● People wanting to visit thecentre all day, for examplecombining leisure activitywith shopping, will bediscouraged, although parkand-ridemay provide analternative;● Displacement of commutersonto public transport willincrease the pressure oncapacity at the busiest times,thusincreasingovercrowding, or increasingcosts if extra services areprovided;● Encouragement of short-stayvisitor parking may reducedemand for and hencerevenue from, publictransport at inter-peak times.This will further reduce theviability of public transport;● Shifting use from long stay toshort stay use will, otherthings being equal, result inmore car trips to and fromthe centre, thus increasing

Formulating Parking Interventions 91the number of vehicles usingthe roads to and from thecentre. This may notnecessarily result in anincrease in total vehiclekilometres driven (this willdepend on how far peopletravel from) but it willcertainly increase traffic inand near the centre; and● Reducing long stayopportunities in the centremay create difficulties forresidents without their ownparking space. This mayundermine any policy toincrease town centre living.Residents may thereforeneed opportunities topurchase permits, either foron-street bays or for space inoff-street car parks.Whatever the balance ofadvantage in any particularsituation, it is clear that settingcharges and regulations to shiftfrom long to short stay useshould not be undertakenwithout careful analysis andconsultation.The setting of low charges inorder to gain a competitiveadvantage over neighbouringauthorities is not normallysupported, although it is widelypractised. Such actions mayresult in over-use of car parks(causing congestion andsearching traffic at peak times),and also lead to unnecessarytraffic generation by peopletravelling from longer distances.If there is ample space toaccommodate demand at a lowprice, then it is likely that the truecosts of provision will not be met,contrary to good auditingpractice. The Regional TransportStrategies should address thisissue with local authoritiesfollowing their guidance.Provision of free parkingIn some smaller towns andvillages public car parks areprovided without charge. Insome cases this may simplyreflect demand that is too low oroccasional to warrant a chargeand its associated costs. In othercases it may be a deliberatepolicy not to deter car-bornevisitors.Demand at tourist and ruraldestinations may be at a levelwhere free parking may nolonger be appropriate.Acceptance of the introduction ofcharges may be higher ifrevenues are used for publictransport or environmentalimprovements, especially where,by removing or relocatingobtrusive parking and accessroads, the attractions areimproved. Such schemes maynot always be possible for thelocal authority, and may,therefore, depend on privateinitiative, but this can bepromoted through joint working.The Council may consider thatthe benefits to a local economy,and the safety advantages ofproviding for parking off thehighway, justify the publicexpenditure involved in providingfree parking. In some cases itmay also be disproportionatelycostly to provide equipment andstaffing for collecting payment,when the revenue will be small.Free car parking signs.

92 Chapter 6In small market towns someauthorities make charges only onmarket days.Where local authorities providefree off-street car parking theyshould be conscious that costsare still being incurred inmaintenance, cleaning, ratesand the opportunity cost of thesite. They are thereforesubsidising the users of the carparks and should considerwhether this is the best use oftheir funds.Alternatively it could be said thatthe Council Taxpayers aresubsidising retailers and otherbusinesses, and the council maywish to seek contributions fromthese beneficiaries towards thecosts if the car parks are toremain free to the users. Out-oftownretailers and supermarketsusually provide customer carparks, and therefore carry thesecosts themselves. Arrangementsfor retailers to rebate charges totheir customers can be made byagreement between the traderconcerned and the council andticketing systems introduced toallow for this.Quotes from Best Value report on asouth coast authority providing freeparking:“The Council needs to look again atcharging, as the costs fall on alltaxpayers and not just those who usethe car parks.Councillors have pursued a policy offree parking because of theperception that it is necessary for theviability of town centre shops. Freeparking is also thought to preventloss of trade to other shoppingareas... but we found no clearevidence to support theseassumptions.“The Council has also failed tochallenge why the service is free.There was no evidence todemonstrate that the cost to theborough of around £200,000represented best value.”(Audit Commission report, 2002).The District Auditor will wish tosee that the council is securingan appropriate level of incomeand Best Value from car parkingoperations. Therefore clearpolicy objectives will need to beagreed if the tariff results in lessthan the maximum achievablerevenue.Management of Parking(Protocols)Since the operation of parkingservices has a direct influenceon matters of policy, a businessplan should be contained within,or be consistent with the ParkingStrategy. More detail about thepreparation of a business planfor parking is given in Chapter10.Enforcement of ParkingControl SchemesThe Parking Strategy should setout the mechanisms wherebyParking Control schemes will beadequately enforced. LocalAuthorities should also set outtheir programme fordecriminalised enforcement oralternatively satisfy themselvesthat the police have sufficientresources. Further details aboutenforcement matters arecovered in Chapter 9.References(1) Parkhurst, G, 2002, Bibliography ofpark-and-ride references, ESRCTransport Studies Unit, UniversityCollege, London.(2) Apel, D et al, 1997, Kompact, mobil,urban: Stadtentwicklungskonzepte zurVerhehrsvermeidungiminternationalen Vergleich, DIFU, Berlin.(3) Government Office for London and theLondon Planning Advisory Committee,1997, Sustainable Residential Quality(SRQ), LPAC, London.(4) Government Office for the South East,1998, Parking Standards in the SouthEast, Llewelyn-Davies.(5) Department for Transport, 1995,Parking for Disabled People, TrafficAdvisory Leaflet 5/95.(6) Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/99: CycleParking.(7) Department for Transport, 1994 (orsubsequent revision), The Traffic SignsRegulations and General Directions(TSRGD).(8) DETR/CABE, 2000, By Design: Urbandesign in the planning system: towards

Formulating Parking Interventions 93better practice and DTLR/CABE, 2001,Better places to live: By design.(9) DETR, 1998, Places, Streets andMovement a companion guide todesign Bulletin 32, Residential Roadsand Footpaths.(10) London Planning Advisory Committee,1994, The Quality of London’sResidential Environment.(11) Traffic Director for London, 1997, RedRoutes and Retailing – Results of the1996 surveys, London.Department for Transport, Traffic AdvisoryLeaflet 2/02: Motorcycle Parking.Pharaoh, T, The Motor Car: Idol or Idle? Asurvey of redundancy in domestic carfleets in Traffic Engineering & Control,February 1986.Shopmobility website as at 2002:(www.justmobility.co.uk/shop).

Section 3ImplementationSection Acknowledgements3Implementation

Chapter 7Delivery ofSchemesIntroductionAt a seminar held in 2003 aboutparking strategies andmanagement, delegates wereasked about what theyconsidered to be the significantbarriers to the implementation ofeffective parking management(1). The response revealed thefollowing:Major barriers were:● Lack of political will locally●●●Public opposition to specificproposals;Public opposition to the useof parking for wider policyobjectives;Lack of priority in localauthority budgets; and● Lack of sufficient staff in localauthorities.Minor barriers were:●●●●Professional opposition touse of parking for widerpolicy objectives;Inadequate/inappropriatedelivery structures in localauthorities;Difficulty in securing crossborder/regional planning;Lack of investment by theprivate sector; and● Lack of appropriate skills andexpertise in local authorities.Other barriers were mentioned,but it is how to overcome or atleast soften these above-namedbarriers that this and subsequentchapters attempt to offerguidance. In particular it dealswith the many practicalconsiderations that must betaken into account by designers,planners, engineers andmanagers involved with thevarious aspects of parking.For convenience, this chapterlooks at off-street parking first,followed by on-street parkingcontrol and management.However, some aspects such astariff setting should be pursuedfor on- and off-street parkingtogether.Public off-street carparkingThere are three elements to offstreetparking:●●The quantity of provision andits distribution betweendifferent categories of user;The pricing and controlsapplied; and● The management of parkingand the revenues derivedfrom it.The supply of parking can beadjusted over time in response topolicy decisions and targets foraccessibility and mode share.Whatever the quantity at anyparticular time, the demand for itwill be influenced by the pricescharged. Tariff setting is,therefore, of crucial importancein achieving both the Strategyand other objectives.AcknowledgementsChapter 7Delivery ofSchemes

98 Chapter 7Tariff setting and reviewIn setting parking charge levelsfactors that should be taken intoaccount include:● Price elasticity of parkingdemand;● Competition between areas;and● Incentives for the use of offstreetparking.The price of parking can be set toinfluence parking activity in orderto serve policy objectives. Thelevel and structure of prices caninfluence:● The level of usage, andhence the traffic generated;● The type of user, and● The length of stay.The pricing of parking facilities isone way of directly affecting thecost of car journeys relative toother modes. Ideally the price ofpublic and private transportmodes should be coordinated inorder to achieve mode splitobjectives, but this is difficultthough not impossible wherepublic transport is deregulatedand privatised.Pricing levels also can be set inorder to:● Secure sufficient income tocover the cost of operating,maintaining and enforcingcar parking facilities;● Raise general income,though this practice is notgenerally supported inGovernment guidance;● Raise income for theimprovement of parking andother transport facilities; or● Maximise revenue, as isoften the case with privatelyowned public car parkswhere there is no localauthority control. (See alsoChapter 10.)These pricing objectives mayconflict with one another andwith other local transportplanning objectives. However, insetting tariffs at public car parks,it is good practice to set them ata level such that 10 - 15% of thespace is free at peak times. Thismeans that drivers will alwayshave a high expectation thatparking space will be available.Some local authorities may betempted to resist higher chargesfor fear of losing customers, butthis should be avoided. Bothsupply and demand issues mustbe resolved. The price of parkingshould support the policy, notconstitute the policy.Matching demand to supplythrough price is good practicefrom an operational as well as apolicy standpoint. It means that:●●The car park aisles do notbecome congested with carsseeking spaces;Queues building up on thehighway due to shortage ofspace are avoided; and● Revenue is maximised withinthe established parametersfor tariff setting (eg, a policydecision to favour short stayup to four hours). If chargesare lower, then revenue isforegone as some customerscannot park, or have to waitfor long periods.Of course, demand can belowered further still by chargingmore than needed to achieve 10- 15% vacant spaces at peaktimes. In this case the car parkwill not be fully used, which maybe useful as a tactic prior to areduction of parking supply, forexample by keeping off-streetspaces in reserve for when anon-street control scheme isintroduced.Peak-time pricing can lead tounintended under-use at othertimes. Some tariffs can beflexible to encourage off-peakuse and hence balance demandthrough the day and week.Special consideration may berequired for evening parkingcharges when the customers arerestaurant or theatre visitors.Parking capacity at these timesmay be abundant and hence acheaper rate to encourage theiruse makes good businesssense. Providing cheapovernight parking also makesgood business sense whilst alsosupporting the move towards amore urban lifestyle. Residents’parking should be available 24

Delivery of Schemes 99hours a day, otherwise residentsmay be compelled to drive out ofthe area each day to avoidrestrictions or charges. Similarconsiderations apply to parkingfor hotel guests.Tariff graduationFor shopping and town centrecar parks a typical fee structure(at 2002 prices) in a provincialtown with a sub-regionalshopping catchment might be:DurationFeeUp to 2 hours £1.202-3 hours £1.803-4 hours £2.404-5 hours £3.605-6 hours £5.00Up to 10 hours £7.50This structure reflects a policy ofdiscouraging parking longer thanfour hours, which equates toallowing plenty of time forshopping and related activity,discouraging regular all-dayusers (commuters), whilst notpreventing long stays whenusers judge that the advantageoutweighs the price.Such a tariff might be combinedwith a 60 pence for one-houronly (10p for 10 minutes) tariff aton-street meters. In that way thevery short stay parkers would beencouraged to park on-street.In the example quoted the offstreetcar park tariff provides alevel fee of 60 pence/hour up tofour hours, which should besufficient for shopping trips. Itthen increases at an acceleratingrate to a level that is designed todeter regular commuting to workby car. If the £7.50 tariff were tobe introduced from four hoursthis could cause resentment, if ashopper had stayed for a shortperiod over four hours. As losttickets have to be charged at thefull-day rate, an excessively highprice could also cause difficultieswith drivers who genuinely havelost their tickets.In larger cities the charges wouldbe expected to be higher, and insmall towns they would be lower.In central London in 2002 metercharges were as high as £4/hrand off-street charges were ashigh as £45/day. In a smallmarket town a tariff of 20p/hr wastypical with a maximum dailycharge of £2 or £3. Thedifference reflects the relativedemand, which in turn reflectsthe attractive power of thecentre, and the availability ofalternative facilities whereparking might be cheaper or free.Where demand is strong andcharges are high, considerationshould be given to smallercharge increments, for examplehalf or one hour increments. Thisavoids the resentment felt byusers who inadvertently stay justa few minutes over time into thenext charge band.What is important is that the tariffshould be policy and pricesensitive and graduated at anappropriate accelerating rate. Agreat many of enforcementproblems and arguments can beavoided by setting charges intime bands that match whatparkers typically do. Thus in asmall town centre where 90% ofvisitors are going to spend lessthan an hour shopping the tariffshould reflect this. Similarly a carpark next to a cinema where thetotal programme runs for abouttwo hours a three-hour tariff stepallows the customer to buy aperiod of time that comfortablyencompasses their stay.Co-ordination of chargesLocal authorities should cooperatewith adjacent authoritiesin setting tariffs so that chargesin comparable centres aresimilar, and should refrain fromundercutting neighbouring townsas this is likely to distort thechoice of town centre for someshoppers and to increase triplengths. It is also likely to result inless revenue for the authority.Tariffs can also be set fordifferent centres within the sameauthority. For example, inBrighton and Hove, charges arehigher in Brighton town centrethan in Hove to reflect thedifferent “offer” of activities andconsequent demand for parking.

100 Chapter 7Tariff reviewsBecause things change, thereneeds to be reviews, both inresponse to particular events orcircumstances and at regularintervals, say three years.Ticketing and PaymentSystemsVarious ticketing and paymentsystems can be used in off-streetcar parks. These include:● Pay-and-display;● Pay-on-entry;● Pay-on-foot (prior toreturning to the car);● Pay-on-exit (attendant ormachine); and● Pre-payment (usingvouchers or cards orreference numbers).For small surface car parks payand-displaywill usually be themost appropriate method. Themotorist purchases a ticket oncethe car has been parked anddisplays it inside the windscreen.The local authority has to employattendants, either directly orthrough a contractor, who visitthe car parks and issue penaltyor excess charge notices tovehicles not displaying a validticket. This avoids the need for apermanent presence in the carpark, but does requireadministrative systems to pursuethose who do not pay. In areaswhere parking enforcement hasbeen decriminalised, the SpecialParking Area and itsadministration can cover the offstreetparking places as well.In some circumstances (forexample where charges arehigh) drivers leaving the car parkmay pass on their tickets toothers to make use of unexpiredtime. This may result in someloss of potential revenue and canbe tackled by using pay-anddisplayequipment that requiresthe driver to enter the numeralsof the registration plate. With therecent change in the registrationnumber system, it will benecessary to modify theequipment to cater foralphanumeric characters. Thisfacility is likely to be madeavailable on new machines.One advantage of pay-anddisplayis that entry barriers canbe avoided. In large town centrecar parks, however, entrybarriers may still be required tolimit congestion within the carpark. In this case, account mustbe taken of the potential forqueuing on the highway andconsequent unwanted impacts.The advantages of pay-and-displayare:● Easy, low cost management andenforcement;● Elimination of barriers andpermanent staff presence; and● Ease of understanding and use.The disadvantages of pay-anddisplayare:●●●Where surface car parks have afixed daily tariff, such as somecoastal car parks, station carparks and park-and-ride carparks, pay-on-entry is possible.“Flap plates” that can be drivenover in one direction only arerequired at the exit to preventaccess via the exit road. Theavoidance of chasing uppenalties can reduce costs butmost local authority operatorshave changed to pay-anddisplayfor the greater flexibility itprovides.For town centre car parks inparticular, pay-on-foot has anumber of advantages:●●●●It requires the user to commit to amaximum length of stay;Unused time has to be paid for;andIt requires users to find the paymachine and return to car todisplay ticket.Users are free to decide theirlength of stay;Users do not have to find themachine and then return totheir car to display the ticket;Users may spend more time(and money) in the town ifthey do not have to return totheir car by a particular time;andUsers can pay when theyleave, which can be more

Delivery of Schemes 101convenient if cash is used.Card payment is just asconvenient before as after.Although equipment costs arehigher, many operators nowfavour this method of paymentas exit delays are minimised. It isalso suitable for credit cardtransactions and, therefore,attractive for higher valuetransactions. It is desirable toavoid cash payments toattendants for fraud controlreasons, and to minimiseadministrative and bankingcosts. Where tariffs are high,such as at airports and in centralLondon, it is sometimesnecessary to provide anattendant payment option in payon-footcar parks.Some car parks (often atairports) photo-record theapproaching car at the barrier.This enables records to be keptincluding a photograph of thedriver, thus improving securityand reducing theft. This systemis also being used in someprivate car parks to restrictaccess to controlled areas (eg,Boots in Nottingham and privatecar parks at Gatwick Airport).Car registration numbers arephotographically recorded,converted into recognisablenumber plates and then checkedagainst approved lists.Car park quality can also beenhanced through the provisionof spacious lobby areas wherethe pay machine and otherfacilities can be located. Creditand debit card payments shouldbe made available.The disadvantage of pay-on-footcompared to pay-and-display isthat an entry and exit barriermust be provided in addition tothe ticket machine.Pay-on-exit usually requires exitbarriers and staff during hours ofoperation, but in most multistoreyand underground carparks staff will be requiredanyway for security reasons. Ingeneral, car parks withattendants in booths taking thefees at the exit have been reequippedfor pay-on-foot or paymachine-at-exit.This frees thestaff for security and customerassistance duties and reducesthe opportunities for fraud.Pay-machine-on-exit iseffective only where there areadequate exit lanes, as acustomer without change canblock a lane while they seekassistance. Where there are ahigh proportion of foreign (lefthand drive) cars, such as nearthe Channel ports, it may beworth installing machines onboth sides of each lane. Thisalso enables passengers tooperate the machine.Pre-payment may be especiallyconvenient for long-stay parkingwhen the trip is planned inadvance, such as at airports.Pre-payment may be suitablealso for regular parking activities,such as residents’ parkingpermits and commuter seasontickets.Season tickets are available inmany car parks. In pay-anddisplaycar parks this requires apermit to be displayed in thevehicle. In barrier controlled carparks it is normal to issue a cardthat operates the barrier. Caremust be taken to ensure thatfraud abuses are minimised fromthe use of season tickets.Permits displayed in vehicles aresometimes forged by colourphotocopying, and, although thecolour fades in time, they can bedifficult to detect. Permits should,therefore, be security printed in away that prevents the easierforms of abuse. Most card ticketshave an anti pass-back devicethat requires it to be used forentrances and exits alternately,and this prevents a driverpassing it back to a friend in thecar behind. However, if cards getinto the hands of attendants theycan use them to let people in andout for cash payments.MotorcyclesGovernment guidance requireslocal transport authorities to“take account of the needs ofmotorcyclists”. Spaces formotorcycles should be providedin off-street car parks, forexample, to assist in providing

102 Chapter 7security, or to avoid parking onthe street where it may beintrusive.Where car parks are barriercontrolled it is desirable thatmotorcycle parking areas areoutside the area controlled bythe barriers. This is becausemotorcycles can often avoid thebarriers.Motorcycles cannot be chargedusing conventional pay-anddisplay.One way of overcomingthis is for the motorcyclist toenter the number of the bay inwhich the motorcycle is parked,which is stored in a memory inthe machine. The parkingattendant can then interrogatethe machine to check which bayshave a valid payment recorded.Free motorcycle parking can beprovided, if the small number ofusers makes charge collectionuneconomic, or if, as a matter ofpolicy, it is decided to encouragemotorcycle use.Audit and Fraud PreventionThere is a high risk of fraudulentactivity in car parks and it isessential that an authority has acomprehensive plan to prevent itoccurring, and to detectdishonest employees. This willinvolve having good audit trails inplace, and possibly under-coverwork where fraud is suspected,for example following complaintsfrom users.Major private operators havetheir own security departmentsto detect fraud, but some frauds,like shortchanging, areperpetrated on the motorist andnot the car park owner. If thecustomer realises afterwardsthey have been defrauded theyare unlikely to complain, as thesums involved are small andthey may not be certain of thefacts. Any car park operatorshould, therefore, mount specialinvestigations to detect fraud oncustomers as well appropriationof car park revenues. No systemshould depend on the honesty ofa single individual, whatevertheir position or experience, andaudit controls should ensure thatany cash handling, includingoffsite cash counting by securitycompanies, can be reconciledagainst records from thepayment equipment.Car park operators bidding formanagement contracts are oftenconcerned to keep tender priceslow, as that is normally the maindeterminant of the contractaward. In considering contracttenders car park owners shouldtherefore consider the fraudcontrols proposed by thetenderers and whether the wagerates proposed can attract andretain honest staff as part of theirtender appraisal.For reasons of security it is notappropriate to describe here thewide variety of frauds that takeplace in car parks. However,operators should be aware of therisks and take appropriate adviceand maintain continual vigilance.To tackle problems of fraud localauthorities and car parkoperators need to:●Recognise and identify thepotential for fraud;● Introduce suitable measuresto prevent fraud, includingstaff training and awarenessprogrammes;● Maintain vigilance indetecting fraud; and● Establish procedures foreradicating fraud when it isdetected.Security in Car ParksSecurity in car parks is a majorconcern, both for the personalsecurity of users and theprevention of theft or damage tocars and their contents.Improvements in security canshow impressive results andlead to additional revenue, asmotorists are more likely to parkin a car park in which they feelsafe.The Association of Chief PoliceOfficers, in association with theBritish Parking Association andthe Home Office, run theSecured Car Park AwardScheme (2). Car parks that havebeen upgraded to meet thestandards for the Award have in

Delivery of Schemes 103some cases shown reductions ofover 80% in reported crime.The scheme evaluatessurveillance, boundarytreatment, lighting, vehicularaccess, the parking area,pedestrian access, security,signage, and managementpractice. Details are availablefrom the British ParkingAssociation.When new car parks are beingbuilt, or old ones are refurbished,the security measures should beconsidered carefully at designstage. The local police crimeprevention design advisor orarchitectural liaison officer andthe regional developmentmanager for the secured carpark scheme should beconsulted before the design isfinalised. Further advice can beobtained from the Institution ofStructural Engineers (3).Security is particularly importantat park-and-ride car parks ascriminals can easily observe thata driver is boarding a bus or trainand likely to be away for sometime. Full CCTV coverage andregular patrols are, therefore,necessary, while an operationalpolicy of always having a buswaiting by the car park alsohelps.The potential threat of terroristaction needs also to beconsidered in designingappropriate security systems.Generally speaking, securitymeasures are relevant for bothpersonal and vehicle security,although the presence ofpersonnel may be perceived byusers as particularly reassuringin terms of risks of personalattacks. Other security measuresinclude:● Lighting;● Design of access ways;● Layout of parking bays;● CCTV; and● Personnel presence.ShopmobilityShopmobility is a scheme thatlends manual and poweredwheelchairs and poweredscooters to members of thepublic with limited mobility, tohelp them to shop and use theleisure and commercial facilitiesof the town, city centre orshopping centre. The NationalFederation of Shopmobility by2002 had registered 224schemes in England, 18 inScotland, 11 in Wales, and 8 inNorthern Ireland.Schemes are mostly but notexclusively designed for use bypeople arriving in town or citycentres by car. (A scheme in FortWilliam serves people arriving bybus and rail, and is sited betweenthe two stations.) It is, therefore,appropriate for them to be sitedwithin a public car park. Theoperating base should be closeto, and on the same level as,reserved parking bays fordisabled people. It must bestaffed during operational hours,using either full or part-time staff,and often involving the use ofvolunteers. To help meetoperating costs, charges can beapplied either for the car parking,or for the equipment hire, or both.Good information should bemade available on the Internetand through local council officesand disability groups.Park-and-RideThe issue of when to introducepark-and-ride is considered inChapter 6. Implementation ofsuch facilities revolves aroundlocation; information; andsupporting public transportservices.1. LocationAuthorities wishing to locatepark-and-ride car parks on theedge of a town or city often haveno choice but to locate them inGreen Belt or other protectedlandscape. PPG13 has an annexon the issues to be considered insuch cases. Sometimes the carpark has to be located in an areabelonging to a different authority,and this can complicate theplanning issues and funding.

104 Chapter 72. InformationSigning is equally if not moreimportant for park-and-ride thanfor other car parks, especially ifthey are to attract users who areunfamiliar with the town, such astourists. It is necessary for thesign to indicate not only thelocation and entry point of the carpark, but also the frequency ofservice, the price, and the hoursand days of operation. This canbest be achieved by providing alay-by in advance of the parkand-rideturn off, whereinformation on all aspects oftravel into the town or city centreis displayed. In turn this willrequire some advance warningthat the information in the lay-byis ahead. Currently there are noprescribed signs for this in theTraffic Signs Regulations (4) so itwould need specialauthorization. It is also importantfor the bus stop for the returnservice to be clearly marked, andvisible from the arrival bus stop.Park-and-ride information shouldbe made available on touristleaflets and through the Internet.Some park-and-ride servicesallow pre-booking via theInternet.3. Public transport servicesFor successful bus-based parkand-ride,frequent services areessential and most have serviceintervals of 10 minutes or less atpeak periods and 15 minutes orless at other times. If a bus isalways waiting at the car park,travellers have confidence thatthere will only be a short wait.Driver’s rest periods are normallytaken at the car park, oftenscheduled so that there is alwaysa bus waiting. There are obvioussecurity benefits to thisarrangement as well. Thepayment structure often includesthe parking fee in the bus fare orvice versa to simplify paymentand marketing.Pay-and-display or pay-on-entryare the preferred methods ofpayment as exit barriers cancause congestion if a largenumber of passengers alightfrom a single train or bus andseek to exit the car park at thesame time. For parking atstations, differential tariffsbetween car parks on the sameline can encourage travellers tomaximise the length of the tripthat is made by train, andminimise the distance driven.Private off-street parkingSome private car parks, such asthose attached to supermarketsavailable for public use, are partof the public parking stock andconsequently charges andcontrols should be coordinated.Local authorities should liaisewith the owners or operators ofany such car parking to see thatcharges are in line with those forpublicly operated car parks. Itmay be acceptable for the owneror operator to provideconcessions for their owncustomers, for example byrefunding charges.Implementation will involvedecisions on the amount ofparking to be provided in newdevelopments (see Chapter 6),but may also involvemechanisms or protocols toinfluence either the supply of ordemand for existing privateparking. These may include theprovision of incentives orencouragements to owners ofprivate parking to reduce thequantity of spaces, or to makemore efficient use of spaces.One such mechanism is theWorkplace Parking Levy.The Department for Transporthas set up a “chargingpartnership” of those authoritiesinterested in workplace parkinglevies and road user charges inorder to exchange informationand experience. Durham hadimplemented a small road usercharging scheme, while a largerscheme was introduced inFebruary 2003 in centralLondon. A number of otherauthorities had considered oneor both of these chargingmethods, but in some casescommitment to them has beenreversed or has waned. OnlyNottingham City Council iscurrently pursuing an interest ina work place levy scheme.

Delivery of Schemes 105A common public and politicalview is that better publictransport services must beprovided prior to theimplementation of workplaceparking levies or other measuresdesigned to reduce the demandfor car travel. This will be difficultto implement, however, sincemore priority and space forbuses requires the reducedtraffic levels that will not occuruntil the charging scheme isintroduced. Overcoming thischicken-and-egg situationrequires both technical skill andstrong political will. On thetechnical side, the relativequantities involved should becalculated. For example, thetotal peak-hour car trips deterredby a workplace parking levy(assuming that the costs of thelevy are in some way passed onto the user) can be comparedwith the capacity of publictransport services available. Thelikelihood of walking or cyclingbeing used instead should alsobe assessed.If a local authority wishes toimplement a workplace parkinglevy or road user chargescheme, it will need to addresssome practical issues ofimplementation:●●●●The levy is designed to applyto the use and purpose of thetrip rather than the space.Procedures will, therefore,need to be established todifferentiate between tripsbeing made as a commuteror in the course of business,and other trips;The levy is paid by theprovider of the space basedon the maximum number ofwork based vehicles likely topark on the site, and it will benecessary to establish andenforce a particular number;If there is a likelihood ofcommuter cars migrating tosurrounding streets, onstreetparking controls maybe required to deal with anyresulting problems;The levy will need to beapplied throughout an urbanarea. If only the centre is●included, there will need tobe strong planning measuresto counteract pressure forout-of-centre development;Enforcement procedures willneed to be established. Forexample, parking attendantsmay need to be given right ofentry to private premises;● The levy will need to be setat a level that coversenforcement costs, but alsothat brings about a reductionin car use for commuting.The acceptability of this willneed to be established at theoutset;● The impact of bothworkplace parking levies androad user charging will affectthe demand for publicparking, both on and offstreet.For example, leviesmight cause some long staydemand to switch fromprivate to public car parks, ora reduction overall of longstay demand could lead toincreased demand for shortstay parking. For road usercharging it will reduce thedemand for parking withinthe charged area and thiscould open up a number ofopportunities to reviewcharges, reduce the spacefor parking and redevelopparking areas for otherpurposes;● The reaction of thebusinesses affected andwhether they offercompensation to theiraffected employees;●●The potential effects ontravel behaviour; andParking outside the chargedarea will also need to bereviewed.On street parking –provision and controlDesign of streetsIn designing streets, parkingissues that can arise include theprovision of structured baysadjacent to, but not strictly partof, the carriageway, and use offootway built-outs that canprevent parking in inappropriate

106 Chapter 7Figure 7.2. Stages in the approval ofa parking scheme.Problem identifiedParking survey work carried outOutline scheme preparedInterested groups consultedDetailed scheme preparedDetailed scheme considered byTransport Authorityor illegal places. It is important torecognise that opportunitiesarise for the modification ofstreets independently of specificimprovement schemes. Awatching brief should be kept toensure that such opportunitiesare taken as they arise. A designguide, or set of design principlesis necessary for this to happen.For example, street profiles andkerb alignments can beintroduced simultaneously withmajor utility or road maintenanceworks, thus reducing costs.Simply “putting it back as it was”remains common practice, but itis not recommended.YesPublicconsulted(andexhibitionheld)Approved?NoNo furtheraction (orrepeat aboveasnecessary)The German State of NorthrhineWestfalia redesigned 1600 mainstreets during the 1990s, and many ofthese arose from opportunitiespresented by, for example, light railschemes, major utility replacementsand regeneration projects.In the older quarters of Amsterdam,when streets are re-laid, they areredesigned to a standard street profiledefined for the particular category ofstreet.YesSchemechangedComments orobjections?Objections considered by authorityYesMajor changesrequired ?YesObjectionsagreed?NoNoNoScheme approvedWorks carried out (signs and lines)Scheme startsRevised layouts and designsshould ensure an appropriateallocation of space betweendifferent users, including thosewishing to park or load. Thedesign and allocation of spaceshould take into account a rangeof users and objectives,including the use of space foramenity and enjoyment, as wellas different road users. It mustalso be recognised that there aremany other issues besidesparking that are connected withstreet design and advice onthose should be sought fromappropriate documents.Parking and loading can beprovided for in bays adjacent tothe main carriageway, whether ornot the space is subject tocontrols and charges. There ispossibly a difficulty over howthese should be signed andmarked as the signs andmarkings prescribed for on-streetbays in the Traffic SignsRegulations (4) are specificallyfor parking on the carriageway orpartly on the carriageway andpartly on the footway. Any such

Delivery of Schemes 107difficulty should be specificallychecked out and advice sought.They do have the advantage ofnot obstructing the movementeither of vehicles or ofpedestrians. Furthermore, thedesign of parking bays should berelated to traffic flow and trafficspeed. For example, echelonparking involving reversing toexit is inappropriate whatever thetraffic speed. The Regulations(4) only prescribe a reverse-toenterlayout.Cycle movement can beseparately provided where thereis sufficient width. The design ofRed Routes in London providesextensive examples of such redesign,including the use offormer general running lanes forconversion to parking andloading bays between footwayextensions at pedestriancrossings and junctions.If the carriageway is limited to asingle lane in each direction, withsome form of divider betweenthem, this can be an effectiveway of preventing parking orstopping, since to do so willimmediately obstruct themovement of other vehicles. Thistechnique has been usedsuccessfully in Borehamwood,Hertfordshire.Traffic Regulation OrdersThe powers relating to TrafficRegulation Orders (TROs) arediscussed in Chapter 3.Implementation of a TROinvolves careful planning of thedesign details, and a robustprocedure to secure approval.There is also merit in keepingsuch TROs as simple aspossible in order to aid drivercomprehension and to minimizethe amount of signing required.The process for making TROs isset out in Annex B.The type of regulation for anyparticular length of kerbside willbe determined by the prioritygiven to competing trafficmanagement objectives. Thesetting of general priorities isdiscussed in Chapter 5. Indesigning a TRO for a specificlocation, these priorities mayneed to be defined in more detail.Atypical priority list might be:● Safety, including zigzags forpedestrian crossings andschools;● Maintain traffic flow;● Bus stops;● Loading for businesspremises without off-streetloading;● Disabled bays close tosurgeries, disability charitiesetc;● Bus lanes;● Doctor permit bays;● Resident permit bays;● Taxi ranks;● Business permits;● Motorcycle and cycleparking;● Short stay parking; and● Long stay parking.The range of uses and thepriority accorded to each willvary with location. For example,in some business districtsloading may take priority overtraffic flow. It may also varyduring the day, with traffic flowDiagram bay markings – West Sussex.Reproduced by permission ofOrdnance Survey on behalf of HMSO.© Crown copyright 2005. All rightsreserved. Ordnance Survey Licensenumber 100029051.

108 Chapter 7favoured at peak periods andloading at off-peak periods.A technical assessment of thecompeting demands for space,together with a reasonedjustification for the particular setof priorities being recommended,should be provided. However, incommunicating this assessmentthrough the process ofconsultation, it is important torecognise the political dimensionand the need to make choicesand trade-offs explicit, havingregard to national and regionalpolicy guidance and their otherpolicy concerns.Implementation timingFigure 7.2 outlines the stagesrequired in the introduction of anon-street parking scheme, suchas a controlled parking zone(CPZ). The process ofconsultation and raising publicawareness can be timeconsuming. Best practice is toundertake an initial consultationprior to drawing up detaileddesigns, including a TRO, beforeundertaking a full publicconsultation exercise. This maystill require the TRO to bemodified and re-advertised.When planning a consultationexercise, it is important to avoidschool holidays, especially thesummer, when many people willbe on holiday. If the validity of aconsultation can be challengedsuccessfully, the implementationof the scheme might be deferred,or in the case of a DPE scheme,the Secretary of State couldrefuse an application for aSpecial Parking Area (SPA).Advice on the consultationprocess itself is given in Chapter8.The setting up of a DPE schemecan be equally resourceintensive and a timetable shouldbe drawn up allowing adequatetime for the following steps in theprocedure:● Carrying out a feasibilitystudy;● Financial modelling;● Seeking agreement betweenCounty and District Councilswhere necessary;● Review of all TrafficRegulation Orders;● Application to the Secretaryof State for the necessarypowers; and● Set up time for contractpreparation and tendering, orthe development of in-housesystems, and the recruitmentand training of staff.Having established the basicprogramme and sequence ofactivities, it will be necessary tofit this to the calendar, makingadjustments if necessary to takeaccount of critical seasons andholidays.As with all potentially contentiousschemes, political timing can bea major determinant for theimplementation of demandrestraint or demandmanagement mechanisms.Whilst in the long term theintroduction of a CPZ can provepopular with residents andbusinesses, there can be shorttermhostility to the scheme inthe run-up to and followingimplementation. The sensitivityof elected Members to theintroduction of such a schemecoinciding with local electionsshould not be under estimated.Seasonal timing needs also to beconsidered. The proposedimplementation of a schemerequiring extensive lining workscan be severely disrupted by anextended period of cold, wetweather (paint cannot be appliedto cold, wet or salty surfaces). Toovercome this, thermoplasticmarkings on public roads areused, as these can be applied inlow temperatures. Lining worksin the summer might conflict withlocal trade considerations where,for example in a town with astrong seasonal economy,disruption of the on-streetparking capacity could affect theeconomic viability of a majorsector of the local economy. Ingeneral, April and October arethe best times to start a scheme,with signing and lining thuscarried out in March orSeptember. The caution aboutpolitical timing may beparticularly relevant if local

Delivery of Schemes 109elections are due in Mayfollowing implementation in thepreceding month.It is important to keep peopleinformed throughout theimplementation process throughan on-going communicationstrategy; managing informationand the media is a majorconsideration in keeping bothpoliticians and the public onboard (see Chapter 11).Incorporating exemptions inthe TROMost TROs have standardexemptions from parkingrestrictions for certain classes ofroad user: typically these are:●●●●●When directed by a policeofficer or traffic warden inuniform;To pick up and set downpassengers and theirpersonal luggage (but not tosit outside a shop whilesomeone else does theshopping!);When the vehicle is in use forfire, ambulance or policepurposes (which does notinclude when the driver isgoing to get a sandwich orpopping to the cashmachine!);To prevent an accident;When the vehicle has brokendown and is awaitingassistance;● Vehicles being used forcollecting or delivering mail;● Statutory Undertakerscarrying out emergencywork; and● People engaged on themaintenance or repair of thehighway.Some authorities also exemptvehicles on council business.This exemption is clearlyrequired for services such asmeals-on-wheels in liveriedvehicles, but the deliveryindustry resents local authoritiesgiving privileges for their ownvehicles that are denied to otherscarrying out similar work. It is,therefore, important thatcouncils, when drafting ordersand establishing operatingpractice have regard to theequity of the exemptions theyallow themselves, in order not tobring themselves or theregulations into disrepute.Planning signs and roadmarkingsSigns and markings areessential in order to informdrivers of the regulations thatapply. In addition, noncompliancewith TRO regulationscannot be enforced unless theyare properly signed. The designof signs is prescribed in theTraffic Signs Regulations andGeneral Directions (TSRGD) (4)that specifies the purpose forwhich signs are to be used. Anysign that is required that is not inTSRGD has to be speciallyauthorised by Department forTransport. Early consultation onsuch signs is encouraged withthe Department and with theWelsh Assembly or ScottishExecutive if the signs are to be inWales and Scotland respectively.This is to ensure consistencyand to prevent signs being usedthat have different meanings indifferent localities. The roadmarkings form part of the signsnecessary for an order, and alsohave to be of the specified formand dimensions.If signs and lines are not properlymaintained then there can beconsiderable administrative costfor authorities in cancellingtickets, and loss of revenuethrough inability to issue PenaltyCharge Notices or raise charges.Efforts should be made whendesigning or revising a TRO tominimise signs and markingsbecause of the negative impactof street “clutter”. This could alsoimpact upon sensitive locationsand reinforces the point to keepa TRO as simple as possible.Complicated regulations needcomplex and larger signs. Thus,where the street or public spaceis especially sensitive to theimpact of such clutter, visualintrusion can be greatly reducedby designating entire streets orareas so that parking regulationsigns are provided only at theboundary. With careful design,Sign and road markings for doubleyellow lines.

110 Chapter 7repeater signs and surfacemarkings can be avoided withoutloss of control over parking andloading activity. This is thestandard approach in mainlandEurope, and it has been appliedat some locations in Britishtowns and cities. Some as, forexample, in Shrewsbury requiredspecial authorisation, as it didnot comply with TSRGDregulations.In order to improve townscapeand urban quality, specialattention should be given tothese issues in the developmentof parking schemes. Whenschemes are being developed,or where opportunities arise foralterations to signs and markings(such as resurfacing and othermaintenance), those responsiblefor parking and for urban designshould liaise with one another toachieve the best result.Computerised design andmanagement of parkingcontrol schemesComputer software is availableto provide full digital mapping ofall parking orders together withthe precise location of signs andmarkings. Such maps allow newtraffic orders to be published asmaps rather than wordy andoften indecipherable schedules.The mapping of signs andmarkings also provides adetailed inventory from whichmaintenance can be carried out.Sign replacements and repairscan be ordered from the signshop by direct reference to thecomputerised inventory.With a fully computerisedinventory of regulations it ispossible to overlay the parkinginfringement data from theParking Attendants’ records sothat it is possible to produceprint-outs of where mostoffences are taking place andwhat type of infringements theyare. This allows “intelligentenforcement” responses, suchas to increase the patrols inparticular locations, or to checkthat the regulations and signsare appropriate and welldisplayed.The costs are not great but theydo have to be justified againstthe overall parking revenuebudgets. Supermarket practiceuses customer information thatallows the retailers to tailor theirproducts and thereby increasetheir turnover and profit.Information should similarlyenable parking operators eitherto increase their revenue or toimprove the responsiveness ofthe parking operation totransport managementobjectives. Such improvementsto parking practice will benefitnot only the local authority, butalso the public who benefit frommore efficient services.Restricting parking for roadsafetyZigzag markings, double yellowlines and red lines used atpedestrian crossings prohibitparking at any time. Indeed theyalso prohibit stopping to drop offor pick up passengers andloading.Where parking is decriminalisedthe local authority needs toconsider arrangements forenforcing these restrictions atnight, as police officers are nolonger able to enforce suchrestrictions. The safety of roadusers is not the onlyconsideration. Where streets arenarrow, or junctions constricted itmight be necessary to provide24-hour restrictions to ensurethat emergency service vehicles,particularly fire engines, are notimpeded.Zigzags for pedestrian crossingsare designed to ensure that alldrivers have a clear view ofpedestrians waiting to cross orstarting to cross, and areprovided on the approach tocrossings. TROs are not requiredbut the provision of zigzags ismandatory for all types ofcrossings. Zigzags prohibitstopping except in certaincircumstances specified in theRegulations. Despite this it isadvisable to continue trafficorders through the zigzag areaso that if the crossing issubsequently moved, the TROdoes not need modification.

Delivery of Schemes 111Where pedestrian signals areprovided at signal-controlledjunctions, or pedestrians areexpected to “walk with traffic”, aTRO providing for no parking orloading at any time should bemade to keep the sight distancesto pedestrians clear on theapproach to the crossing andwithin the junction.The need for such regulationscan to a large extent be“designed out” by realigningfootways and kerb lines to makeparking physically impossible atlocations where it would behazardous at any time. Undercurrent regulations, however,zigzag markings are still requiredat crossings, even if stopping ismade impossible through suchredesign.School EntrancesVehicles parked at schoolentrances during arrival andleaving periods pose a particularsafety hazard and should betackled in the following way:● Provide yellow (advisory)zigzag markings outside theschool entrance;● Support markings with TROsand vertical signing, wherenecessary, to enable betterenforcement;● Communicate with theschool to promoteawareness of and action tosolve the problem;● Ensure that regulations areenforced; and preferably● Use design techniques toreduce reliance onregulations and to “designout” abuse.School entrance markings canbe placed on both sides of theroad, if appropriate.It is important that local roadsafety officers keep contact withschools, and that regularcommunication with parents isarranged. Information should begiven to parents at the beginningof every autumn term to advisethem of the purpose of themarkings and the need to complyfor the safety of the children.Further encouragement may beneeded through the school yearif compliance is poor, forexample by arranging for a rosterof parents to act as volunteerwardens during school arrivaland departure times.Traffic authorities should ensurethat appropriate TROs are inplace. This becomes of particularconcern where parkingenforcement is decriminalised,as parking attendants cannotuse police powers to enforceobstruction or careless drivingoffences, and must enforceagainst a valid TRO.School entrances are a particularlocation where the problem cansometimes be ‘designed-out’ byextending the footway out acrossthe area otherwise occupied bythe yellow zigzag markings. Thisis easiest to achieve wherekerbside parking can beprovided for in defined bays. Theadvantages of this measure are:● The physical prevention ofparents being able to stoptheir vehicles in an areawhere they cause a danger;● The provision of extrafootway space that can beenjoyed by children andparents for social interaction;and● The extra footway spacereduces the likelihood ofchildren walking or runninginto the carriageway atcongested times.Pedestrian Crossing PlacesRegulations are often requiredfor the safety and convenience ofpedestrians. Obstructing adropped kerb can result inwheelchair users having to traveldown the carriageway to anotherlocation where they can accessthe footway. It is an offence ofhighway obstruction, which canbe enforced by the police as anendorsable Fixed Penalty Notice(FPN). In areas withdecriminalised parkingenforcement (DPE) it is useful toprovide “no parking or loading atany time” orders so that aparking attendant is able to issuea penalty charge notice (PCN).This would not prevent a police

112 Chapter 7officer or traffic warden issuing aFPN for the endorsable offenceof obstruction.If possible, the problem ofobstruction of places wherepedestrians cross thecarriageway should be “designedout” by extending the footway.This both helps to preventobstruction by parking andreduces the distance thatpedestrians have to cross.Footway extensions combinedwith central refuges will preventobstructive parking altogether,provided that the remaining lanewidth does not exceed 3.6metres.● Continuous road lengthswhere traffic flow would beimpeded by parked vehicles;● Properties nearby likely toattract parking in theabsence of restrictions; and● No frontage accessrequirements.Peak time clearways areappropriate where:● Access to frontageproperties is required, andthere is no alternativeprovision, such as accessroads or off-street bays; and● Traffic flow is markedlypeaked.Variety of different restricted parkingsigns – Taunton and Watford.Restricting parking for trafficflowRestrictions will vary accordingto circumstances in order tomaintain traffic flow. In somelocations, such as on majorthrough routes with no frontagedevelopment or service roads,24-hour clearways will beappropriate. “At any time”restrictions will also benecessary in many locations,such as close to traffic signalstop lines, where parking couldobstruct flow even when there islittle traffic. At times when trafficflows are high or road widthslimited it will be appropriate tointroduce working day or peakperiod restrictions. Peak hourclearways can be used wherethe characteristics of the roadare relatively similar for thewhole route. On many urbanmain roads with frontage accessthis will not be the case andrestrictions should be designedto match the nature of the roadas it varies along its length. In astudy of south east Birminghamit was found that locationsserving as district centres withcommercial frontage accessaccounted for roughly 10% of themain road network (5). TheTraffic Management Act is alsorelevant here.Clearway restrictions are acomplex subject. As applied 24hours they require:Clearway signs.Restrictions at junctionsIn most urban situations thejunctions determine trafficcapacity, not by the link capacitybetween junctions. In streetswhere it is intended to ensurethat vehicle flow through thegreen phase at junctions ismaximised (including whensignals are set to favourpedestrians), parking restrictions

Delivery of Schemes 113should be applied on theapproach to the junction in orderto maintain that capacity.For signalled junctions thedistance back from the junctionto be restricted will be the lengthof the platoon of vehicles thatcan pass through the junction inone stage of the signals. Greaterset back of restrictions generallywill not increase the capacity ofthe junction.For roundabouts and priorityjunctions the impact of parkingon capacity can be calculated byvarying the flare widths on theapproaches when calculatingjunction capacities usingcomputer simulation programs.There will also be a need in suchcases to protect the capacity ofthe junction by restricting parkingwithin the junction and on theexits.Where parking reduces junctioncapacity and there is a need toprovide for loading on junctionapproaches, this should be doneoff-peak or, where flows areheavily tidal, in the contra-peakdirection. In some cases, suchas on gyratory systems, theremay be a need to provide forloading within the junction. Onceagain a careful and systematicanalysis will be essential toensure an appropriate balancebetween traffic flow and therequirements of access tofrontage property. Reference tothe Traffic Management Actwould also be helpful.Collis and Read (6) showed theimportance of ensuring that parkingwas restricted and effectivelyenforced on the approach to criticaljunctions. Their study showed thatenforcing a particular 50 metre lengthof kerbspace before and during theevening peak would show a benefitcost ratio of over 15:1 if a trafficwarden were fully engaged on thissingle length of road during thecritical period.Bus StopsLocal authorities should ensurethat all bus stops are:● Kept free of parked vehicles;● Designed so that buses candraw alongside the kerb tofacilitate easy access;● Designed in ways thatphysically discourageparking obstruction; and● Located so that parkingrestrictions can be effective,and for the convenience ofpassengers.All new buses in the UK are ofthe low-floor type, designed toease access to those withmobility difficulties. The statutoryrequirements that lead to theextra cost of the vehicles arelargely frustrated if the buscannot stop easily close to thekerb. Parking and loadingshould, therefore, be restricted atbus stops.Parking restrictions should applyat least during the periods whenbus services run, and preferably24 hours a day throughout theyear. This is because:●●Permanent restrictions areeasier for drivers tounderstand;Permanent restrictions signala seriousness about priorityfor public transport, and mayengender compliance withwider bus priority measures;● Permanent restrictions areneeded for the growingnumber of areas that have(or should have) night andweekend bus services; and● Part-time restrictions areincompatible with purposedesignedbus stops involvingraised platforms, shelters,and build-outs (busboarders).Bus stop clearways do notrequire a TRO, as all new busbays are now covered by theRegulations (4). The markingswill have the meaning specifiedin the Regulations. TROs willonly be appropriate if no bus bayis marked on the carriageway.In preparing TROs for bus stops,the best design and location forthe stop should be pursued:●When there is permittedparking or loading either sideof the bus stop,

114 Chapter 7●consideration should begiven to provision of a busboarder, which is a wideningof the footway so that the buscan approach the kerb moreeasily and illegal parking canbe deterred;When the aim is to makebuses accessible to thosewith mobility difficulties.Accessibility can beincreased if higher kerbs (theusual design is known as theKassel kerb) are installed inconjunction with busboarders. These have theadded advantage ofdiscouraging cars fromparking or stopping at thebus stop since the higherkerb can prevent a car doorfrom opening; and● When the bus stop is justdownstream of a side roadjunction with yellow linerestrictions, it makes it easierfor the bus to get close to thekerb.Bus Lanes and Bus GatesBus lanes and other parts of theroad network where buses havepriority should have parking andloading restrictions that prohibitany other activity to obstruct busmovement. Such restrictionsshould apply at least during theperiod of operation:●Parking should be preventedat all times; and● Loading should be preventedat critical times.Where access for frontageloading is required this wouldpreclude 24-hour bus lanesbeing introduced, unless spacecan be found for a separateloading bay. The bus lane would,therefore, normally be timed forthe period of the day when busesare most affected by congestion,usually the morning and/or theevening peak, and loadingallowed during the inter-peakperiod.The parking and loadingrestrictions should be consistent,in terms of the location and timeperiods, with the bus lane order.It may also be necessary tointroduce controls on the otherside of the street during theoperational period of the buslane order, as vehicles precludedfrom using the bus lane mayhave to straddle the centre of thecarriageway.Cycle facilitiesSome cycle facilities need to beprotected from obstruction byparked motor vehicles. As withbus lanes, parking restrictionsideally should apply 24 hours aday, but at locations wherekerbside loading is required,with-flow cycle lanes may haveto operate at peak hours only.Where frontage access isprovided throughout the day,cycle provision should take intoaccount the following:● A cycle lane should beprovided on the offside of aparking/loading lane;● The parking/loading laneshould take the form of a baydefined within the footway orbetween footway “build-outs”;● The cycle lane must be ofsufficient width to minimisethe risk to cyclists caused byopening of vehicle doors;and● Where there is intenseparking pressure (leading todouble parking), cycle lanesare of little value.For further details about parkingin relation to the design of cyclefacilities, see CROW (7).Cycle gaps through roadclosures in the contra-flow areaof a one-way section of streetshould have permanent 24-hourparking and loading restrictions.This is another instance wherethe problem of obstruction bythoughtless parking can besolved through design.Short stay parkingShort stay parking can becontrolled by payment or bylimited period free parking.Where there is both on- and offstreetavailable, it is usuallydesirable to provide for shortstays (less than one hour) onstreetand for longer stays offstreet.This reduces congestion

Delivery of Schemes 115in off-street car parks and ismore convenient for short stayusers.Limited period free parking isused in many areas with parkingpermitted for a specific duration,with return prohibited for afurther period. This is verydifficult to enforce effectively andis usually widely abused. Ifcharges are made it is easier toidentify people who stay beyondthe permitted period, rather thanpeople who return within the noreturnperiod. It is, therefore,preferable that charges aremade in areas of limited-periodparking.An alternative is a disc-parkingscheme, where discs similar tothose used by blue badgeholders can be used to indicatearrival and departure times.Enforcement action can be takenagainst those not displaying avalid disc. This system can be aproblem in areas where there area lot of casual visitors, as thevisitors may not be familiar withthe system and have to obtain adisc. If an administrative chargeis levied for the disc this resultsin the need for the authority tomake formal arrangements withlocal retail outlets that sell thediscs, but reduces the number ofdiscs required. Where no chargeis made, the number of discsissued can be very high as thereis no incentive to look after a disconce it has been obtained.However, distribution costs arenegligible as local retailers arehappy to hold a stock and givethem to customers, and the costof printing the discs can be offsetby advertising revenue. In someareas there has been resistanceto the use of discs as penaltieshave been issued to motoristswho are not aware of the natureof the system.On balance it is generallypreferable to charge a modestamount for short-term parkingrather than attempting to providea readily enforceable system thatis free.Retailers’ concernsWhere there is no charge forparking, access for short-termstops for shopping is oftendifficult. In some areas politiciansand shopkeepers have a fear ofon-street parking charges,although, where they have beenintroduced, they are oftenwelcomed as the use of chargescan ensure that spaces areavailable for customers.In considering representationson changes in parking andloading regulations, authoritiesshould be aware that frontagebusinesses often claim that theyare concerned about access fortheir customers but are actuallyprotecting their own establishedpractice of using the parkingspaces themselves.On-street charging methodsVarious methods are availablefor charging for on-streetparking. The commonest aresingle bay meters, multi-baymeters, vouchers and pay anddisplay machines. Each systemhas advantages anddisadvantages in terms of impacton the street scene, customerconvenience and operationalefficiency.1. Single Bay MetersSingle bay meters are wellknown and understood by thepublic, as they have been widelyused since the early 1960s.Clockwork meters are now rareand any new installation wouldbe of electronic meters. Theseuse batteries and do not requirea mains electricity supply.Single bay meters have aparticular advantage over othermethods in that the meter isadjacent to, and clearlyearmarked for a particularparking bay. Drivers know thatthat the information displayedapplies to the bay chosen. It isalso clear to enforcement officersthat as soon as the driver walksaway from the vehicle, paymentshould have been made. Withpay-and-display drivers may bereturning in order to display theticket.Particular parking for shoppers –Westminster.

116 Chapter 7Different ways for payment –Newcastle, Westminster andMaidenhead.In areas of very high demandand high charges, such ascentral London, single baymeters are often preferred. Thetime taken to pay-and-displaycan be greater than the timeneeded to conduct very shorttermbusiness, and consequentlycontrol of kerbside space wouldbreak down.Meters have a number ofdisadvantages, however, whichin many places have led to theirreplacement by pay-and-displaymeters:● A lot of machines arerequired which adds to streetclutter;● Some models of single baymeters may not indicate theamount that should be in themeter when cash iscollected. This makes auditcontrol difficult and there isrisk of fraud;● Faulty machines result in aloss of revenue and parkingspace until they are repaired;and● They are subject to abuse bymotorists who attempt toblock them to avoid payment,(although it can be made anoffence to park at a brokenmeter), and attack by thievesseeking access to the cashinside them.2. Multi-Bay MetersMulti-bay meters reduce streetclutter, but are less wellunderstood. They are particularlyuseful where there are only a fewbays grouped together to becontrolled, and are cheaper thaninstalling pay-and-displaymachines. Like single baymeters, they are battery operatedand do not require connection tothe electricity supply, but theyhave the advantage that they canprovide audit data.3. Voucher parkingPre-paid vouchers, in the form ofscratch cards validated at thetime of parking, have beenpopular in areas where the aimhas been to avoid street clutter.This system avoids any on-streetequipment, although expiredvouchers may litter the street.However, the system hasbecome unpopular with bothusers and operators:●It is only suitable in areaswhere most users areregulars who understand thesystem and are able topurchase vouchers inadvance;● Enforcement can be difficult.Parking adjudicators are likelyto rule in favour of someonewho parks and then claims tohave tried to purchase avoucher. If no retailer or othervoucher outlet is availablewithin a short distance, it islikely that a penalty notice willnot be upheld;● Voucher schemes havenever been widely used inthe UK, and they are poorlyunderstood;● Providing vouchers throughretailers and other outletsinvolves considerableadministration costs; and● Parking spaces can be aconsiderable distance awayfrom the nearest outlet, anda driver’s short-termbusiness can be conductedmore quickly than acquiringand displaying the voucher.As a result there are fewsituations where voucherparkingschemes could berecommended and schemesinstalled by some authoritieshave been changed to pay-anddisplayin recent years as aresult.4. Pay-and-DisplayPay-and-display is now thecommonest method ofcontrolling short-term on-streetparking. From the viewpoint ofthe community and the operator,pay-and-display has a number ofadvantages over single baymeters, not least of which is theminimal impact on the streetscene, especially since theavailability of attractivelydesigned machines.Advantages are:● Motorists are familiar withpay-and-display and the

Delivery of Schemes 117system is easy tounderstand;● Provided the equipment canbe shown to be in goodworking order, it is rare that apenalty notice would beoverturned on appeal;● A single machine willnormally serve between fiveand 20 parking spaces. Thisimposes minimal streetclutter;● Where there is anothermachine within a reasonablewalking distance the chargescan be enforced even if asingle machine malfunctions;●If the machines are checkedat least daily, losses due tomachine problems areminimal; and● The audit control on payand-displaymachines isgood. For example, oneauthority with 50 machinesturning over a total of£5000/week rarely has adiscrepancy of more than £3on a weekly account, andcan usually identify thecause of any greaterdiscrepancy.Disadvantages are:●●The driver must park first andthen find a machine relatingto the chosen space;The driver must then returnto the vehicle to display theticket, possibly involving thelocking, unlocking and relockingof the car; and● The machine must be foundbefore the charge rate andother conditions of use canbe determined.As with all on-street controlmethods the driver has to predictthe duration of parking andcommit to the cost of thatduration at the time of parking.Label meters for clarityAt meters and pay-and-displaymachines charges should bedisplayed as an hourly rate, as well asa rate for a given number of minutes.For example, users find it easier tounderstand “£1.50 per hour” than“25p for 12 minutes” when decidinghow much money to insert. Meters inthe Royal Borough of Kensington andChelsea now display both.Power supply for Pay-and-Display machinesMachines are powered by one ofthree methods:● Mains electricity● Rechargeable battery● Solar power with batteryback-upConnecting machines to mainselectricity usually costs severalhundred pounds per machine. Ifit is necessary to move themachine similar costs areincurred. Revenue is also lost ifthe power supply is interrupted.This can happen of there is ageneral mains failure in the areaor if the local supply cable is cut,as can happen during utilityworks.Machines are available on themarket, and have been for someyears, that can provide highquality service without mainselectricity. Rechargeablebatteries need replacement atintervals far less frequent thanthe service visits necessary tocollect cash and re-stock tickets.The performance of pay-anddisplaymeters from differentmanufacturers varies, but thereis sufficient operating experienceto demonstrate that meters withrechargeable batteries are themost economical type of payand-displaymeter over the life ofthe machine. Although solarpowered machines may beregarded as the “green” option,the small amount of electricitysaved over the lifetime of themeter must be set against thepossibly larger amount used inthe construction of the solarpanel. The solar panels can alsobe vulnerable to vandalism.Technological advances havealso provided “intelligent ticketmachines” that “call” the centralsystem when they have a fault orare running out of paper, or whenthe cash box is getting full.Providing parking privilegesTROs can be designed to giveprivileges to certain usersthrough the issue of permits, forexample to:Different ways for payment –Newcastle, Westminster andMaidenhead.

118 Chapter 7● Residents;● Visitors;● Business people;● People with a mobilitydisability; and● Doctors or other healthworkers.All such permits grant a privilegethat is not available to othermotorists. As such they create avaluable asset that can bevulnerable to abuse. Forexample, in central Londonfraudulent resident permits willattract a particularly highpremium as they confer a 90%reduction on the normal chargeof £5 per day to drive in the areaimposed by the Londoncongestion charging scheme.Permits should, therefore, beintroduced or supported onlywhen there is sound evidencethat an important policy objectiveis served by providing suchprivilege. Control of their issueand their enforcement is anessential part of the propermanagement of permit schemes.Providing for on-streetloadingIn order to ensure that loading isproperly catered for it will benecessary to establish, throughsurveys and interviews:●●The premises requiring onstreetloading facilities;The duration and frequencyof loading activity; and● The size and nature of thegoods being loaded.Where the speed or volume oftraffic is likely to make loadingactivity hazardous, speed ortraffic management measures toreduce the source of conflictshould be considered.When setting the times forloading restrictions, care shouldbe given to consider the needs ofbusinesses. If possible therestrictions should apply at thesame times as for parkingrestrictions. There may bespecific local circumstances,however, that demand a flexibleapproach. This will need to beconsidered as part of theconsultation with businessesalong the route and the prospectof introducing innovativesolutions should be explored.In entertainment districts, whererestaurants and bars are openuntil the early hours, it may beappropriate to permit loadingduring the morning, and restrict itfrom lunchtime until late at night,when the streets are busier. Thiswould mean that restaurants,where the staff finish work in theearly hours of the morning, couldreceive deliveries towardsmidday, as they are opening forlunch, rather than have to rosterstaff to receive deliveries early inthe morning.During planning of the Red Routenetwork in London, it was initiallythought desirable to standardise thetimes of restrictions as 7am to 7pm,which was the norm for bus lanes.However this would require theproprietors of lock-up shops to bepresent well before 7am to receivedeliveries, and this would be a dailyproblem for those premises receivingfresh foods. Where traffic surveysshowed that there would not beproblems for free flow of traffic,particularly buses, the start of therestrictions was delayed until 08.00hours.In streets where loading on bothsides of the road would restricttraffic, such as by making itdifficult for two buses to pass, itcan be useful to permit loadingon one side of the road until 1pmand on the other side after that.This means that loading vehiclescan stop somewhere in the streetat any time, but congestion isavoided. If a business hasdeliveries that would be difficultto carry across the road, theycan arrange with their suppliersfor a morning or afternoondelivery to suit the permittedhours on their side of the road.Traffic orders for loadingrestrictions should normally limittime for loading to twentyminutes. There is merit inmaintaining this, as a consistentrequirement across the countryas it is well understood bydelivery firms and the time limit isnot normally signed. Wherethere is a particular need forlonger unloading periods, such

Delivery of Schemes 119as for a firm that regularlyreceives large consignments,consideration can be given toproviding a marked loading bay,with a different time limit signed.In general, however, firmsregularly wishing to load orunload large consignmentsshould be encouraged toconduct their business on theirown premises, not on the street,and local authorities should givecareful consideration to thepolicy implications of permittingsuch activity before approving alonger time limit.Providing for DisabledBadge HoldersLoadingIn planning for loadingrestrictions it should berecognised that Blue (or Orange)Badge holders are permitted topark for up to three hours outsidethe period that a ban on loadingor unloading is in force, includingsingle and double yellow linerestricted areas. In somelocations this can cause seriousproblems for businessesrequiring loading or unloading.In those circumstancesconsideration should be given tomarked loading bays, whereBlue Badge holders are notpermitted to park under the rulesof the scheme. For example,where there is likely to be loadingactivity close to the bus stop it isimportant to reserve space sothat this can occur withoutvehicles obstructing the busstop. If space allows it may bebetter to provide loading bays, asthese are more respected thanyellow lines in such locations.Disabled bays close tosurgeries, disability charitiesetcThe requirements of blue badgeholders in shopping streets andother town centre locations arenormally met by the concession,which allows them to park whereloading is permitted (but outsidethe period when a ban is inforce). However, there are somelocations where there arespecific needs for people withdisabilities. These might includedoctor’s surgeries or premisesoperated by organisations givingadvice and support to peoplewith disabilities, and localauthority offices. Bays can beprovided that are exclusivelyavailable to blue badge holdersin these circumstances. It is alsosometimes desirable to providedisabled bays close topedestrianised areas to enablemobility-impaired people toreach shops with ease. In suchareas their access needs shouldbe carefully planned, with a mixof provision on and off-street,including a Shopmobility schemeif there is sufficient demand.In determining whether to makesuch provision authorities shouldconsider whether the restricteduse of the kerbside is necessaryto meet a social policy objective,whether the scale of use issufficient to deny use of thatlength of the kerb to other users,and whether serious difficultieswill be caused to others denieduse of the space, as well as theconvenience of the blue badgeholder. The Regulations (4) allowsigns to indicate a time limit onparking in disabled badge holderbays.Resident PermitSchemesParking pressuresThe hours of restriction shouldinclude all times when demandexceeds supply. In most areasthis is confined to the workingday, when pressure on spaceParking for disabled drivers.

120 Chapter 7Designated residential parking signs.from commuters and shoppers ismost intense. However,increasingly there are areaswhere the problem is lesstractable, for example, where:●The number of cars ownedby residents exceeds thekerbside space available,making it difficult forresidents to find a parkingspace near to their homes,and leading in extreme casesto double parking anddangerous parking atjunctions; and● The area has restaurants,hotels and other facilitiesattracting visitors in theevening or at night.In these cases the hours ofcontrol may need to beextended, and this hasimplications for enforcementresources.Parking for residents should notbe restricted as to length of stay,otherwise residents will beforced to drive their cars awayfrom the area simply to avoid aparking penalty, thus generatingunwanted traffic.Allocation of PermitsCriteria must be established forthe issue of residents’ (andother) permits. The mainpurpose is to ensure thatresidents have a good chance offinding a parking space close totheir home, enabling them toleave their vehicle there even ifthere are restrictions on parkingby non-residents. For this benefitto be realised the criteria forissue must relate to balancingsupply and demand. This cannoteasily be predicted prior to theintroduction of a residents’parking scheme, and soimplementation must include areview of the scheme after asettling down period.If after the introduction of aresidents parking scheme,supply of parking space isadequate to meet residents’parking demands, a review of thespace allocation may be requiredto:● Allow issue to households ofmultiple permits, based onproof of residence andvehicle ownership;● Convert a proportion ofresidents’ bays to otherusers, such as short staybays, business permitholders; and● Convert some parking baysfor footway or amenity uses.If, on the other hand, demand ishigher than can comfortably beaccommodated, a review forreducing demand will be needed.Most local authorities have optedfor a simple qualification ofhaving the main residence withintheir area. This can lead to thenumber of permits far exceedingthe supply of parking space,especially in areas of housingmulti-occupation. There is nolegislation that prevents a localauthority from rationing permitsby number or some othermethod. The options for demandreduction include:●●One permit per dwelling unitat a basic charge, with ahigher charge for the secondor subsequent permits;One per household using theCouncil Tax register to definea household; and● Excluding those with offstreetparking facilities fromhaving permits.In areas of parking pressuremost residents consider that it isfairer that permits should belimited in this way.Permit chargesPart of setting charges relates tothe issuing of residents’ parkingpermits. Where new schemesare being introduced thepromoters always suffer theproblem that people perceive thespace outside their house wherethey park their car as a freeextension of their property rights.A number of authorities haveintroduced residential parking onthe basis of no charge. Thisseems to set a dangerousprecedent for two reasons:● It is difficult subsequently tointroduce a charge; and

Delivery of Schemes 121● There is clearly some costfor developing, establishingand enforcing such ascheme and, if the localresidents are notcontributing, why should allof the residents – even thosewithout cars – be paying toprovide a free privilege toothers?The level of charge and the rulesof permit issue are related. Thecosts of permits must be linkedto the costs of administrating thepermit scheme. Problems ofexcess demand can arise ifcharges are set too low, or if theissue of permits is unrelated tothe supply of kerbside spaceavailable for residents’ vehicles.This can result in dissatisfactionwith the scheme because peoplefind it difficult to find free spacesnear their homes. Wheredemand is high, or the supply ofkerbside space is low, it may benecessary to limit permits.Although precise costs can bedifficult to determine, estimatessuggest a range of around £20 -£30 per permit to administer aresidents parking scheme(including the issuing of permits,the sending out of reminders,changing vehicle registrationnumbers, cashing cheques).Guidance issued for London (8)recommends that “localauthorities should, as aminimum, have a permit chargewhich covers the cost ofoperating and enforcing thepermit system and bearing inmind the needs of people with adisability.” It should berecognised that not many PCNsare issued in residents’ parkingbays if they are well enforced.The cost calculation should,therefore, include the full cost ofpatrolling with all attendantoverheads as well as theadministrative cost of issuing thepermit. .It should be recognised thatresident permits have a value, asprovision of off-street spacemight be £500-£1000 a year for alock-up garage in a normal town,and up to £6000 a year for aspace in a public car park inCentral London (2002 prices). Itis, therefore, necessary toexercise strict control to ensurethat only those entitled to permitsreceive and use them. In centralLondon there are specialist fraudinvestigation units because thepotential for abuse is so great.Deciding on Parking ZonesResident parking zones (thoughnot necessarily the area coveredby schemes) should be relativelysmall, so that permit holders arenot able to use spaces at adistance from their home as freeparking when making trips toanother part of the area. This“internal commuting” can resultin difficulties for those residentswho live close to shoppingcentres or stations as otherresidents are occupying thespaces. It is also undesirable onpolicy grounds to encourage theuse of cars for short trips.Consequently, where the overallcontrolled area includes bothorigins (housing) anddestinations (such as shops andworkplaces) separate zonesshould be created. The parkingzones will still ensure that onstreetparking is available in thevicinity of people’s homesprovided that demand is inreasonable balance with supplyon a zone by zone basis.The zone should, wherepossible, follow naturalboundaries and be planned tohave a reasonable provision ofspace compared to demand. Inareas where there are overnightspaces available on singleyellow lines, resident permitschemes can work satisfactorilywith a ratio of 1.3 or even 1.4permits per space. Census datais useful for estimating thenumber of permits that will berequired, as household carownership is usually available onan enumeration district basis. Agood estimate can be obtainedof the likely demand for permitsby taking the number of carsowned in the area on censusnight, and then adjusting by:● Deducting for dwellings withoff-street parking;

122 Chapter 7●Allowing for any significantland use changes; and● Adjusting for the age of databy using national statisticsfor the growth in carownership since the lastcensus.DisplacementThe level of displaced parkingresulting from theimplementation of a parkingcontrol scheme will depend on anumber of factors. Theseinclude:● The type and extent of therestrictions introduced;● The off-street parkingcapacity in the area;● The location of off-street carparks and their charges;● The walking distance fromthe uncontrolled area to thetown centre or otherattractions;● The availability of acompetitive park-and-ridealternative for long-stayparking; and● The cost, quality andavailability of public transportalternatives.The displacement effects are,therefore, more likely to be ofsignificance in a small town,where the town centre might bewithin reasonable walkingdistance from the uncontrolledparking areas further out, andwhere public transport may bepoor. In a larger town or citycentre other effects, other kindsof displacement are likely to bemore significant. For example,parking forced off the street duea residents’ parking scheme isless likely to be displaced touncontrolled areas becausethese will be some distanceaway. Instead the controls maylead to greater use of off-streetcar parks and greater use ofpublic transport for access to thecontrolled area.It is important that themanagement of displacedparking be considered at theoutset of the development of aparking scheme. Mitigationmeasures might be incorporatedwithin the proposals of a parkingscheme, for example in the formof larger or additional residents’parking zones to act as a “buffer”surrounding a town centreparking scheme.There is a particular need whenimplementing schemes toanticipate the displacementeffect. It will mean that on-streetparking problems will be shiftedfrom one place to another,unless the controlled area islarge enough. Residents whocurrently experience no parkingshortage will experience such ashortage if their area is notincluded in the scheme.When mitigation measures suchas Residents’ Parking Zonessurrounding a town centreparking scheme are proposed, itis important that publicconsultation emphasises thepossible effect of displacementfrom the town centre on theoutlying areas (see alsoChapters 8 and 11). It is likelythat in areas where no parkingproblems currently exist, thepotential effect of displacementwill not be appreciated byresidents with consultation oftenreturning low levels of support forthe introduction of parkingcontrols in such areas. In theevent that public support is toolow for the proposed mitigationmeasures to be implementedfully, it is not uncommon foropposition to the scheme tocollapse once the town centrerestrictions come into force, withmany residents expressing theirdesire for measures to beimplemented.If the public cannot bepersuaded to accept a schemethat addresses future as well aspresent problems, a morereactive approach might beadopted, following planned andpro-active monitoring of ascheme. This may mean theincremental introduction ofcontrolled parking, requiringresources to be available over along period of time.A short-term response or “quickfix” to ease conflict in areas mostaffected by displaced parking

Delivery of Schemes 123might be the introduction ofadvisory “access protectionlines” or markings (white lines). Ashort to medium term measuremight be the introduction ofsingle yellow line restrictions,targeted to combat long staycommuter parking to where thisis obstructive. Whilst thisprevents all day commuterparking it also restricts parkingby residents. A medium to longtermmeasure might be theextension of an existing zone orthe introduction of an additionalzone. In addition, there areshared use bays. TheRegulations (4) permit signs forspaces shared between permitholders and Pay and Display andfor spaces shared betweenpermit holders and time-limitedfree parking.Whichever approach is adoptedfor managing displacement, thisshould be stated from the outsetand the resource implicationsaccounted for within the overallcost of implementing the parkingstrategy.Providing for residents’visitorsIn areas with resident parkingschemes difficulties often arisefor resident’s visitors. Short-termmeter parking does notnecessarily meet the need, as itis often restricted to one or twohours and in many areas there isno suitable off-street parkingavailable. Resident visitorpermits can be a valuable part ofa resident permit scheme in suchareas. Usually they are providedat a discount to meter parkingrates, and available for longerperiods. It is, therefore,necessary that their availability isstrictly controlled, or theybecome a form of currency, withconsequent loss of revenue tothe council, and underminepolicies to restrict long stayparking.Usually scratch cards are usedfor resident visitor permits, andthey are pre-sold in books soresidents can have a supplyavailable for any visitors andvalidate them when required.Typically a resident might beallowed a limited allocation oftickets per annum, which can beused by tradesmen such asdomestic appliance repair staffas well as for social visits. Someauthorities also provide for anallocation of weekly tickets,which can be used if a relative orfriend is visiting for a few days.Resident visitor tickets should beavailable to all residents,including non car-owninghouseholds. They are ofparticular benefit for visitors toelderly or disabled relatives.Some people who choose not toown a car also find themvaluable, as they can use themwhen they hire a car whilst thehire car is parked close to theirhome.Providing business permitsBusinesses should provide offstreetaccommodation for theparking and loading of largecommercial vehicles, providedthat this can be achieved in away that is consistent with goodurban design. However, inplaces where development tookplace before widespread motorvehicle use, there will often be arequirement to accommodateparking for business vehicles onstreet.This can be achieved intwo ways:● Providing special bays forbusiness permit holders; or● Allowing business permitholders to park in residentpermit bays, or in short termparking bays.During the working day residentparking areas often have a largeproportion of unoccupiedspaces, and so there is noconflict if business permitholders are permitted to usethem.Business permits should bestrictly controlled to ensure theyare not used for personalcommuting contrary to thetransport policies the controlsare designed to support.Authorities should limit businesspermits to:● Businesses that have nopermitted or authorised off-

124 Chapter 7street parking or loadingspace under the terms oftheir planning consent; and● Businesses that require touse a vehicle for the purposeof the business during theworking day.It is not unusual for off-streetspace that has been provided forcommercial vehicles to be usedinstead for commuter parking bypeople employed at thebusiness. This may mean thatthe commercial vehicles areparked in the street. In thesecircumstances business permitsshould not be issued.The cost of a business permitshould reflect the cost of shortterm parking revenue forgone,as the benefit should be to allowthe vehicle to park for a longerperiod than otherwise permittedand to avoid the necessity to payon every parking event. Thecharge for a business permitshould therefore be higher thanfor a resident’s permit.The provision for business usecan be enforced by a declarationfrom the applicant andobservation by parkingattendants. A vehicle that isobserved as not moving duringthe course of the day is unlikelyto be necessary for theoperational needs of thebusiness, though there areexceptions, such as vans used tore-stock market stalls during theday.Making special provision forDoctors and other HealthWorkersNormally permitted parking baysare available to any user in thedefined category. However,when it is desirable to providedoctor parking bays, normally forGPs close to their surgery, it isgood practice to number thebays and restrict the use to thedoctor or doctors registered withthe permit for that numbered bay.This ensures that only theperson for whom it is designatedcan use the bay. Localauthorities may need toundertake detailed consultationto establish which people at amedical practice need a privilegeof this sort. Besides doctorsthere are other health workerswho may be dependent on theircars in order to perform theirduties. They should normallymake a charge for the permit thatreflects their costs in making andmaintaining the order,administration and enforcement.Providing special Permits,Waivers and SuspensionsIn writing the TRO for residentpermit areas it is useful to have aprovision for the council to issuespecial permits in exceptionalcircumstances. Examples of theuse of special permits include:●An enhanced allocation ofvisitor permits for an oldpeople’s home, so that thewarden can provide them toresidents’ visitors; and● The supply of a residentpermit to a carer who visits aresident daily but would nototherwise be entitled to aresident permit.Internal guidelines should bedeveloped to ensure consistencyon the circumstances whenspecial permits can be issued.Authorisation should be by asenior officer or member of thecouncil to ensure that issue isproperly controlled.The TRO should normally allowfor waivers and baysuspensions, which are used foractivities like building works,furniture removals, weddingsand funerals and public events.The authority has discretion tocharge for these and wouldnormally do so for commercialactivities such as building works.Other on-street parkingissuesStreet Trading and MarketsSpecial licensing arrangementsare usually made for streettraders and street markets.Street trading is usually coveredby royal charters going backcenturies or by local Acts ofParliament. Special provisionsmay be required in TROs toensure that spaces are cleared

Delivery of Schemes 125in advance of markets, and someareas of road space will need tobe allocated permanently tostreet traders who have rights totrade on a daily basis.Hotels and Guest HousesIn some towns where there aresmall hotels and guest housesbased in converted residentialbuildings there may be no offstreetparking available. In thissituation the landlords can begiven or sold a daily parkingvoucher that they can provide totheir guests so that they can parklegally. This would normally beviewed as a commercialundertaking and charged foraccordingly.Parking on footwaysParking on footways oftencreates a nuisance and potentialhazard, leading to obstruction ofthe footway, especially fordisabled people, visuallyimpaired people, and thoseencumbered with push chairs orbuggies. Damage to paving willbe the inevitable result offrequent parking, especially withlarger format paving slabs. Treesand street furniture are alsovulnerable to damage. Footwayparking is a common source ofcomplaint by residents andfootway users.Parking on footways and vergesis prohibited where there is atraffic order prohibiting parkingon the carriageway or there is aspecific local legal prohibition. InLondon and some other localauthorities there are local Acts ofParliament prohibiting footwayparking except where anexemption is signed. Some otherauthorities have relevant bylaws;in one there is a prohibitionon parking on “ornamentalverges”. These, however, haveto be signed.Otherwise, parking on vergesand footways is not prohibitedunless there is an obstruction ofthe highway or damage iscaused. Section 72 of theHighways Act 1835 makes itamongst other things an offenceto deposit any matterwhatsoever on the footway.Subsequent case law hasestablished that on the footpathfalls within the ambit of thislegislation. Some authorities usethis provision to prosecutevehicles that park on the footwayand vehicles parked on privateforecourts that have noauthorised crossing, on the basisthat they must have driven on thefootway to be there, in theabsence of any evidence to thecontrary. Prosecution will,therefore, depend on the attitudeof local magistrates; someauthorities and police forcesprosecute, and others do not.Local Authorities operating DPEcan take enforcement actionunder that process.Overnight Lorry parkingIn some areas problems arecaused by overnight lorryparking on the public highway.The most significant problem isthat they frequently start up earlyin the morning and the noisecauses disturbance to those whoare still sleeping. When at theirhome base HGVs are required tohave an operating centre wherethe vehicle is normally kept.Planning authorities have theright to comment on thesuitability of operating centreswhen applications are made tothe Traffic Commissioners.There is a need for lorry parkingfor those who are away from thehome base. Some overnightlorry parks are available butthere are still problems in someareas. In London there is a localAct that is used by most of theLondon Boroughs, whichrestricts overnight parking byvehicles over 3.5 tonnes. Anyother authority that has aproblem can promote a TRO tosimilar effect. Further advice isgiven in Lorries and TrafficManagement (9)Coach parkingIn tourism, theatre and hoteldistricts there is often a need tomake special provision forcoaches. Many tourist attractionsare in historic city centres whereit is difficult to provide off-streetNuisance footway parking.

126 Chapter 7Coach and lorry parking – Chichester.Securing motorcycles.Photo courtesy: DfT.parking. Coach parking bays canbe designated on-street, with orwithout charges. TheRegulations (4) allow for signsthat can be used to designatespaces that coaches and otherbuses can use. Major changes toa town centre’s parking, forexample by the introduction of aControlled Parking Zone or thedevelopment of surface carparks, are likely to impact uponthese arrangements.The parking duration can belimited to picking up and settingdown passengers, with the driverhaving to take the coach toanother location for parking. Inhotel districts overnight parkingcan be a problem, particularly ifthe area is also residential, andTROs can be introduced toprohibit overnight coach parkingon-street.Accommodating coach parkingat or near the point of attractionhas the advantage of reducingthe amount of empty running bycoaches, and being convenientfor both passengers and drivers.In many locations, however,such parking causesunacceptable loss of amenity orsafety hazards. Where nosuitable coach parking can bemade available near theattraction, sites should be foundwith the following attributes:● A route between theattraction and the parkingspaces that is notenvironmentally sensitive;●●If parking is to use on-streetbays, these should bealongside “dead” frontageand away from places wellused by pedestrians;A parking area that is sharedwith other large vehicles withdifferent parking hours, suchas a bus garage during thedaytime, or an office car parkat night time;● Facilities for coach driverssuch as toilets andrefreshment facilities; and● Supervision of coacheswhilst parked for securityreasons.Such set-down and pick-upareas might need to be allocatedclose to the town centre or touristattraction, together with an outlyingarea provided for the layingover of coaches.Motorcycle parkingThere is a particular problem ofsecurity for motorcycles giventheir value as, even if a lock isapplied, the vehicle can bestolen by being lifted onto a lorry.Best practice is to provide secureanchor points, either at groundlevel or by means of a raisedhorizontal bar integral topedestrian railings. There isadvice on the provision ofsecurity points for motorcyclesand about methods of chargingfor motorcycle parking (10.)Motorcycles have an inherentdifficulty in displaying parkingpermits and Pay and Displayvouchers so parking hastraditionally been provided freeof charge. Schemes have beendeveloped to enable parkingcharges to be applied tomotorcycles, for example,Birmingham City Council providesecure boxes beside parkingbays into which motorcyclistspost their Pay and Display ticket,having written their registrationnumber on it. An overallapproach to these problems hasyet to be adopted amongst localauthorities. Small motorcyclesmight also have a valuable rolein maximising the use of parkingat stations popular withcommuters.Advice on motorcycle parking inoff-street car parks is providedearlier in this chapter.Cycle parkingCycle parking should beprovided for major attractions,such as stations and shoppingcentres, and in small groups indispersed locations around townand city centres. The “SheffieldStaple” or similar cycle standsenable cycles to be chainedsecurely. Most areas have alocal cycling organisation andconsultation with cyclists shouldensure that cycle stands are well

Delivery of Schemes 127located and of a design thatmeets their preferences. It isdesirable for local authorities tooffer advice to developers aspart of the planning process onthe design and provision of cycleparking facilities.Where there are particularproblems of vandalism and theft,the use of cycle lockers,especially for medium to longstayuse such as at stations andleisure facilities, should beconsidered. Where control ofaccess or finance are significantissues, the lockers can be rentedon an hourly or daily basis, orleased for permanent use byregular users who need toguarantee availability.Further advice is available in theIHT publication Cycle-FriendlyInfrastructure (11).Taxi ranksIt is useful to mark out bays to beused by taxis at town centres,stations and other key places,even if there are no other onstreetparking controls. Thishelps to bring taxis and theirpotential customers together,and to avoid random parking bytaxis. The use of taxi ranks incontrolled areas should bemonitored from time to time asspaces that are little used mightbe reallocated for otherpurposes. The Regulations (4)introduced a wide yellow stripe toindicate which taxi bays prohibitstopping, not just waiting, byother vehicles.Footway crossoversThe policy approach tocrossovers is discussed inChapter 6. It will be necessary inaddition for local authorities toconsider the knock-on effectswhen on-street parking controlsare introduced.Where parking controls areintroduced householdersfrequently seek crossovers toallow parking in front gardens inorder to avoid the restrictions, orthe residents’ permit charge.When introducing parkingcontrols in residential areas thatdo not have off-street parking itis, therefore, useful to considerwhether further planning controlsare necessary to prevent theconstruction of crossovers. InConservation Areas this can beachieved by making an Article 4Direction under the Town andCountry Planning Acts.New crossovers should beintroduced sparingly, if at all, inareas with significant pedestrianmovement. A maximumpedestrian flow could be decidedabove which new crossoverswould not be allowed.It should be noted thatcrossovers provide the only legalauthority for driving on thefootway, to gain access topremises. Where they arepermitted they must beconstructed by the highwayauthority, or to its specification,with the costs being reimbursedby the applicant for thecrossover. Statutory Undertakershave to be consulted to ensureprotection of buried plant.Planning consent for a newcrossover is only required on aclassified road.Sports StadiaSports stadia are often located inareas where resident parkingschemes are not normallyrequired, or do not cover the timeperiod when matches are held.In these cases a match dayparking scheme can beintroduced. The signing andmanagement of such schemescan be complex and localauthorities considering a matchday scheme should take advicefrom authorities with existingschemes and from theDepartment for Transport inEngland, the Welsh Assembly inWales and the ScottishExecutive in Scotland.Planning theimplementation of majorParking Control SchemesThe team for implementing aproject requires a wide skill base.If an authority is to implementDecriminalised ParkingEnforcement and a ControlledParking Zone, they cannot passImprovised cycle parking –Westminster.Taxi rank: on-street provision.

128 Chapter 7Matchday restrictions – Watford.the whole process out toconsultants, althoughconsultants can provideimportant skills and resources.Ultimately the authority hasresponsibility for running theoperation itself, whether bycontract or direct labour.Consequently the team will needto comprise officers other thanjust from the engineering andtraffic management department.The council’s lawyers, auditors,human resources, publicrelations and member servicesofficers are all going to beinvolved in the longer term. Acomprehensive project team,therefore, has to be establishedat the start, with a closerelationship with the councillorsconcerned, if the project is to beeffectively managed and achieveBest Value.It is important that the teamworks to the parking businessplan that is prepared as part ofthe Parking Strategy (see alsoChapters 4 and 10).Budgetary requirements are afurther constraint. Both capitaland revenue expenditure have tobe planned into the annualbudgets of an authority. For bidsto be assessed, officers willnormally need to have a clearidea of their future estimates atthe beginning of the calendaryear. If Local Transport Planexpenditure is involved,submissions have to be made inJuly for the forthcoming financialyear.Major schemes must be thesubject of consultation with thepeople affected, and it will benecessary to communicateinformation about the schemebefore, during and after itsimplementation on the ground.Guidance is provided in Chapter8.References(1) British Parking Association,Unpublished Report at BPA SeminarMarch 2003.(2) British Parking Association, Thesecured Car Park Award Scheme:Guidelines for Self-Assessment.(3) Institution of Structural Engineers,2002, Design recommendations formulti-storey and underground carparks (3rd edition).(4) Traffic Signs Regulations and GeneralDirections.(5) MVA, 1992, South East BirminghamStudy for Birmingham City Council.(6) Collis, HA and Read MJ, 1986, Acost/benefit study of ParkingEnforcement PTRC Summer AnnualMeeting.(7) CROW, 1993, Sign Up for the Bike:design manual for cycle-friendlyinfrastructure, Netherlands.(8) Government Office for London, 1998,Traffic Management & ParkingGuidance for London(9) Civic Trust, County Surveyors’ Society,Department of Transport, 1990, Lorriesand Traffic Management: A Manual ofGuidance for Local Authorities andothers, The Stationery Office.(10) DLTR, 2002, Traffic Advisory Leaflets02/02: Motorcycle Parking(11) The Institution of Highways &Transportation, 1996, Cycle-friendlyInfrastructure: Guidelines for Planningand Design, endorsed by theDepartment of Transport and theCyclists’ Touring Club.Butler, PE and Allan, MG, 1991, Red Routesin London, PTRC Summer AnnualMeeting.Collis HA, 1991, The Red Route scheme -Design and Implementation, PTRCSummer Annual Meeting.DTLR, 1993, Traffic Advisory Leaflets 04/93:Pavement Parking.DTLR, 1995, Traffic Advisory Leaflets 05/95:Parking for Disabled People.DTLR, 2001, Traffic Advisory Leaflets 02/01:Bus-Based Park & Ride.DfT, March 2000, Guidance on Full LocalTransport Plans.English Historic Towns Forum, 2000, BusbasedPark-and-Ride: Good PracticeGuide, 2nd Edition, Report No.48.Jones P, 1992, Illegal Stopping Activity atShopping Centres on Main Roads.Wood, K and Smith, R, 1992, Assessmentof the pilot priority Red Route inLondon, PTRC Summer AnnualMeeting.

Chapter 8PublicConsultationWhat consultation isrequired?There are different stages ofconsultation where parkingissues are likely to feature:●In preparing or revising localDevelopment Plans ordocuments, or other planningdocuments such assupplementary planningguidance on parking in newdevelopments;● In preparing Local TransportPlans;● In preparing a ParkingStrategy as a subcomponentof the above; and● In promoting specificschemes requiring a TrafficRegulation Order.It is important to determineprecisely the policies orproposals where involvementand consultation is to beundertaken. Particular aspects ofa scheme or a policy should,where possible, be presented aspart of the wider strategy. Forexample, consultation on theprinciple of parking chargesshould not be consulted on as astand-alone issue. Similarly it willbe fruitless to consult on the levelof charge to be applied withoutdiscussion of the wider context.(There are rights of objection toTRO changes including achange of hours, but not tosimple changes to the charges.)Why consult?The traditional approach is to“consult” people on a policy orscheme once it has beendesigned. This can have majordisadvantages, however, since itmay be too late to change theconcept in response to theconsultation exercise, thusprovoking criticism that theauthority has already made up itsmind. It is better to adopt aprogramme whereby people areinvolved at as early a stage in theprocess as possible. This is thekey stage at which to engagepublic support and to “win overhearts and minds” and to seek toengage with representatives ofhard-to-reach groups such asethnic minority groups and smalltraders. Although suchinvolvement can be resourceintensive, it may overall be lessso than having to redesign a fullydeveloped scheme that hasbeen rejected at the formalconsultation stage, or to dealwith damaging and costly courtaction by aggrieved parties.Comprehensive publicconsultation is not just a legalissue but is a necessarycomponent of implementing asatisfactory parking scheme. Itshould be embraced by localauthorities as a way of ensuringthat parking interventions meetthe council’s objectives andrespond to people’s concerns,and not just as a way of keepingthe council out of trouble with thecourts.AcknowledgementsChapter 8PublicConsultation

130 Chapter 8Consultation on aParking StrategyPreparation of a ParkingStrategy is set out in Chapter 4.A decision will need to be madeas to whether the publicinvolvement and consultationshould be separate or part of theDevelopment Plan or LocalTransport Plan process. Thequestions to be addressedinclude:●Are the parking issues likelyto be sufficiently complex orcontentious to justify aseparate consultation?● Is the preparation timetablecompatible with otherconsultation programmes?● Is there a danger of“consultation fatigue” ifseparate consultations areundertaken simultaneouslyor consecutively?● Is the content too detailedand specific to be included inconsultation on broad policyissues?The content, in particular, mayneed to be adjusted in order toenable an appropriate publicinvolvement programme to becarried out. For example, thesplit between the policy, schemeand management elements maybe important. For example, itmay be simpler to undertake aseparate consultation on parkingif the broad policy issues havebeen dealt with in the localDevelopment Plan and LocalTransport Plan processes.Consultation on parkingcontrol SchemesStatutory consultation onindividual Traffic RegulationOrders will need to beundertaken separately andparticular care must be takenwhen doing so. The Road TrafficRegulation Act 1984 requiresauthorities to publish proposalsfor traffic orders and to considerany objections received beforeconfirming the orders. Theorders have to be published in alocal newspaper and streetnotices should be displayed inthe areas affected. Six weeksare allowed for submission ofobjections. Whilst the statute lawdoes not require any furtherpublic consultation, the courtshave determined that thereshould be earlier non-statutoryconsultation in certaincircumstances. Residents in thePrimrose Hill area of Camden(London) sought a judicial reviewof a proposed resident parkingscheme on the basis ofinsufficient public consultation,and were successful. (1)Internal organisation andconsultationGood channels ofcommunication will also beessential within the authority, forexample between leisure,tourism, corporate policy,planning policy, legal, finance,press office and the parkingstrategy teams. County anddistrict councils will need tocooperate to ensure compatibilitybetween on-street and off-streetpolicies.Valleley (2) suggests “thedevelopment of anorganisational structure whichallows all of the officers from thevarious departments who areinvolved with parking policyformulation, management,operation and enforcement to beunified”. This would help toovercome many of theorganisational difficultiesexperienced in developing acohesive Parking Strategy.Alternatively, Valleley suggeststhat by “placing all responsibilityfor developing and implementinga comprehensive parking policyin a single local authoritydepartment” a unified structurecould be achieved, but this wouldbe more applicable to a unitaryauthority rather than within atwo-tier local governmentstructure. At the very least, somearrangement (such as a workinggroup) should be established toensure that parking is not treatedin isolation.

Public Consultation 131Elected MemberinvolvementThe stages involving electedMembers are set out in Chapter4.Planning a schemeconsultationConsultation needs to becarefully planned and managed.The aim is to obtain the bestscheme in accordance with thepriorities of the Authority and theaffected parties. The processmay start with a view that aparticular approach is required,but must be sufficiently flexible tomanage changes in theapproach, even radical changes,if the consultation processindicates that change is needed.A defined project group shouldbe established, which wouldnormally include councilMembers, and the appropriatesenior officers as well asprofessionals with skills inmanaging the consultationprocess and getting the bestresults from it. Some consultantswill have these skills, but they willneed to be blended with anunderstanding of the localpolitics and public attitudes, andthe personal contacts with thelocal stakeholders and media.The council’s public relationsdepartment is, therefore, anessential part of the team, and itmay on occasion be desirable tosecure the services of externalpublic relations advisors withsuitable experience.It is important to remember that apublic consultation is one of theoccasions when a local authorityis very visible and gets veryclose to the local community. Theperformance of the authority isoften judged by the contactsmade during such consultations.Likewise, consultation on parkingissues can be affected bycontact between the council andthe public on other matters.Experience suggests that thesuccess of public consultationand involvement depends notonly on the appropriateness ofthe procedures themselves, buton the general standing of thelocal authority with thecommunities it serves. If there isgeneral distrust or unrestconcerning aspects of theauthority’s work, this can bubbleto the surface during any specificconsultation exercise andparking is a particularlyvulnerable topic because itaffects everyone.From all these standpoints it isimportant to:● Plan consultation carefully;● Make adequate provision ofresources; and● Remain flexible andresponsive.Improving the schemethrough consultationWhere a large or complex onstreetparking scheme isproposed, such as theintroduction of a CPZ in a townthat has not had such controlsbefore, consultation is necessaryto:● Determine the acceptabilityof proposals; and● Shape the scheme.It is essential to produce aproposal before undertakingwidespread or detailedconsultations using, for example,leaflets and exhibitions. Thisshould be easy for people tounderstand, if they are going tobe able to contribute effectivelyto the process. It may takeseveral rounds of amendmentsto fine-tune a scheme, butwillingness to respond to localviews should be viewedpositively.It is important to keep the lines ofcommunication open duringimplementation of a scheme toprovide information and to dealwith issues of disruption.People responding to aconsultation are primarilyconcerned with how they arepersonally affected. It is,therefore, necessary to set outthe context of a scheme and howit would work, and howconflicting priorities would bebalanced.Questionnaires need to becarefully designed. Below aresome do’s and don’ts.Do explain:●●●●●●What scheme is proposed and itspurpose;The area affected, preferably witha map;How it will operate, includinglikely charges;The changes that will be madecompared to the presentsituation;What happens next; andThe action that the recipient isexpected or able to take.Do ask for:● Comments or opinions about anyof the above points;● Information about thehousehold’s vehicle ownership;● Comments from interestedpeople other than householders(e.g. local businesses);● Comments about how theresponded thinks he or she willbe affected by the scheme; and● A contact address or telephonenumber in case follow up isnecessary, and to avoidfraudulent returns.Don’t ask:● What the parking or permitcharges should be;● About personal information that isnot directly relevant to theconsultation; and● For opinions on a collection ofmeasures; it is preferable to beable to identify precisely whichaspects of a scheme are liked ordisliked.

132 Chapter 8In addition to leaflets andquestionnaires that are aimed atall those affected, a marketresearch exercise should beconsidered whereby in-depthinterviews are undertaken with alimited number of people. Dataon existing patterns of parking inthe area or in other parts of thelocal authority area can help bothin conducting such an exercise,and in understanding thesignificance of the results.For large schemes specialisthelp may be required for theconsultation process. Councilofficers will need to guide electedMembers on the effects on publicopinion of such matters asoperative hours, location ofrestrictions, the tariff structure,and permit rules.A number of issues are likely tofeature prominently in theconsultation process, including:●●The extent of the controlarea;Displacement of the parkingproblem from the newlycontrolled area to adjacentareas – the knock-on effectof drivers finding the nextavailable free or uncontrolledparking opportunity (seeChapter 7).● The allocation of kerb spacebetween different types ofuser, such as pay anddisplay, residents’ orbusiness permits, loading,and restricted parking; and● The issue of whethercharges will be made, and ifso at what level.Once the scheme has beenagreed or amended asnecessary, a formal period ofconsultation is required for theTraffic Regulation Order (TRO).This will be at least for the 21 daystatutory consultation requiredfor TROs. Again, good publicrelations should be committed tothe exercise to ensure thatadequate levels of awarenesshave been raised. This too isiterative and if significantobjections remain unresolved,the scheme may requireamendment and re-consultation.Handling objections toTROsIt is unlikely that all objectionscan be accommodated and so itis important to ensure that onceall opinions have been fairlyconsidered and a decisionreached, the council shouldcommunicate this decision. Thepublic needs to know whatchanges are to be made and thetimetable for their introduction.It is an important part of the TROorder-making process that theorder-making authority has toconsider objections to the orderbefore confirming it. Anycomment or suggestion that ismade in response to aconsultation should be fullyconsidered and provided with areasoned response. To simplyreject an objection or alternativeproposal because it does notconform to the council’s currentthinking or policy is inadequate.The objector’s view must beconsidered, given full weightand, if it is in conflict with currentpolicy, the policy itself must bereviewed and shown to be stillvalid.A report on objections should beprepared by the technicaladvisors to the authority, withcopies of all objections madeavailable to elected Members toinspect. The Members are betterable to discharge this statutoryprocess effectively if they havebeen closely involved in the nonstatutoryconsultation process.The consultationtimetableImplementing a major schemerequires substantial resources,and has to be planned,programmed and resourced. Inpreparing the programme thereare a number of constraints thatneed to be considered:1. Extensive consultation shouldnot be carried out in the schoolholiday periods, as this mayproduce a response that peopleare disenfranchised.2. The political and seasonalcalendar should be addressed. Itis unlikely to be acceptable to

Public Consultation 133councillors to conduct aconsultation or introduce acontroversial scheme in a preelectionperiod. It is alsoundesirable to make majorchanges to parking in towncentres or other shopping areasin the Christmas shoppingperiod, which generally builds upfrom the autumn school halfterm. In a tourist area, it may beundesirable to make changes inJuly and August.Due to these and other factors,the “windows of opportunity” forboth consultation and schemeimplementation are limited. Table8.1 illustrates periods that can berelatively problem-free, althoughthe local authority must be awareof other factors such as localfestivals and variable schoolhalf-term dates.Where a developer funds theintroduction of a CPZ under aplanning contributionsagreement, it is necessary toseek approval before thedevelopment is brought into use,bearing in mind that it is theCouncil, not the developer, whoimplements the parking controls.These constraints need to bebuilt into the project programme.It also has to be recognised thatone month of slippage of theprogramme can result in manymonths of delay inimplementation. It is importantthat all parties to the process(council Members and officers,and any consultants andcontractors involved) are awareof the nature of theseconstraints. Failure by any partyto meet the programme cancause serious delays, resultingin lost revenue, extendedperiods of disruption on thestreets, and other problems.Consultation fatigueA further important factor to beborne in mind is the timetable ofother consultation exercisesbeing undertaken especiallythose that are related to parking,such as the Local TransportPlan. Local authorities shouldaim to dovetail differentconsultation programmes, andTable 8.1 Preferred times for parking scheme consultation and implementation.ConsultationImplementationJanuary ✔ ✔February ✔ ✔March ✔* ✔*April ✔* ✔*May ✔** ✔**June ✔ ✔July ✔*** ✔***August ✘ ✘****September ✔ ✔October ✔ ✔November ✔ ✔December ✘ ✘* But avoiding Easter school holidays** But not in election years*** But avoiding school holidays**** But may be preferred in areas with student housing and facilitiestry to avoid “consultationfatigue”, and confusion on thepart of consultees.Post implementationreview of schemesControlled parking schemes arecomplex and can cause variedimpacts on many people. It is notalways possible to predict theseimpacts, and even where there isan extensive consultationprocess, many people do notappreciate the effects andtherefore do not make aninformed response. It is,therefore, good practice to havea comprehensive review afterimplementation. Suchconsultation should beconducted six to twelve monthsafter the scheme is introduced(see Table 8.2).During this period, feedbackshould be sought from theconsultative forum and possiblyfrom the wider public to gaugehow successfully the parkingstrategy has been received andto seek opinions on anyamendments that should beimplemented. The cost andresources of monitoring thestrategy and of undertaking thereview process should beincorporated within the budgetfor the strategy. The initial reviewwill include a number ofelements but will essentially befine-tuning of the existingregulations. More significantchanges such as extensions tothe CPZ or modifying charges

134 Chapter 8should be left until the schemehas settled down.A firm commitment to a postimplementation review can behelpful in dealing with objectionsto the implementation of theinitial scheme. Many consulteesraise concerns and problemsthat could unnecessarilycomplicate the scheme ifchanges were made toaccommodate them. Often theseconcerns are not well founded,for example, when it is knownthat they have not arisen in othersimilar schemes. A postimplementationreview can alsoprovide a genuine route forconsidering a response to anyunforeseen problems that arise.Authorities should take earlyaction if such unforeseenconsequences are causingunexpected hardship. The use ofexperimental orders may beuseful in these circumstanceswith reviews afterwards, beforepermanent implementation.Otherwise changes should notbe made until the scheme hasbecome established.User satisfactionExercises such as Best Valuereviews should provide goodevidence of customer views.The review in West Sussex (2001) provided interesting evidence of usersatisfaction on three Controlled Parking Schemes which had been established forone, five and ten years respectively.The survey was undertaken by sending questionnaires to holders of ResidentsPermits on renewal, handing them to visitors at Parking Shops, sending them tolocal forums, placing them on the windscreens of vehicles parked within CPZs andalso on those vehicles parked in the areas immediately surrounding the CPZs. Inaddition a small number of face-to-face street interviews were held in town centresand the questionnaire was available on the County’s website.This survey revealed that, in the three towns, overall levels of satisfaction with onstreetparking schemes varied and suggested a correlation between the age of thescheme and the overall level of satisfaction with it.Length of time that scheme had been operational: % Satisfied:1 year old scheme 43%5 year old scheme 54%10 year old scheme 68%Even in the longer established schemes the main reason for dissatisfaction wasenforcement, or lack of it. These results suggest that, whilst there may be a lowlevel of satisfaction immediately after implementing a scheme, the level ofsatisfaction should grow over time. Though the reasons for this were notestablished, the implication for those promoting parking schemes is encouraging –albeit requiring a long-term view!Higher levels of satisfaction have been achieved earlier by other schemes. Theextension of Chichester’s CPZ in 1994 saw the introduction of a zone with a onehour a day parking restriction, on an experimental basis, in order to address issuesof displaced parking. Within two months of the scheme’s implementation, levels ofsatisfaction in excess of 85% were recorded in an after-survey of residents.Provided that schemes are wellmanaged, maintained, up-datedor amended in response tochanging circumstances, publicsatisfaction can increase overtime, as demonstrated in WestSussex. On the other hand, if ascheme is neglected or is nolonger appropriate thenbusinesses and residents mayhave increasing cause forcomplaint. In particular,traditional “blanket” yellow linecontrols are rarely appropriate inareas where it is important toallocate kerbside space betweendifferent users.Consultation techniquesThe techniques to be employedwill vary with each type ofconsultation, not only because ofdiffering levels of detail required,but also because of differencesbetween statutory and nonstatutoryrequirements. Broadrecommendations are providedin Table 8.2, but it is importantthat local authorities shoulddecide what is appropriate tomeet the particularcircumstances (see also Figure4.1).Two important distinctions canbe made between differentconsultation techniques. First,some techniques are appropriatefor ongoing consultation (such asa Forum) while others are “oneoff”techniques (such as anexhibition). Second, techniquesvary as to their suitability forconsulting targeted groups andindividuals or for consulting acommunity in general.1. Stakeholder groupsStakeholder groups are crucial toeffective public consultation.Local authorities will need toensure that all relevant interestgroups and their representativesare included. These includevarious categories:● Local Councils, residents’associations primarilyconcerned with the amenitiesof their locality and otherlocal associations with ageneral interest such asConservation Area Advisory

Public Consultation 135Committees and historicalsocieties;● National bodies, such as theCouncil for the Preservationof Rural England and theCivic Trust, who may have orwant local representation;● Organisations representinglocal businesses, such as theChamber of Commerce, andlocal representatives ofbodies such as the FreightTransport Association, RoadHaulage Association, theHighways Agency, and theConfederation of BritishIndustry;● Public transport operatorsand providers;● Organisations with a socialor caring role representingpeople with a disability, olderpeople, and ethnic minoritycommunities;● Community organisationssuch as churches and otherreligious groups, sportsclubs, rotary clubs,playgroups, etc;● Schools, parent teacherassociations, hospitals,universities and colleges,residential homes, etc;● Police, fire brigade,ambulance service,coastguard and any otherorganisations concernedwith public safety andsecurity; and● Representatives of transportcampaigning bodies such asLiving Streets, Cyclists’Touring Club, TheEnvironmental TransportAssociation, AutomobileAssociation, RoyalAutomobile Club Foundationand any local commuterclubs.Not all of these groups will berelevant to a particular area, norwill they necessarily need to beconsulted at every stage of theprocess. Consultation with thesegroups is best undertaken byletter, as they will normallyrequire to consult internallybefore responding, and wish tomake a written response. Wheremeetings are required it may beappropriate for a representativeTable 8.2 Consultation techniques recommended at different stages.Strategy and Scheme Formal SchemePolicy formulation consultation Reviewformulation and design on TROsTargetedStakeholder groups ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔Forums ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔Focus groups ✔ ✘ ✘ ✘Stated Preference surveys ✔ ✘ ✘ ✔Structured questionnaires ✔ ✔ ✘ ✔and interviewsNon-targetedConsultation leaflets ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘Exhibitions ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘Public meetings ✘ ✘ ✘ ✘Press and other publications ✔ ✔ ✔ ✘of the Council to attend. Peopleattending meetings ofstakeholder group on behalf of aCouncil, whether Members,officers or consultants, shouldlimit their contribution toexplanation of the council’spolicies and proposals, andgiving advice on technicalissues. They should be briefed toensure that commitments are notoffered without Councilauthorisation.At stakeholder meetings it isimportant to have presentationmaterial to help explain council’spolicies and proposals. Theformat will depend on the natureand size of the meeting, butmight include annotated plansand photographs, or mightinvolve a multi-mediapresentation. In preparing forsuch meetings it is important toknow in advance about who willbe present and what interests orgroups they represent.Establishing this in advance isreasonable as it ensures that thelocal authority provides thepeople who are best able torespond to questions andconcerns, which is to the benefitof all concerned.Where meetings are held withlocal groups such as a residents’association, it may beappropriate for officers orconsultants to represent theCouncil. Such meetings shouldbe informal and informative. Ifthey are advertised as a “publicmeeting” with the Councilrepresentatives on a platform

136 Chapter 8being subject to possible politicalhostility, it is important that theseshould be treated as open publicmeetings and managed by thepoliticians.2. ForumsSometimes a suitable forum willexist; otherwise local authoritiesshould consider setting up aforum that can deal with parkingand other transport matters.Forums can be set up to engagea wider set of interests than juststakeholders, and this may beparticularly useful in developingand reviewing schemes. Forummeetings can be held to build aconsensus on the type ofscheme required that wouldmeet the objectives set out in theparking strategy or otherdocuments. The widercommunity can be kept informedof the deliberations through anewsletter circulated within thecommunity.Once a scheme has beendeveloped with the involvementof the forum, it can be put out forpublic consultation, in line withstatutory obligations.3. Focus groupsFocus groups are speciallyrecruited groups of people,usually with some commoninterest, who are broughttogether to discuss policy issues.They are frequently used inmarket research and can providevaluable insights into publicreactions. They are not usuallyused in developing parkingschemes and proposals, wherebroader representation isnormally needed, but they canbe useful where innovativeschemes are being proposed.Focus groups were used, forexample, to explore reactions toa proposed City Car Clubinvolving the use of dedicatedon-street space for club vehicles.Focus groups need to beplanned and moderated byprofessionals trained in the useof such groups.4. Stated Preference surveysStated preference surveys areoften used in transport planning,mainly as a means ofestablishing coefficients tocalibrate mathematical transportmodels. The surveys use indepthinterviews where thesubjects are required to maketrade-offs between differentoptions. They are an importantpart of building models of parkingbehaviour and require specialistadvice to plan, administer andinterpret.It is important that respondentsunderstand the range ofpropositions being put to them. Ifa proposed scheme involvesaspects with which respondentsare unfamiliar, such as the firstresidents’ parking scheme in atown, it is unlikely that people willgive answers that will reflect theiractual behaviour once a schemeis introduced. Proposedschemes may initially attractadverse comment, but receivefirm support once the benefitshave become clear afterimplementation.5. Structured questionnairesand interviewsQuestionnaires are oftenincluded in leaflets for generalconsultation on parkingschemes. They can also beused in a targeted way either toget responses from specificgroups of people, such as localtraders, or to achieve responsesthat are statistically robustthrough the use of structuredsamples, for example 10% ofresidents in a scheme area.Because of typically lowresponse rates from postalquestionnaires, achievement of astatistically significant samplewill normally require door-to-doorinterviews.6. Consultation leafletsThe commonest form ofconsultation on parking schemesis a leaflet distributed toresidents and businesses in thearea concerned, usually with aquestionnaire for return to theCouncil. Use of such leaflets is

Public Consultation 137expensive, as they have to bedesigned, printed, distributed,and the results of responsesanalysed. Leaflets should beclear, contain legible plans, andbe free of jargon. They shouldput forward the Council’s draftproposals clearly and precisely.Most respondents are interestedin how the scheme will affectthem personally, and they shouldbe able to understand that fromthe leaflet. Where additionalinformation needs to besupplied, like more detailedplans, this should be depositedin Council offices and libraries,preferably on display boards sothat people can consult them.The area covered by leafletingmust be carefully considered,bearing in mind that parking isused by visitors to an area aswell as local residents andbusinesses, and that parkingmay migrate beyond theboundary of a scheme once it isintroduced.It is important to ensure fulldistribution of leaflets. One of themain complaints is that peopledid not receive the material. Freenewspaper distributorsfrequently have only 50%coverage. They find it particularlydifficult to ensure that everyhousehold receives a copy of theleaflet in blocks with entry phonesystems.The most effective way ofensuring comprehensivecoverage is to distributeaddressed envelopes, using theCouncil Tax and Business Ratesregisters for the addresses, andarrange distribution by post.There are mailing companies,which will stuff, address andfrank the envelopes. The PostOffice is the most reliable way ofensuing full coverage, aspostmen have good knowledgeof all addresses, and anobligation to seek to deliver ifthere is a problem, and return ifno delivery can be made. It ispossible to get the Post Office todeliver unaddressed mail, andthis is less expensive, but theynormally require considerablenotice and will not guarantee thedate of delivery.If the Post Office cannot be usedthen an alternative is to get oneof the established traffic surveycompanies to arrange delivery,using a database of addresseslike the electoral roll, but alsodelivering to addresses not onthe electoral roll. Thesecontractors have suitable staffand supervisors to undertakethis sort of exercise effectively. Asample call back to speak tohouseholders to check that theyhave received the leaflet ensuresthat the Council is protected fromcriticism over its deliveryarrangements. This sample willnever be 100%, as the leafletmay have been picked up bysomeone other than the personanswering the door, butconfirmation from 90% ofhouseholds in an inner city areahas been achieved using a trafficsurvey contractor.Whatever delivery system isused, it is advisable to publishback-up material in the localpress. The material should go inparallel to elected Members.The reply coupon should be keptsimple. If there are a lot ofquestions the results becomedifficult to analyse and responserates are lower. Too manyprompts about possible optionsalso mean that it is difficult toassess the issues that mostconcern respondents. If a singleproposal is presented the mosteffective way is to ask thequestion “are you generally infavour of the proposals?” with ayes/no answer, followed by “doyou have any comments that youwish to make”, with a large whitespace for the response.Respondents should also beasked for their name andaddress.If ”profile” questions areincluded, such as car ownershipor trip-making habits then peoplemay be concerned aboutconfidentiality and anonymity. Ifonly opinions are sought, thismay be less of an issue.

138 Chapter 8There is no standard templatethat can be used for suchcommunications. It is vital thatlocal authorities should designleaflets and forms that aretailored specifically to matchlocal conditions andrequirements. Given thestatutory responsibility toconsider each case on its meritsthere should be no ‘standard’letter, even if similar schemeshave been undertaken before.“Cut and paste” should be nosubstitute for ”think and write”.Local authorities should not relyon just their technical staff toplan, design and carry out theconsultation. It is important thatskilled public relationsprofessionals are involved,whether drawn from the authorityor from external consultants.The respondent’s name allowschecks to make sure that peopleare not submitting massresponses, and the addressallows analysis by street. Thecommon responses can then becoded into a series of categoriesin a database, with any otherparticular concerns mentioned inthe report of the consultation,which is presented to members.Names of respondents should bekept off the database to avoidbreach of the Data ProtectionAct.The simple yes/no questiongives comfort to Members of theCouncil when there is a clearmajority in favour, and theopportunity to reconsider whenthere is a clear majority against.Analysis by street allows thescheme to be modified ifopposition is in one particulararea. Experience shows thatpeople on the fringes ofproposed CPZs will not expresssupport if they do not have aserious common problem, evenwhere it is apparent that parkingwill be displaced into those areasif a smaller CPZ is introduced.It is recommended thatresponses should be filed bystreet and number order, tohighlight any multiple responsesand enable checks to be madeagainst council tax or electoralregisters if there is concernabout false responses. Similarprecautions may be taken withany petitions received. Theresponse files can be madeavailable to Members of theCouncil before the meeting atwhich the response to theconsultation is to be considered.Most local authorities will have apolicy about making materialavailable in languages other thanEnglish, and it is important thatthis is followed. Consultationmaterial can also be madeavailable in Braille and large printformat to help people with avisual impairment.7. ExhibitionsAlong with leafleting, exhibitionsare the commonest form ofconsultation on parkingschemes. They are expensive tomount, however, and need to becarefully planned. The questionsfor a local authority will include:● Is it appropriate to hold anexhibition?● What sort of material shouldbe presented?● What venue is appropriate?● Is the venue accessible bypeople with mobilitydifficulties, and if not how cansuch people access theinformation?● What should be the periodand times of opening?● What level of staffing will berequired?Where a scheme is large orcomplex, such as theintroduction of a CPZ in an areawhere there are no such controlsat present, it is important to havean exhibition where the trafficengineers can be present toexplain the reasoning behind theproposals and their likely effects.If the area is large, it may benecessary to hold the exhibitionat several venues. Venuesshould be accessible and knownto the public. Schools,community centres, parish halls,libraries and Council offices arenormally used. Sometimes thereare areas within shoppingcentres that are available, and

Public Consultation 139suitable for consultation oncitywide concerns, but they areoften not suitable for addressingmore local issues.Care should be taken with theuse of religious buildings, sincepeople of different faiths may bedeterred. Such buildings may beappropriate when they areknown for non-denominationalcommunity use.If those primarily affected by aparking scheme are car owners,it may be acceptable to have asingle venue covering a widerarea if adequate free parking isavailable, such as a school andassociated playground outsideschool hours.A wide range of people (includingemployed people) should beable to attend, albeit withoutcreating an undue burden onexhibition staff. An examplewould be from mid afternoon toearly evening on a weekday (say3pm to 8pm) and during themiddle of the day on Saturday(11 am to 4pm).It is recommended thatexhibitions should not be openfor more than five hours on anyday, as the work is verydemanding for the professionalsinvolved. The arrangementsshould be such that the staff atthe exhibition are properlybriefed and have sufficientsupport if difficult orconfrontational situations arise.When consultants are managingthe consultation, it is essentialthat Council officers are also inattendance. Questions oftenarise that are outside the scopeof the consultation and a councilofficer will be able to answersuch questions or be able to takethe matter back and seek aresponse from the appropriatepart of the Council.people likely to be affected bythe scheme. It is difficult to getinformation across in a publicmeeting, while a few activistswith preconceived views caneasily dominate feedback.Public meetings tend to providea platform for organised interestgroups who are already verycapable of making their viewsknown by other means. If it is stillfelt to be necessary to hold apublic meeting, the localauthority should be representedat a political level. Officers andconsultants should be presentonly to make technicalpresentations and to advise themeeting on technical matters.9. Press and otherpublicationsInvolving the local media is a keypart in keeping the publicinformed, as frequently it is theonly way in which local peopleare aware of what is beingproposed. It is important to sharewith the local media what ishappening and the reasons for it.This should be seen as acontinuous process of informingthe press rather than an “one-off”exercise at the start of theintended scheme. It may behelpful to consider paidadvertisements in the localpress, regular media releasesand information packs.References(1) Regina V Camden, London Boroughex Parte Mark Dyson, Gordon Cran,and Others, 1995 (colloquially knownas the “Primrose Hill” case).(2) Valleley, M 1997, ParkingPerspectives. Produced by theUniversity of Westminster TransportStudies Group.8. Public MeetingsPublic meetings are anineffective method of obtaininginformation for the developmentof a parking scheme. Effectiveconsultation requires thedissemination of quite detailed ortechnical feedback from the

140

Chapter 9Compliance andEnforcementIntroductionCompliance here refers not justto compliance of LocalAuthorities with national andregional guidance, andcompliance of private companieswith a range of planning andother rules, but also to driversabiding by parking regulations.Local AuthoritycompliancePolicies laid down by nationaland regional governmentencourage interventions at thelocal level to manage the use ofthe car. Local authorities haveembraced such policy guidancewith varied degrees ofenthusiasm.The Government has scope toimprove the level of compliancein a number of ways:● Providing more detailedguides to best practice;● Providing mentoring andpractical assistance as ameans of “capacity building”at the local level;●●●Reviewing Local Transportand Development Plans (orsupporting documents) forconsistency and compliancewith national and regionalpolicy;Allocating transport funds ina way that favours localauthorities who candemonstrate compliancewith policy;Withholding “excellence” or“beacon” status from localauthorities that pay scantregard to national andregional policies andpriorities.Local Authorities must alsocomply with the duties andprocedures laid down in thevarious highways and parkingenforcement legislation, withGovernment Guidance onDecriminalised ParkingEnforcement, and to otherrelevant legislation, for examplethe Human Rights Act 1998 andthe Disability Discrimination Act1995.Private SectorcomplianceLocal authorities, whether or notin partnership with otheragencies, need to encourageprivate car park owners andoperators to conduct theirbusiness in line with planning,traffic and other regulations. Thekey issues are likely to be:● Compliance of privateoperators of public car parkswith the terms and conditionsset down in local authoritycontracts, such as tariffstructures and charges, andsecurity requirements;● Compliance of privatedevelopers with planningconditions and agreementsconcerning the amount andoperation of parkingassociated with newdevelopments.In both these cases compliancewill depend not only on theAcknowledgementsChapter 9Compliance andEnforcement

142 Chapter 9private company’s willingness,but also on the clarity ofcontracts and conditions drawnup by local authorities, and themechanisms for monitoringcompliance. The new BPA modelcontract, for example, focuseson the effectiveness ofenforcement activity rathermaximising ticket numbers.It must be borne in mind thatparking enforcement contractorsare acting as agents for theParking Authority and theCouncil is accountable and liablefor the actions of the contractor.A particular issue is ensuring thatthe maximum amount of parkingprovided in new developments isclearly specified in the planningpermission, checking that thishas been complied with followingcompletion, and taking action toenforce any breach ofconditions.Parking Regulations –compliance andenforcementTraffic Regulation andManagement Orders provide themeans of managing traffic andparking; charges can be used asa means of rationing orprioritising the use of space forparking. The role of enforcementis to create a fair balancebetween the overridingobjectives of local and nationaltransport policies and the rightsand needs of motoring citizens.The basis ofenforcementThe original powers ofenforcement of parkingregulations were part of thecriminal law system and involvedthe police and magistrates’courts. As illegal parking grewwith increasing car ownershipand use, it became clear that,with the other calls on Policetime, they would not be able toprovide the resources needed tomatch the growing demands forenforcement. Therefore, in 1991the Road Traffic Act (RTA)enabled Councils to takeresponsibility for parkingenforcement from the police in acivil rather than criminal regime,(see Chapter 3). The RTAscheme became compulsory forLondon Councils in 1994, withCouncils outside London beingable to opt into the scheme from1996. The thrust of the RTAscheme is that the authoritycreating the parking regulationscan also determine the level ofresources needed forenforcement and linkenforcement policies to theregulations. Experience ofdecriminalised parkingenforcement has been positiveand it is Government policy topromote it (1). It is important,however, to bear in mind thattraffic regulations themselvesand how they are made are notaltered by decriminalised parkingenforcement; it is simply thatCouncil parking attendantsenforce contraventions of theregulations in a civil rather thancriminal regime.Traffic Regulation Ordersand Traffic ManagementOrdersIn order to regulate parking aTraffic Authority has first todefine formally what the controlsare and, precisely, where,geographically, they apply. Thisis done by the creation of aTraffic Regulation Order (TRO)or (in London) a TrafficManagement Order (TMO),which specifies amongst otherthings:● The lengths of roadcontrolled;● The types of controls;● The conditions andqualifications associated withthe use of the facilities; and● Exemptions, including thestatutory ones for BlueBadge holdersTraffic Regulation Orders mustbe made for the purposesstipulated in the RTRA,particularly Section 122. Theyare governed by a formalprocedure, which is set out in theLocal Authorities’ Traffic Orders(Procedures) (England andWales) Regulations 1996 (2).The High Court has emphasised

Compliance and Enforcement 143that TROs and TMOs must notbe made for the purposes ofraising revenue.TROs and TMOs are legalinstruments and must, therefore,be precise and unambiguous.Since a parking contravention (oroffence in the criminal scheme)is a violation of a provision in theTRO/TMO, rather than againstthe sign, it is important for localauthorities to keep their TROs upto date, and not just to add layerupon layer of regulation. This isespecially important in thepreparations for decriminalisedparking enforcement, when itbecomes necessary to removeotiose provisions such as excesscharges.Many Councils use maps insteadof schedules to theirTROs/TMOs and it is importantthat any restrictions or permittedand designated parking markedon the map is completely clearas to the extent of the restrictionsor the permitted parking bays.Any subsequent variation in themaps must be made inaccordance with the proceduresset down in the 1996Regulations. Therefore, if aCouncil is proposing to alter theextent of any of the restrictions orpermitted parking, theappropriate procedure must becomplied with; it is not sufficientsimply to issue a second versionof the map. It is also importantthat the maps are deposited inCouncil offices so that membersof the public can view them.Particular care needs to be takenwhere a Council is using specialsoftware to read the map.The Secretary of State’sGuidance on Parking (3)requires each Authorityproposing to take on the DPEpowers to carry out acomprehensive review of all theirparking restrictions andrecommendsregularconsolidation of orders. It isimportant to revise the mainbody of the TRO/TMO, not justthe schedules.A proper strategyA well-conceived scheme will, byits very nature, require lessenforcement. It is particularlyimportant to ensure that:●Charges are set to limitdemand to a level wheresome parking spaces remainavailable at all times (thusreducing the temptation topark illegally);● Signs and markings arecomprehensive, clear,consistentandunambiguous, thus reducingunintentional infringements;● Good information andmarketing are provided bothbefore and after theimplementation of a controlscheme, to ensurewidespread understandingand familiarity with theregulations; and● The design of the street andkerb alignments aidsunderstanding of parkingrestrictions.Signs and linesLocal authorities are required byRegulation 18 of the 1996Regulations to sign properly theeffects of all their traffic orders.Restrictions and controls onparking must be marked andshown as prescribed in theTraffic Signs Regulations andGeneral Directions 2002(TSRGD) (4). The importance ofcorrect marking cannot beoverstated since it has beenestablished by the High Courtthat unless the markings complyfully with the TSRGD (or arespecially authorised by theSecretary of State), theregulation has no legal weightand cannot be enforced. Further,the regulations and markingsmust be unambiguous.Councils may introduce ascheme, which requires differentsigns from those specified inTSRGD, if they obtain formalauthority from the Secretary ofState for the signs and thescheme. Examples of this arerestricted zones, signs for whichdo not appear in the TSRGD.

144 Chapter 9Confused markings for a bus stop bay.Decriminalised ParkingEnforcement (DPE)The Road Traffic Act 1991The future of parkingenforcement lies with thedecriminalised systemintroduced by the Road TrafficAct 1991 (RTA).The RTA was brought into effectfor all 33 of the London LocalAuthorities on the 4 July 1994.Prior to that, in 1993, 5 Councilshad taken on the powers. Themain provisions of the Act arewritten in respect of London butSchedule 3 enables Councilsoutside London (includingScotland) to take on the powers.The first Council outside Londonto do so was Winchester CityCouncil in 1996. Edinburgh wasthe first Authority to adopt thescheme in Scotland and NeathPort Talbot the first WelshCouncil.For a Council to adopt the DPEpowers it must be granted aPermitted Parking Area/SpecialParking Area Order (PPA/SPA).Councils in England must applyto the Secretary of State forTransport, Councils in Wales tothe Welsh Assembly andCouncils in Scotland to theScottish Executive.However, while the RTA schemeintroduces the two new conceptsof the permitted parking area andthe special parking area, thedifference in the concepts hasbecome increasingly academic.Consequently the TrafficManagement Act 2004 willremove the differentiationmaking each area simply a CivilEnforcement Area.See Chapter 3 and Annex B formore information about thislegislation.The Traffic Management Act2004The provisions in the TrafficManagement Act (TMA) bringLondon, England and Walestogether into a single civilenforcement regime (butpreserving the differentarrangements for adjudication). Ithas added the additional minortraffic offences which Londonhas already decriminalised forexample bus lanes, yellow boxjunctions, no right turns, and oneway streets. Thus civilenforcement will be used forcontravening a sign as opposedto a TRO/TMO.The TMA will repeal the RTADPE provisions for England andWales (but not for Scotland),absorbing the procedures,particularly owner liability, intonew regulations to be made bythe Lord Chancellor. The TMAcannot be brought into forcewithout those regulations.The Secretary of State will issuenew Guidance in respect of civilenforcement, updating the DPEGuidance in the light ofexperience and changing times(5).See Chapter 3 and Annex B formore information about thislegislation.The Road Traffic Act SchemeA parking contravention is acontravention of a provision of aTRO/TMO, which would havebeen a Road Traffic RegulationAct (RTRA) offence in thecriminal scheme. The RTAprovides for Council parkingattendants to issue PenaltyCharge Notices (PCNs) tostationary vehicles contraveningthe specified provisions.A particular feature of thedecriminalised (civil) scheme isowner liability for payment ofpenalties. This contrasts withthe criminal scheme, which isdriver liability, albeit with apresumption that the owner wasthe driver.In 1995 off-street parking wasbrought within the scope of theRTA powers. This included offstreetcar parks, off-streetloading areas, and also addedtemporary orders to the lists ofcontraventions, which can beenforced by a PCN.London introduced theenforcement of bus lanesthrough the London LocalAuthority Act 1996 and this

Compliance and Enforcement 145power is included in the TrafficManagement Act 2004, whichextends the civil enforcementjurisdiction to various movingtraffic offences including no rightturns and yellow boxes inaddition to bus lanes. The TrafficManagement Act, which appliesto England and Wales, but notScotland, will require regulationsto be made by the LordChancellor with respect toenforcement and the appealsprocess.Contrasting the DPEscheme with the criminalschemeUnder the criminal systemparking enforcement involved anumber of different agencies:local authorities making theregulations, the police enforcingthem in the criminal system,magistrates deciding thedisputes and the Treasury takingthe fines. There was little contactbetween the differentorganisations.Parking ChargesThere are two types:1. Parking Charges set by theTRO/TMO making process.These are the charges that aremade for parking, either on thestreet or off-street, and are set bymeans of the TRO/TMO makingprocess by the Councilconcerned.2. Additional Parking Chargesintroduced in the RTA andcomprising the penalty chargesand any charges made forreleasing vehicles that havebeen clamped or removed,including storage charges. Thereare regional variations in theprocess for setting additionalcharges:● In London the additionalparking charges are set bythe Joint Committee of the33 London councils inaccordance with a scale ofcharges stipulated by theMayor;● In England each parkingauthority is under a duty toset their charges based on aTable 9.1 Differences between the Criminal Scheme and the DPE 1CivilScheme.Criminal Scheme Civil Scheme - RTA 1991Traffic Regulation Orders Made by LA under Made by LA underTraffic Management Orders RTRA ‘84 powers RTRA ‘84 powersEnforced by: Parking offences Parking contraventionsPolice traffic wardens enforced by LA(and some LAs for parking attendantdesignated parking) LA Penalty chargenoticeEnforcement Process Fixed penalty notice, Clampingcourt summons, Removingclamping and removingPenaltiesFixed Penalty without Penalty Chargewith reduction for early 50% reduction forpayment settlement within 14daysLiability Driver liability with Owner liabilitypresumption that theowner was the driverInitial Challenges Letter to police Representations to LACentral Ticket OfficesAppeals and Court Summoned to Appeal to AdjudicatorproceedingsMagistrates’ Court for (tribunal)trialRevenue allocated Fines (as court fines) Penalty Chargesto Treasuryretained by LADebt Registration Increased fine Increased penaltycharge registered at registered at countymagistrates’ court court (bailiffs’ warrant)(both bailiffs’ warrantand imprisonmentavailable for default)scale of charges imposed bythe Secretary of State forTransport. (See the Section73 RTA modification in eachoutside London PPA/SPAOrder.);● In Wales the parkingauthorities set their chargesbased on a scale imposed bythe Welsh Assembly; and● In Scotland the parkingauthorities set their chargesin accordance with a scaleset by the Scottish Executive.(The slightly differentarrangements come through themodifications to the RTA madeby the PPA/SPA Orders.)Removing andimmobilisationThe RTA gives parkingauthorities the power toimmobilise (clamp) vehicles inaddition to the issue of a PCN.While the RTA omitted to giveCouncils the powers to removevehicles in these circumstances,the position was rectified byRegulation 5A of the Removal

146 Chapter 9and Disposal of VehiclesRegulations 1986 (6).Both clamping and towing awayare discretionary powers andshould be exercised with careand in accordance with apublished policy of criteria andpriorities. These policies must inthemselves be created with aview to proportionality, bearing inmind that the Human Rights Actnow applies and a publicauthority must have good reasonto penalise a citizen byinterfering with his or herpossessions, in addition toissuing a PCN. GovernmentGuidance is emphatic thoseremovals should not be ad hocand that an experienced parkingattendant should oversee theremoval to ensure that it isgenuinely necessary.Public perception ofenforcementSince the public are only too wellaware that Councils retain thepenalty charges under the civilscheme, unless enforcement isundertaken with utmost integritywithin the context of transparentand clearly published policies,the enforcement activities of theCouncil may be seen to bebased on financial incentivesrather than traffic management.Unfavourable perceptions will beparticularly rife if clamping andremoving are employed withoutregard to proportionality.On the whole there are threetypes of contravening driver:● Those who are well aware ofthe regulations and take adeliberate risk;● Those who cannotimmediately identify therestrictions and givethemselves the benefit of thedoubt; and●Those who simply make amistake, for example beingunfamiliar with the type ofrestriction, being confusedby ambiguous signs, ormaking assumptions thattimes and days of parkingcontrols are universalEach of these types will havedifferent perceptions of parkingenforcement, which will dependon how they are treated. Driverswho have made a genuinemistake will respect Councilobjectives more if treated at therepresentations stage withleniency and a warning; if notthey become cynical andsceptical of council motives. Theother two types need consistentenforcement to reinforce theregulations and shorten the oddsthey give themselves.Taken in isolation individual actsof non-compliance usually havelittle measurable effect.However, when non-compliancebecomes the norm, then trafficflow and safety are threatenedon the highway and the financialand policy base for providingparking off the street can beundermined.Enforcement is, therefore,necessary to ensure that parkingregulations are complied with sothat a system of control canoperate, in the manner intended.The enforcementprocedureIf a parking attendant considersa contravention has occurred, aPenalty Charge Notice (PCN) isissued. A discount (currently50%) is applied where thepenalty charge is paid within 14days. If the penalty remainsunpaid after 28 days, a Notice toOwner (NtO) is issued to theperson appearing to be theowner, usually the personregistered with the Driver andVehicle Licensing Agency(DVLA) as the keeper of thevehicle. The owner may thenmake representations to theCouncil against the penaltycharge. The Council is requiredto cancel the penalty charge if itconsiders that a statutory groundis met. In summary thesegrounds are principally that:●●The recipient did not own thevehicle at the time of thecontravention;The alleged contraventiondid not occur;

Compliance and Enforcement 147● The vehicle had been parkedby someone who had taken itwithout the consent of theowner;● The (traffic regulation/management) order wasinvalid;● The vehicle had been hiredand the person who hired ithad signed a statement ofliability for penalty charges;● The penalty chargeexceeded the amountapplicable in thecircumstances of the case;and● (In London only) the parkingattendant had not beenprevented from serving aPenalty Charge Notice,where a Council believedthat this was the case and sohad served the Notice bypost.Where a vehicle has beenclamped or removed theownership ground does notapply, instead there are twofurther grounds:● That 15 minutes had notelapsed since the expiry ofpaid-for time; and● That a current disabledbadge was displayed in thevehicle.Consideration ofrepresentationsThe RTA places a duty onCouncils to considerrepresentations. While thestatutory duty is in respect ofrepresentations received inresponse to a NtO, they are alsounder a general duty to considerproperly the “informal”representations made before anNtO has been issued. The dutyto consider representations alsoextends to the duty to givereasons. These shouldspecifically deal with the issuesraised by the representationrather than be a standard letter.Experience has shown that, if thefirst representations areresponded to with a reasonedreply, there is a higher proportionof penalties settled at thediscount, and the numbers ofNtOs needing to be issued arereduced. It is recommended thatif a motorist writes in within 14days of the PCN then thediscount is extended by a further14 days in the reply letter.A common problem for Councilstaking on DPE is to underresourcethe administrativearrangements behind thescheme and consequentlybecome overwhelmed by thevolume of correspondence andtelephone calls they receive.However, if first roundrepresentations are dealt with ina cursory manner withinappropriate standard letters, itcan create dissatisfaction andlack of faith in the Council’s DPEoperations.Mitigation andextenuatingcircumstancesThere will be occasions wherethe motorist accepts that acontravention occurred and nostatutory ground of appealapplies, but he or she considersthat the imposition of a penaltycharge is neverthelessinappropriate and wishes tomake a plea of mitigation as towhy the penalty charge shouldnot be pursued.Councils have discretion not topursue a penalty charge at anystage of the procedure and have,as a matter of administrative law,a duty to act reasonably, fairlyand without fettering thatdiscretion. It would, therefore, bea breach of that duty if a Councilwere to act unreasonably orunfairly or to fetter its discretionwhen considering suchrepresentations.Care must be taken not to treatcases where a lawful exemptionapplied as mitigation. If a vehiclewas engaged in loading orunloading, or setting downpassengers, then there will nothave been a parkingcontravention, even though theparking attendant may havebeen correct to issue the PCN.The Council is under a statutoryduty to cancel the PCN in these

148 Chapter 9cases; it is not an exercise ofdiscretion.The different versions of theSecretary of State’s Guidance allemphasise the importance ofCouncils approaching their dutyto consider extenuatingcircumstances fairly, as has theLocal Government Ombudsmanin a 2004 special report (5).Appeals to the ParkingAdjudicatorIf a Council rejectsrepresentations, the recipient ofthe Notice of Rejection has theright to appeal to a ParkingAdjudicator on the samestatutory grounds applying topost NtO representations.The parking appeals procedureis free and readily accessible.There are currently three RTAparking appeals services● London – Parking andTraffic Appeals Servicefunded by a joint committeeof the thirty three Londoncouncils.● England and Wales – theNationalParkingAdjudication Service fundedby a joint committee of all theparticipating councils inEngland and Wales.● Scotland – The ScottishParking Appeals Servicefunded by the Scottishparticipating councils inpartnership with the TrafficCommissioner.Therefore each Council inLondon, England and Waleswishing to operate DPE must jointhe appropriate joint committeethrough which the joint functionsare performed.Parking Adjudicators, who,although they sit on their own,constitute a tribunal, must belawyers and are judicialappointments made with theconsent of the Lord Chancellor.Each of the three adjudicationservices is, by statute, under thesupervision of the Council onTribunals.Appeals can be decided either atan oral hearing where the vehicleowner and any witnesses canexplain their case to theAdjudicator, or simply on thedocumentary evidence suppliedby each party. The Adjudicatorsfunction is to consider all theevidence, make findings of fact,and apply the law. This meansthat, where necessary they willscrutinise the TRO/TMO.It is for the Council to make out aprima facie case that:● There was a parkingcontravention;● The person they are holdingliable for payment of thepenalty was the owner of thevehicle at the material time;and● The penalty (or othercharges) were correct.It is for the appellant vehicleowner to prove that anexemption to the parkingrestriction be applied, or, if he orshe was the DVLA registeredowner, that they were not in factthe owner.The standard of proof is on thebalance of probabilities andthere is no requirement forappellants to corroborate theirevidence with documents.If the Adjudicator finds that oneof the grounds is made out by theappellant, they will allow theappeal and give directions to theCouncil. If the vehicle wasclamped or removed, theAdjudicator will direct the Councilto refund the charges paid.Charge certificates anddebt registrationIf a vehicle owner decides not topay a PCN, it is first increased invalue by 50% for late paymentand then registered as a civildebt at the County Court, fromwhere a bailiff’s warrant can beissued to collect the outstandingsum.Operational issuesA properly authorised parkingattendant, as defined in Section44 of the RTA, 1991, can onlyissue a PCN for a parkingoffence.

Compliance and Enforcement 149To provide an effective andconsistent service, policies needto be developed by Councils inrelation to the exercise ofdiscretion. The purpose of theparking attendant is to enforcethe regulations rather than turn ablind eye. However, they willalways need to exercisecommon sense in somesituations, for example, where avehicle is likely to be loading orunloading. In most cases wherea driver pleads specialcircumstances the parkingattendant will note what wassaid, advising that, if a letter iswritten, the person who dealswith representations will considerthose circumstances.A parking attendant patrols agiven area, a beat, either on foot,or sometimes by bicycle ormoped. To be effective somesimple rules should be observed:●●The attendant should alwayspatrol his or her beat to arandom pattern so thathaving left a street, the nextvisit should be unpredictable.The attendants and theirmanagers should monitorwhat is happening on thestreet so that they can seewhere the parkingbehavioural problems areconcentrated and deploystaff accordingly. Thus if onone beat there are very fewparking problems and onanother there is a local “hotspot” it would be goodpractice to take the attendantof the quiet area for a coupleof days and focus on thebigger problem.● Attendants should be rotatedthrough beats regularly. Thisequalises the workload, byensuring that one person isnot always doing the busierstreets. It also ensures thatindividual attendants do notbecome familiar with thelocal community, particularlytraders, meaning that theyare less likely to bepressurised to be lenient.The question of how many staffto use for a given area of streetcontrols depends, amongst otherthings, on:● The level of controls andthe mix of regulations: Forexample, a residential streetnear a station might need tobe visited only twice a weekto maintain an acceptablelevel of compliance, whereasa street with intensively-usedtwo-hour meters may requirea patrol every 30-90 minutesto maintain turnover.● The duration of theregulations: For example,08.30-18.30 Monday toFriday creates 50 hours ofcontrol a week whereas08.00-20.00 hrs creates 60hours a week. Withwidespread Sunday trading,controls can extend up to 84hours. Staff levels wouldhave to be chosenappropriately.● The level of servicerequired: Parking attendantsare enforcers but they canalso be a source of help andinformation, particularly intowns with large numbers ofvisitors. As a generalprinciple it is better for anattendant to direct a driver toa legal parking place ratherthan only look for anopportunity to enforce illegalparking acts.●The level of contravention:With low enforcement,compliance will inevitably bepoor. In this situation a heavyinput of enforcementresources is required beforedrivers’ perceptions of whatis acceptable will start tochange and non-compliancefalls. As non-compliance isdriven down by increasingenforcement effort, a point isreached where enforcementcosts are high butcompliance is good. At thispoint it is possible to reducethe enforcement level to apoint where the minimumamount of enforcementresource is used to maintaingood levels of compliance.This can be a dynamicsituation and requiresconstant monitoring and

150 Chapter 9Clear charges and times.targeting of resources toavoid moving back to abreakdown of enforcementor where resources are usedinefficiently.● The impact ofcontraventions: Morefrequent patrols may beneeded on routes where theimpact of contraventions isgreatest, for example whereloading is frequentlyimpeded leading todangerous double parking.Removal and ClampingRemoval and clamping powersare provided to all authoritiesthat decide to adopt thedecriminalised parking powers inRTA 1991 in their PPA/SPAOrder. Few authorities, however,undertake removals or clamping.For an authority wishing to useclamping they must utiliseclamps to a design approved bythe Home Office. When a vehicleis clamped the vehicle must havea prominently displayed labelattached to the windscreen towarn drivers that the vehicle hasbeen clamped and should not bedriven. The motorist committingthe contravention is required topay a release fee to recover thevehicle, which should then bereleased within a reasonabletime.To be effective, clamping needsto be applied in a targeted way. Itis self evident that if an illegallyparked vehicle is clamped thenthe time that the vehicle willremain parked is extended sincewhen the driver returns theycannot immediately drive away.Therefore a vehicle that isdangerously or obstructivelyparked should be removedrather than clamped. Clampingcan be an effective deterrentagainst persistent offenders.The law prohibits the applicationof a clamp to a vehicle displayinga disabled users blue badge andmost authorities extend a similarcourtesy to primary healthpersonnel badge holders. It hasbeen decided as a matter ofpublic policy that diplomatsshould also be exempted fromclamping.Off-street ParkingRegulationsThe RTRA provisions forenforcing off-street car parkregulations are confusing anddifficult to administer. It hasresulted in some dubiouspractices, which have no legalbasis. Consequently in 1995 thecivil enforcement powerscontained in the Road Traffic Act1991 were extended so that theycould be applied in off-street carparks and loading areasregulated by an order (7). Theprocedures and outcomes areidentical to those applied onstreet.Most Councils adopting DPEhave their car parks included inthe PPA/SPA Order. This is thepreferable approach since therewill be a consistent andunderstandable enforcementregime operating throughout theparking area and PAs can bedeployed on beats incorporatingboth on-street and off-street.Where the RTA DPE scheme isnot in force, Councils enforce carpark regulations by means ofexcess charge notices.Unlike signing on the highway,there is no statutory requirementfor signing in an off-street carpark using approved signs.Common sense dictates,however, that if there arecharges and conditions attachedto the use of a car park then it is

Compliance and Enforcement 151necessary that the charges andconditions be displayed so thatparkers know what to do.Where a car park is provided andregulated using a traffic order,the Local Authority is precludedby the scope of the Act fromusing other sanctions. LocalAuthorities may, however, alsooperate car parks without anorder, normally with accesscontrol where the regulation ofthe car park would depend on acontract between the user andthe operator. Car parkscontrolled by order may also useaccess control but this isrelatively uncommon.Car parks not subject toa Traffic OrderMunicipal car parks may beoperated without an order,relying instead on pay-on-footsystems. The user is requiredthen to pay an advertised sumfor the parking that they use andfailure to do so could, dependingon the circumstances, lead eitherto a civil action to recover a debt,or to a criminal offence. Therewould normally be no effectiveenforcement action possible if adriver chose to ignore someother condition associated withthe use of the car park, such asparking across two bays.Private car parks that areoperated to provide a service tothe public on a commercial basisalso rely on a contract betweenthe parker and the operator forpayment of a fee. Commercialoperators have no explicitpowers to “enforce” other than bya civil action after the event. Forthis reason most publiclyavailable privately operated carparks have attendants to controlaccess.Enforcement usingwheel clamping onprivate landThere are some private carparks, for example many railwaystation car parks, that rely on payand display with a threat of wheelclamping to deter non-payment.The use of wheel clamps inthese circumstances is a legalminefield in England and Walesand is illegal in Scotland.Generally, the use of wheelclamps is a very contentiousissue, not least because of thequality of people employed bysome clamping companies, thecircumstances of use and thequite penal sums that have beendemanded by some operatives.In an attempt to deal with someof the worst practices theGovernment included in theSecurity Industries Act, 2001(8)powers to enable the companiesoffering wheel clamping servicesto be regulated. The Act allowsfor the publication of a Code ofPractice for clamping on privateland and, following publication ofthe necessary regulations,private clampers will have to beregistered and comply with apublished code of practice.Some private operators purportto issue a civil penalty. These arewholly without legal basis andare unenforceable in any courtproceedings. They aretantamount to extortion.The complexities of clamping onprivate land add a further reasonfor keeping as much publicparking as possible within LocalAuthority control, so thatenforcement procedures aresubject to democraticaccountability.Private car parks andprivate landThe final category of car parkingwhere enforcement may berequired is a private car park orprivate land, for example anoffice car park where the carpark is available to users byinvitation only. Under thesecircumstances, anyone whoparks without prior permission ispotentially trespassing. In realitythe powers available to deal withso-called “fly parkers” are verylimited since the DVLA areunlikely to release registeredkeeper details in thesecircumstances.

152 Chapter 9How should enforcementbe carried out?On-streetStreet parking enforcementrequires that enforcement staffpatrol the streets whereenforcement is required andcheck the status of vehicles andtake enforcement action asappropriate. Normally this wouldbe done by foot patrols and,where there are many vehicles tocheck, this probably remains themost effective means ofenforcement.Checking the status of a vehicleincludes:● Whether it is parked in aplace where parking isallowed;● Whether it is parked properlywithin a designated bay; and● Whether required evidenceof correct payment and timeis displayed.The level of enforcement effortrequired cannot be determinedby a rigid formula but must bedetermined to meet localcircumstances and priorities. Asa guideline, for an urban area,taking account of the need tocheck vehicles and issue tickets,an attendant will patrol at anaverage speed of about 1 mphand so, as a crude estimate, thestaff requirement for a given areacan be determined from the kerblength to be patrolled and thefrequency of visit required.Table 9.2 offers guidance on thesort of enforcement regime thatmight be adopted for typicalscenarios. It is important toremember that compliance rateswill react dynamically toenforcement rates, meaning thatwhatever level of enforcement isplanned, driver behaviour willchange. The enforcementregime may then need to beadapted to meet the changedcircumstances. The enforcementburden can be reduced in manylocations by “designing out” theproblem, as discussed inChapters 6 and 7. It is, therefore,important to ensure thatcompliance and enforcementdata are fed back to the trafficand highway design teams.It is fundamental to theeffectiveness of any enforcementregime that it creates theperception of uncertainty andrisk in the mind of the potentialoffender. There must at any timebe an expectation that theoffence will be detected andpenalised. This is greatlyassisted by ensuring that anypatrolling is randomised so that itis not possible to plan an illegalparking act around theexpectation that once a streethas been visited, there is timebefore the next visit. This can beachieved by dynamically varyinghow staff patrol their area. Forexample, an attendant with anarea to patrol on average oncean hour can patrol the wholeTable 9.2 Typical enforcement scenarios.Regulation High Offence Rates Low Offence RatesWaiting restriction Frequent visits, perhaps every hour or less Infrequent visits, perhaps daily or lessin busy areas such as main bus routes and at places where the restriction is toshopping streets, to keep the kerb clearpreserve access, eg, in a back street.Any problem is likely to generate callsfor enforcement.Loading banPatrol during permitted period to ensureturnover; parking restriction prevails otherwiseShort Stay Parking Frequent patrols to ensure turn-over linked to Reduce effort if controls are welllength of stayobeyedLong-stay parking Should not normally require intensive Occasional visits to reinforce and(eg, residents’ permit) enforcement as residents tend to police and confirm regulations, perhaps once ahighlight persistent problemsdaySchool EntranceEnforce intensively during hours of operation.Parents the main problem. Short-term transientnature of stopping tends to make ticketingproblematical, but offenders can be moved on.

Compliance and Enforcement 153area once in the first hour, thenpatrol half the area twice in thesecond hour, the second half ofthe area twice in the third hourand return to a full area patrol inthe fourth hour. Simple tacticslike this prevent opportunistdrivers from being able to predictwith any certainty when the nextattendant will pass and addgreatly to the deterrent effect ofthe patrols.Besides parking attendantswalking the streets, mobilepatrols using cycles, mopeds, orcars, can also be effective insome circumstances. In outlyingareas, such as a suburbanstation, where regulationsoperate part-day to keep streetsfree of commuter parking, mobilepatrols can be very effective inmaking a quick visit andpatrolling the area quickly andmore effectively than a footpatrol. Mobile patrols in town andcity centres can also beinvaluable in supplementing footpatrols by providing completelyrandom additional visits to areaswhere high levels of enforcementare required. This can mean thata mobile patrol can arrive in astreet literally minutes after a footpatrol has left, meaning thatpeople who drive round the blockto miss the warden are stillvulnerable. Supplementarymobile patrols can also help toprovide support and supervisionfor foot patrol staff.Finally in areas with extendedlengths of “no-parking”, such asan Urban Clearway, a mobilepatrol can be an effective meansof enforcement since offencesare likely to be well spaced out.Offenders also cannot be sure ofthe proximity of mobile patrols asthey could be with a foot patrol.Where there is a change inregulation or enforcement thatcould result in drivers beingpenalised, it is good practice togiven an informative warningnotice rather than a PCN.Depending on localcircumstances this could operatefor a fixed period or alternativelydrivers can be allowed thebenefit of the doubt for their firstoffence under the new regime.However, a grace period shouldnot be used as a substitute forthe provision of good prepublicityand clear information onthe ground about regulations,charges etc.Off-street car parksMany municipal and a fewprivately operated public carparks operate using pay anddisplay machines to collectpayment and time the duration ofstay. These rely on periodicinspection to check whether thecharge has been paid and topenalise non-payment. Thenumber of staff needed dependsvery much on the configurationof the car park and operationalconditions. Checking cars in payand display car parks can bemore time consuming than in astreet because many of the carsmay be parked “nose in’”meaning that the attendant mayhave to walk into the bay tocheck the ticket.The frequency of inspectionagain depends upon the type ofparking behaviour beingobserved. For example, at along-stay car park where mostusers park all day, a randomdaily check may be sufficient. Ina shoppers’ car park, whereusers come and go every hour orso, patrols as frequent as oncean hour may be necessary forrevenue protection and to ensurethat the parking is used correctly.Where parking is free, but timelimited, the patrol effort is moreonerous because the attendantwill have to record the details ofevery vehicle seen so that theycan check the length of stay.Logically one would patrol at thefrequency just above themaximum permitted length ofstay so that, if a vehicle wereseen on successive passes, itwould be an offender. Therequirement to patrol repeatedlyat this frequency, rather thanmaking intermittent passes,would depend upon offendingrates. The conclusion from this isthat parking which is controlledshould also be charged, at thevery least to cover the

154 Chapter 9enforcement costs. Free parkingin a controlled area in effect issubsidised by those who park incharged areas and this may bedifficult to justify.Where there is access controland payment is collected at thestart or end of the parking act,patrol staff are not required forrevenue protection. Operatorsshould still consider whetherpatrolling is desirable to providesecurity in the car park, however.If the car park in question hasCCTV, good lighting and naturalsurveillance from passingpedestrians, this will be lessnecessary than if the car park isremote and unmonitored.Compliance monitoringEnforcement of all parkingrestrictions should be monitoredagainst agreed compliancelevels. Compliance monitoringsurveys may take a sample ofstreets, recording the number ofillegally parked vehicles. Thenumber and choice of roadssurveyed would depend uponthe extent of enforcement issuesarising.The following illustration may behelpful. The total parkingcapacity of the road(s) beingsurveyed is recorded, togetherwith the number of illegallyparked vehicles, ie, the numberof spaces occupied by vehiclesnot displaying a valid permit,voucher or Pay and Displayticket, and by those vehiclesexceeding the period for whichparking has been paid. For thepurpose of a compliance report,unoccupied parking spaces aredeemed to be “legally occupied”.The expected compliance levelshould be stipulated within thecompliance contract. There isevidence in schemes, wheresuch an approach is used, that acompliance level of 80% orgreater will indicate an adequatelevel of enforcement. This maynot appear to be an overlystringent target but it is sensitiveto vehicles setting down orpicking up passengers or (whereit is not banned) loading, whichare subject to exemptions andtherefore not parked incontravention of the regulations,as well as drivers returning fromticket machines and other suchoccurrences, where PCNsshould not be issued.References(1) The Institution of Highways &Transportation, June 2001, Costs andBenefits of Decriminalised ParkingEnforcement.(2) Local Authorities’ Traffic Orders(Procedures) (England and Wales)Regulations 1996 (SI No. 2489).(3) Traffic in London – Traffic Managementand Parking Guidance (Department ofTransport, Local Authority Circulars5/92, 1/95 and Government Office forLondon - February 1998).(4) Traffic Signs Regulations and GeneralDirections 2002 (SI No.3113).(5) Guidance on Decriminalised ParkingEnforcement Outside London(Department of Transport LocalAuthority Circular 1/95 and WelshOffice Circular 26/95) and TrafficManagement and Parking Guidancefor London (Government Office forLondon – February 1998).(6) Removal and Disposal of VehiclesRegulations 1986 (SI No. 183).(7) Road Traffic Act 1991, (Amendment ofSection 76(3)) Order 1995SI1995/1437.(8) Security Industries Act, 2001.

Chapter 10Funding and theParking BusinessPlanAcknowledgementsChapter 10Funding and theParking BusinessPlanIntroductionParking in most local authoritiesinvolves a large amount ofexpenditure and income, and istypically one of the mostimportant accounts. It is,therefore, important that parkingshould be managed not only as aservice, but also as a business.Parking policies and schemesmust flow into the business planrather than being separated fromit.The Parking BusinessPlanThe core of the business plan willbe the parking account thatenumerates all income andexpenditure, together with anychanges to the operation andmanagement of parking that areplanned or will have an impacton the financial balance sheet.Items that should be included ina typical parking business planare:● The parking account(including the previous yearand forecasts for thefollowing year(s);● Policies and plannedchanges affecting thebusiness, such as a transferto DPE, or a change in thesplit between on- and offstreetparking;●Reasoned justification forsubsidies to the parkingaccount (such as freeparking);● Investment plans and theirestimated costs, such as carpark refurbishment;● Forecast income, takingaccount of any changes incharges;●Planned expenditure of anysurplus on the parkingaccount;● Parking supply and demanddata, and the results of anyreview of the business;and● The impact of resourceaccounting, particularly thetreatment of the assetvaluation of car parks.Income from parkingLocal authorities’ finance now ismore stringently controlled thanpreviously and authoritiesshould, at a minimum, balanceFigure 10.1: The context of a local Business Plan for parking.LTPParking StrategyOther elementsParking Business PlanParking policies,schemes

156 Chapter 10their revenue and costs on ayear-by-year basis. In addition,revenue should be generated tocover the opportunity costs of theasset value of car parks,buildings and equipment. Localauthority auditors are expressingconcern where such returns arenot being made. For instance anumber of authorities who areproviding free town centreparking to benefit retailingviability are being criticised fornot covering the costs ofmaintenance, supervision andrates. The auditors generally arenot saying that free parkingshould not be provided, but thatsuch provision must be fullyjustified by the wider benefits,and that those wider objectivesmust be specifically stated andunderstood.It is possible that some parts ofthe parking operation will showdeficits, such as the provision offree spaces in district shoppingcentres, or in villages and ruralareas. The business plan shouldclearly identify such issues andindicate where the cross subsidyarises. While policy requirementsmay override purely financialconsiderations in constructingthe business plan, the reason forsuch departures fromcommercial practice should bemade explicit and open to publicscrutiny.The business plan shouldrecognise the inter-relationshipbetween charging levels at onandoff-street spaces and thepotential transfer between thetwo. Raising the on-streetcharges or reducing on-streetspaces may increase the usageat off-street car parks. (Whetherthese are within local authoritymanagement control or whetherthey belong to a private operatormay be a consideration.) A wellconstructedplan should considerthe costs and revenues of bothon- and off-street provision as asingle service. With two-tierauthorities, however, this may bemore difficult as the ownershipand management of the twotypes of parking is dividedbetween the two authorities, withthe county council controlling theon-street spaces and the districtcouncil controlling the off-streetspaces.There may be the opportunity toconsider the rating valuations ofoff-street car parks, particularlyfor locations that generate lowrevenues. Some areas have astraight unit business rateirrespective of the financial valueof the site. Business rates maybe imposed on free car parkingfacilities since it is argued that itis the local authority’s decisionnot to charge irrespective of thevalue of the site.Some Councils view parking as a“cash cow”, generating surplusrevenues that can be used tosupport other council services.Some use these revenues solelyfor the purpose of keeping downthe rate of Council Tax. Suchpractice is particularlyquestionable (and unlawful inrelation to on-street spaces), ifthe local authority is at the sametime seeking financial help fromGovernment to fund its transportschemes. Greater transparencyand accountability is achieved, iftransport expenditure as far aspossible is met from transportrelated revenue. It is alsodesirable that people perceivetheir parking payments ascontributing directly to transportimprovements.Setting parking chargesParking charges, in combinationwith both the supply andregulation of parking spaces, arepotentially powerful tools, andmust be determined carefully.Decisions on charges should bebased on reliable estimates oftheir impacts. Local authoritiesshould retain detailedinformation on the usage withineach different band of car parkcharge, and use it to monitoryear by year the usage changesthat occur with changing chargerates. This information willindicate the variations in demandthat can be used to predictchanges through time.In practice, although the basicinformation generally exists, it isnot always analysed and

Funding and the Parking Business Plan 157presented alongside the case foraltering charges. The setting ofcharges is often a pragmaticpolitical decision rather than onebased on objective analysis ofthe impacts and effects. Parkingprofessionals within the authorityshould make it clear to electedmembers when such decisionsundermine or run counter toadopted polices and objectives.There may be ways of avoidingor minimising the risks involvedin taking decisions about parkingcharges that provoke a publicoutcry, for example by:●●Publishing the charges in apolitically “neutral” month (ie,away from elections orChristmas);Agreeing charges coveringmore than one year at a time;and● Agreeing that charges at costof living plus, say, amaximum of 5% can belevied without consultation.The issue of setting charges forresidents’ parking permits iscovered in Chapter 7.Additional revenueCar park operators, both privateand public, can generaterevenue from their car parksadditional to that generated byparking charges, for examplethrough:● Contract parking (generallyprovided on an annual basiswith defined marked outspaces). A variation of this isthe provision, generally inCity Centres, for evening andweekend special rates forlocal residents who do nothave their own spaces;● Advertising on reverse ofparking tickets (both payand-displayand barriersystems);● Internally illuminatedadvertising, which providesincome as well as improvedillumination;● Use of space for Sundaymarkets or car boot sales (Itshould be noted thatplanning permissions arenecessary for regular usage);● Car valeting. This alsoprovides a presence ofpeople that can add to thefeeling of security andpossiblyreducemaintenance and securitycosts;● Vending machines; and●Sponsorship, although thisseems to be rarely tried.Expenditure andOperating CostsOn-streetRevenues should cover thecosts involved in setting up,operating and maintainingparking control schemes. Costsshould at a minimum include thefollowing:● Scheme development;● Consultation;● Information and marketing;● Scheme monitoring andreview;● Day-to-day operating costs,including the issue ofpermits, collection of payand-displaycash, ITservices, “back office” staff, aproportion of seniormanagement costs,contracted traffic wardens orparking attendants; and● Maintenance and equipment,signs and road markings.The use of any surplus revenueswill need to be carefullyconsidered and justified in thebusiness plan.Section 55 of the Road TrafficRegulation Act 1984 restrictsexpenditure of surplus on-streetparking income to making goodany charges against anauthority’s general fund,provision and maintenance ofoff-street parking, highwayimprovements and publictransport schemes. This hasbeen updated by section 95 ofthe Traffic Management Act 2004to allow local environmentalschemes to be added to the listof permissible uses for parkingsurpluses. Regulations underthis Act will also enable highperforming Authorities to have

158 Chapter 10the freedom to use surpluses forany purpose.Revenue from fines (under 1984Act regulations) flow back intothe Government Exchequer.However, within a decriminalisedparking regime, the charges arenot a ‘fine’ nor are they a ‘levy’(as that implies fund raising) buta ‘charge’. The revenues fromthis charge are ring-fenced forparking, transport andenvironmental improvements.Government circulars make itclear that local authorities shouldavoid using parking charges as ameans of raising additionalrevenue or as a means of localtaxation.Certain authorities, particularly incentral London, generate verylarge surpluses in their parkingaccount because of the highcharges that are necessary bothto manage the parking demandand to provide a reasonable levelof enforcement. There is no legalproblem in this as the highcharges, and hence the highsurpluses, are justified by trafficand transport objectives ratherthan pure revenue generation. Inmany other parts of the UnitedKingdom, however, the positionis closer to ‘break even’.On-street spaces are broadlyconsidered as providing a publicservice where the primarypurpose should not be to make aprofit (and to which VAT does notapply) as opposed to off-streetspaces where legislation allowsa much less constrainedapproach (and to which VATdoes apply). The 1991legislation does notfundamentally change thatdistinction.The absence of a profit motivefor on-street parking charges isanother important reason forensuring that all costsassociated with the operation areincluded in the account,including commonly forgottenitems such as seniormanagement staff time and themaintenance of signs andmarkings.Off-street car parksAdequate costing should beallowed for maintenance andrepairs as well as direct runningcosts of car parks. It is the lackof an appropriate business planthat has led many authorities tounder-resource maintenanceand care to the point where carparks are a disgrace and nobodywants to use them.Too often“surpluses” have been declared(which may then be transferredto other council services), whenthe car parks are not cleanedproperly and maintenance isinsufficient.All off-street car parks requirefunds to operate and maintainthem. These costs will includethe business rates, lighting andpower, cleaning, maintenanceand supervision. The costs ofsupervision and enforcement forpay-on-foot or pay-at-exit willtend to merge, but for pay-anddisplayadditional enforcementcosts will be incurred. In mostcases these enforcement costswill be met from the excessparking or penalty payments thatwill be received.As well as looking after the assetvalue of the buildings, operatorsneed to consider whetherinvestment, such as improvedappearances, new ticketingmachines, CCTV and enhancedlighting, could actually pay forthemselves by increasing theattractiveness of the facility andtherefore its income generation.For private sector operatorscapital improvements can bejustified on simple assessmentsof rates of return, but for localauthorities it is frequently thecase that capital funding is notavailable – irrespective of themerits of the proposedinvestment. This highlights thepotential value of regardingparking as a business within thelocal authority framework, andthe potential value ofpartnerships with the privatesector to increase the capitalavailable for investment.

Funding and the Parking Business Plan 159Capital costsThe capital cost of car parksvaries considerably dependingupon the type and quality of theprovision being made. Table 10.1sets out examples of typicalcosts as at 2002. They excludeland values and assume nospecial ground conditions.FundingTable 10.1 Typical Car Park Construction Costs.Type of provision Specification Cost per space*At grade car park gravel surfaced £600At grade car park tarmac surfacing, marking, £1,500lighting, charging equipment2 storey Simple construction, stairs, £4,500lighting and equipmentMulti-storey Standard specification, lifts, lighting £4,500and equipmentMulti-storey High specification, lifts, lighting, £6,000security etcUnderground Standard specification including £12,000ventilation with only a low loadbearing surfaceUnderground High specification – replacement of £18,000urban square with high load bearing* Costs reflect 2002-03 pricesOff-street car parksThe heyday of local authority carpark construction was in the1960’s when construction costswere relatively cheap andforecasts were for large revenuestreams that would generate aprofit on the development. Theprovision of car parking by thepublic sector was seen as themeans by which visitors andemployees could be attractedinto town and city centres. Thecapital was generally fundedthrough long term borrowing (30to 50 years). Money did, in fact,flow through the ticket barriersbut this was not ring-fenced to aparking account, and certainlynot to a transport account. Oftenthe borrowing was treated aspart of the council’s borrowingrequirements and the loan costswere not set off against income.Funds were not set aside formajor maintenance orreplacement. Frequently thecash flows were used tounderwrite other council servicesand the pressure of demand forthese other services graduallydrained the money that had beenplaced in the parking fund tomaintain and repair theinfrastructure.The need for increased “capitalfunding” to cover maintenanceand enhancements has led anumber of Authorities to eithersell off their complete stock ofcar parks or enter into apartnership with a commercialoperator.More stringent financialmanagement procedures andthe introduction of “capping” ofLocal Government expenditureled to a virtual cessation of newlocal government funded multistoreycar parks. A simplefinancial calculation illustratesthe reason for this. If a car parkstructure costs £8,000 per spaceto construct (excluding land), thedebt and repayment charges arelikely to be £600 per year, towhich need to be added rates,staffing, maintenance, repairsand other costs. The overallcosts could easily reach £2,000per space per year. This wouldrequire an income from eachspace of over £5 each day, alevel that is rarely achievablebearing in mind that occupancylevels are mostly well below100%. In large centres suchincome may be achievable, butwill be counterbalanced by muchhigher land costs.Despite the costs involved, therehas been new car parkconstruction. The difference fromthe 1960s is that most newconstruction is now funded bythe commercial sector anddesigned to complement otheractivities where car parkingMulti-storey car park – Birmingham.

160 Chapter 10provision is considered to be animportant requirement.Expanded airports, new retailcentres, business parks andleisure facilities have been andcontinue to be designed andlocated such that car parking isrequired for their operation.Hence the cost of providing theparking is met by the financialviability of the overalldevelopment.Under current financial rules it isdifficult for Local Authorities tofund major car parks throughLocal Transport Plan or SingleCapital Pot resources, or anyother conventional source,unless they are able to justify theasset charges that are arequirement of local governmentfunding. There may beexceptions, however. A localauthority may be able to raisecapital for new car parks throughthe sale of land or other assets,and certain types of majorfacility, such as park-and-ride,can be funded through the LTPprocess.Local authority provision of offstreetat-grade car parks can stillbe considered viable in a numberof circumstances, particularly forthe use of vacant land on atemporary basis. Additionally,developing at-grade off-streetspaces to support localregeneration initiatives, ruralcommunities or park-and-ridecan often be justified by thewider benefits that can beobtained rather than the directbusiness objectives of a positivebalance sheet. Capital costs canbe provided through a number offunding streams such as LocalTransport Plans or funds forregeneration areas.Local Transport Plan funding canbe used for land purchase andconstruction costs of park-andridesites, and the purchase ofequipment related to off-streetparking such as variablemessage signs.The introduction of ‘Prudentialborrowing’ rules for LocalGovernment does provide theopportunity for Local Authoritiesto undertake some newinvestment into car parkprovision. The rules mean thatLocal Authorities are now free toborrow for capital investmentwithout having to seekpermission from Government,subject to this being prudent andaffordable. This opportunity isstill in its infancy and, although atthe time of writing someAuthorities have begun lookingat the scope that this mightprovide, none have so farentered into such an agreement.In effect the policy reintroducesthe concept of capital borrowingfrom banks and financialinstitutions but, before enteringinto such an agreement,Authorities should be clear thatthey can make the repaymentsfrom the parking accounts.On-streetThe introduction of on-streetcontrols is likely to incursignificant set-up costs andrecovery periods may varywidely. However, it is usually aprerequisite of schemes thatthey be self-financing. There willbe a large range of permutationsof possible controls, tariffs andcharges and fundingmechanisms, and each authoritymust make its own choice. Thiswill require a significant level offinancial modelling andforecasting, together with anappraisal of each option underconsideration against objectivesand financial constraints.The set-up costs of on-streetcontrol schemes, andconstruction costs of highwayworks affecting the provision ofparking bays, can be fundedthrough Local Transport Plans.The cost of implementing a controlledparking zone (CPZ) in a small markettown will be in the order of £60,000for lining, signing and pay-anddisplaymachines. A larger town CPZwith 4,500 controlled spaces wouldbe in the order of £500,000+. Thecost of a park-and-ride scheme of500 spaces would be at least £1m,but could be much more than this ifaccess required significantinfrastructure provision.

Funding and the Parking Business Plan 161Capital investment for on-streetequipment (parking meters, payand-displaymachines etc.) maybe considered as revenueexpenditure due to the relativelyshort life of the capital asset, butpressure on revenue budgetsmay make it more practicable tokeep it on the capital side. Thesource of funding may also berelevant. For example, forschemes funded throughdeveloper contributions, it will beeasier to negotiate a one-offcapital sum than an ongoingrevenue sum.If the capital costs are seen toplace an undue burden oncouncil resources, there may beopportunities for Private FinanceInitiative or Public PrivatePartnership deals with privateparking operators for them toprovide, maintain and operateon-street equipment. Manyauthorities operate privateenforcement contracts but retainthe ownership and managementof the equipment. The failure ofany piece of equipment is,therefore, a risk upon theauthority. If the same contractoroperated both the equipmentand the enforcement, therewould be a greater incentive toensure the prompt repair ofequipment as this increasesrevenue. Such incentives canalso be built into enforcementcontracts, for example throughrevenue sharing. These aspectscould feature more strongly inthe evaluation of best value foron-street operations.Best Value reviewsThe procedures of a Best Valuereview of parking vary betweenauthorities, but tend to focus onissues that are “internal” toparking, such as:● Data on the use of parking,including turnover of spaces,daily totals and peaks;● Staff costs and time involvedin parking management,taking into account timespent by staff not employedsolely on parking, includingsenior management time;● Performance Indicators suchas costs and income perparking space;● Information on PCNs issued,the excess charge recoveryrate;● Levels of maintenance andasset depreciation;● Problems of operation suchas vandalism and car crime;and● Levels of user satisfaction.Best Value reviews areconducted to address questionssuch as:● Why is the parking servicebeing provided? Morespecifically, what is thejustification for the servicebeing provided by theauthority or by privatecontractors, and are currentcharges appropriate inrelation to costs and potentialrevenues?● Are users and serviceproviders satisfied with theoperation?● How does the performance,quality and cost comparewith parking operations inother authorities?● Is the service being providedcompetitively, and has thisbeen tested?● What are the strengths andweaknesses of the parkingservice? and● What is the potential forimprovement, and how couldthis be realised?It is important that assessment ofthe parking service includesconsideration of the contributionto wider objectives, such ascontribution to sustainability orregeneration objectives, as wellas the quality of the parkingservice itself.The Policy and FinanceInterfaceLocal Authorities have a primerole in managing trafficcongestion, reducing airpollution, maintaining andsupporting town and city centresand in encouraging moresustainable means of transport.

162 Chapter 10Currently the most widelyaccepted and effective way toinfluence the demand for car useis through the provision and theprice of parking. The policyadopted by most authorities is totry to restrict or discourage longstay(commuter) parking but toencourage short-stay parkingthat is perceived to contributemore to the economic well beingof retail and other facilities.In most towns and cities,however, the private nonresidentialparking elementmakes up some 50% of thecentral area parking stock and is,therefore, beyond the directinfluence of local authoritymanagement. Since localauthorities have tended toconvert the publicly managedspace for short-stay use, theresult is that they now haveinfluence over only a smallpercentage of the car parkingstock used for long-stay parking,often less than 15%. In thesecircumstances trying to influencecar commuting by the pricemechanism is a forlorn task. It isfor this reason that localauthorities should seek ways ofinfluencing the supply and use ofprivate parking, as discussed inChapter 6.Town centre retailers mayconsider themselves to be in anunfavourable position comparedto out of town retailing locationswith free parking. Other than alimited number of locationswhere a town centre is in directcompetition from an out of townretail site, there is no realevidence that reasonableparking charges are a majordeterrent to visiting a centre.What is known to be a deterrentis badly laid out car parks thatare dirty, smelly and subject topersonal security risks. Retailerscan generally be persuaded tosee the reasonableness ofcharges, if sufficient resourcesare being ploughed back into themaintenance and managementof the spaces. Users also aregenerally prepared to pay for aquality service.Parking charges should relate toaccessibility. On-street spaces inthe heart of the centre shouldhave very short time limits andbe relatively expensive.Shopper parking should be closeto the shops but commuterparking can be further away.Parking tariffs can assist indelivering that mix of use. It willbe good practice, however, toconsider the relative accessibilityby car and public transport.Parking charges should be sethigh enough to encourage thechoice of public transport, whilecar parks and bus stops can belocated so that the latter aremore convenient for the shopsand other attractions.Private car park operators maycharge more for short-termspaces but undercut long-staycharges, which can undermine apolicy to reduce car commutertravel.Private SectorinvolvementLocal authorities may considerinvolving the private sector in themanagement and operation ofcar parks in their area. Jointventures or partnerships havebeen established, for example inBrighton and Hove andManchester.There may be a variety ofreasons for transferring theprovision and management ofcar parks to the private sectorincluding:●A lack of ability to raisesufficient capital to maintainthe parking stock, or toexpand it;● A lack of revenue to supportmore staff and associatedcosts;● A desire not to operateservices directly that wouldincrease local authority staff;and● Local authorities not beinggeared towards theoperation of a large scalebusiness.It is important, however, thatinvolvement of the private sectorshould not be carried out in such

Funding and the Parking Business Plan 163a way that the local authorityloses control over charge levelsand tariff structures.Experience has tended to showthat parking charges rise fasterunder private sector control thanthey would have within localauthority control. Many localauthorities are fearful of raisingcar park prices to realistic levelsdue to the outcry that oftenoccurs. By passing theresponsibility to the privatesector they no longer get thebacklash that can occur. One ofthe prime objectives of the localauthority, however, is to managetraffic levels and to maintain theviability of their town and citycentres; both objectives thatbenefit from retaining controlover charge levels and regimes.There may be a middle way, asin Manchester where a board, onwhich the City Council isrepresented, sets charges.On occasions the private sectorcan release asset values that thecouncil would not, on their own,have been able to realise, oftenthrough land deals. Improvedmanagement practices andefficiencies of scale can also bebeneficial.The importance of LocalAuthority controlA number of authorities that soldoff their car parks have from timeto time regretted that action asthey no longer have sufficientinfluence on charging policy andhence cannot influence eitherthe economic viability of theircentres or congestion levels. It isnow good practice that localauthorities retain control ofIn 1999 Manchester City Council promoted a partnership with private car parkcompanies. However, this proposal was referred to the Monopolies and MergersCommission due to the perceived lack of competition that would remain in thearea. The legal challenge greatly extended the period of contract negotiations, buteventually the partnership went ahead on the basis that Trafford and Salford wereimmediately adjacent and hence there was not a monopoly of spaces by a singleoperator.NCP Manchester Ltd. is a Joint Venture that has provided for £13 millioninvestment in over 40 car parks including:● Installation of digital CCTV;● State of the art 24 hour Control Centre;● Variable message signage on arterial routes and the inner relief route;● Installation of modern control equipment.The Joint Venture has a turnover in excess of £16 million providing an integratedparking system within the City Centre Management Plan, Local Transport Plan andCommunity Safety Plan.The Joint Venture believes that residents, businesses and visitors have allbenefited from the arrangement in a number of ways. To date these include:● Cost reduction and improved Council net income;●●●●●Upgraded car parks which allow customers to park safely when going abouttheir normal daily business;High quality parking provision that enables Manchester to maintain its positionas the Regional Centre despite threats from the “out of town” alternative;Real-time information on parking options for occasional users of the CityCentre;A vital role in supporting new commercial development; andSupport for, and explicit links to, the Local Transport Plan and the CommunitySafety Plan for the City Centre.charge levels and tariffstructures, even if managementand operation is transferred tothe private sector.There is also an important landuse planning reason for keepingcar parks within local authorityownership. A private car park ismore difficult to remove, shouldurban design or regenerationplans require it to be removed orreplaced. It is noticeable in manycities that otherwise welldesignedpedestrian priorityareas are compromised by theneed to maintain access to carparks constructed before suchimprovements were conceived.In deciding whether and in whatways to involve the privateTable 10.2 The do’s and don’ts of private sector involvement in car parks.✔● Local authority owned and ● Private control of tariff structuremanaged car parks● Private control of charges● Private management of car parks ● Unregulated private control ofunder contract to the local authority conditions of use and enforcement● Privately owned car parks with● Private ownership withlocal authority control over tariffunregulated management andstructure and charges, and regulation operationof conditions of use and enforcement● Private ownership with managementin partnership with the local authority✘Parking sign for private car park –Birmingham.

164 Chapter 10sector, local authorities shouldtake account of the basic do’sand don’ts shown in Table 10.2.On-street managementLocal authorities may also wishto involve the private sector inparking provision andenforcement on-street. Becausethe outcomes of on-street controlschemes may be difficult topredict in advance, the localauthority will usually need to beresponsible for schemeimplementation, but thesubsequent maintenance,operation and enforcementfunctions may be suitable forprivate sector involvement.Again, the local authority mustExamples of parking account information in south east EnglandAuthority A (A medium size town in south east England)A total of 3150 spaces were provided, 2500 of which were in multi-storey car parks.The in-house service was run at a net cost in 2000/01 of £83,000, or subsidy perspace of £26.Authority B (A rural district with five small towns)The council provides 34 car parks across five towns, a total of 2,334 spaces. Itdoes not charge for car parking, though there are time restrictions in some carparks. The estimated cost for 2000/2001 was £283,850, including around £9,400on enforcement of parking notices and £37,600 on cleaning and maintenance. Thecost or subsidy per space was £121.Authority C (A rural district in south east England)The council provided 20 car parks (of which 5 are free) with costs of £552,625 for1999/2000 and income of £668,991. The total number of parking spaces providedis 2,099. The cost of provision per space was £26. The surplus revenue generatedper space was £55.Authority D (A borough council in south east England)The council’s in-house team of 7.8 staff manages 32 town centre car parks withover 2,700 car parking spaces. In 2001/02 the parking service generated a netincome of £120,000, or £44 per space.Authority E (A borough council in south east England)The council provides 2,700 parking spaces in 43 public off-street car parks free ofcharge. The cost of the service was £214,260 in 1999/2000 (2.4 per cent of thecouncil’s net revenue budget). The Council had a long-term policy of providing freeparking and provided sufficient spaces to meet demand. The subsidy per spacewas £79.Authority F (District Council in south east England)The council provided 2828 car parking spaces in one medium size and three smalltowns. The total expenditure per space in 2001/2002 was £584, while income was£564, producing a revenue loss of £20 per space. However, the account includestwo notional items, which if excluded would mean a monetary surplus of £128 perspace (see table below).Authority F Parking Account Summary 2001/2Expenditure General management and overhead costs £685,000Asset rental (notional) £526,000Operational expenditure £443,000Total expenditure £1,654,000Income Staff permits (notional) £104,000Season tickets £149,000Excess charges £75,000Ticket sales £1,239,000Other £29,000Total income £1,596,000retain control over charges andtariff structures.Private sector involvement canintroduce new capital but thishas to be financed. Dependingon the local employmentsituation, revenue costs may bereduced by lower wage costs.Private sector managers mayproduce other advantages suchas easier recruitment with lessbureaucracy, but this should notbe achieved at the expense ofstaff quality and training. Localauthority contracts shouldensure good standards ofservice, and will need to allow forthe cost of monitoring andenforcing these standards withinthe parking account.Private companies nowundertake a substantialproportion of on-streetenforcement, but they havemade less impression on the“back office” systems where localauthorities retain more control.While routine office work couldbe contracted to the privatesector, it is generally desirable toretain within the local authoritythe interface with customers andthe handling of complaints andappeals.If private sector companies areinvolved in on-street operations,there are also opportunities forthem to take over themanagement of the systemscompletely including theprovision and maintenance ofon-street pay-and-display, andcash collection. This may providea stronger incentive to maintainthe equipment, as brokenequipment cannot generate anincome. The issue of which partsof the parking service can orshould be contracted to theprivate sector, and equallyimportant, which should beretained under local authoritycontrol, can be explored throughthe Best Value review process.The Parking AccountWithin the Business Plan, therewill need to be a statement ofaccounts. This should usuallyinclude a statement for theprevious financial year, together

Funding and the Parking Business Plan 165with a forecast out-turn for thecurrent year and a subsequentperiod. The assumptions in theforecasts about changes tocharges and expenditures willneed to be made clear. Anoverall indication of how theparking account can bestructured is shown in Table10.3.There is a need to bring all thecosts associated with parkingwithin the parking account. Inthis way any subsidies or crosssubsidiesor privileges for certainusers are exposed, requiringjustification in the business plan.In addition, the costs of parkingcan be compared with the costsof other transport provision, sothat priorities can be decided inthe light of true comparativecosts.The parking account shouldcover the return on capitalborrowing or asset values as wellas all income and expenditure.Asset values may derive fromthe opportunity costs of retainingcar parking rather thandeveloping a car park site for amore profitable use. Resourceaccounting may be relevanthere.The largest element of theparking account is likely to be theincome generated by parkingcharges for either or both onstreetand off-street spaces.Penalty charges forinfringements and overstayingcan also be a major element ofthe overall balance sheet. Onthe cost side of the equationoperational and maintenancecosts, including maintenance ofthe asset value of parkingfacilities, tend to consume thegreater part of the income.Table 10.3 The Parking Account.IncomeExpenditureA: Direct costs of operation for each individual car park● Parking charge income at off-● Supervision costsstreet car parks● Cash collection and handling● Cleaning● Utilities● ConsumablesHence “operating profit” calculated per car park and per spaceB: Costs and revenues from enforcement● Parking penalties received● Enforcement costsHence (A +B) “profit” calculated per car park and per spaceC: Other infrastructure costs and revenues● Other income streams (advertising, ● Maintenance costsassociated services etc)● Business ratesHence (A+B+C) “profit” calculated as return on current facilitiesD: Infrastructure investment costs● Asset value of investment(calculated as an annual cost)or loan repaymentHence (A+B+C+D) economic return on off-street parking operationE: Direct costs of operation of on-street spaces● On-street revenue● Cash collection and handling● Utilities● ConsumablesHence (E) “operating profit” calculated per spaceF: Costs and revenues from on-street enforcement● Parking penalties received● Cost of enforcement, including“backroom costs”. Costscalculated per parking spaceHence (E+F) “profit” calculated per spaceG: Infrastructure investment costs● Review of parking orders● Maintenance of signs andmarkings● Asset value of investment(calculated as an annual cost)or loan repaymentHence (E+F+G) economic return on off-street parking operationH: Management Costs● Cost of managing the systemHence (Sum A-H) overall return on parking operation

166

Chapter 11The Role ofMarketing andCommunicationsAcknowledgementsChapter 11The Role ofMarketing andCommunicationsIntroductionThe role of marketing andcommunications is now ofgreater significance whenparking is used as a means ofmanaging demand, and it isnecessary to engage the publicto inform them. This needs tocover not only thecommunication of informationabout the operation of parkingschemes, such as locations,tariffs and charges, but also theprinciples and purposes behindthem. Consequently, effectivecommunication involves winningover “hearts and minds” as wellas the provision of information.Consultation procedures(Chapter 8) form an importantpart of marketing andcommunication, but this chapterfocuses on the more general andongoing requirement tocommunicate with the public. Toillustrate the contrasting roles ofconsultation and communication,the stock of leaflets at aconsultation exhibition needs tobe replenished for no more thana few days; the stock of leafletsat a tourist office showingparking routes and locationsneeds to be replenished inperpetuity.The reasons forMarketing andCommunicationsThere are two principal reasonsfor communicating parkinginformation to the public:1. To inform people aboutany new parking scheme andto involve them as part of thedemocratic process; and2. To ensure that driversknow where and when theycan park.In a commercial environmentmarketing is used to raiseawareness of a product andcreate an appreciation of itsdesirability. In relation to parking,particularly where there is morethan one provider in a town, theobjective is similar. Competingsuppliers will want to makepotential customers aware ofwhat they offer and todifferentiate them by branding inorder to create brand loyalty andso get more business.There should be a degree ofcooperation, if competitionexists, so that town centrevisitors are presented withcoordinated information. Thismay happen in something asbasic as signing. The purpose ofdirection signing is to aid drivers;it is not a marketing aid to themunicipal car park operator. Tobe effective in helping drivers topark, any system of signing

168 Chapter 11Information showing available longstayparking.should, therefore, include allsignificant car parks available tothe public, not just the municipalones. This requires all parkingoperators to work together toprovide a single source ofparking information. This canthen be translated into clear andeasy to use information mediaincluding signs, maps andInternet pages.Information on parking must berelevant to the driver on aparticular day. Any changes inthe location or type of parkingmust be communicated,including an explanation of thereasons for change.Car parks have a fixed capacityand once spaces are occupiedthere are no more until someoneleaves. This gives rise to thevalue of ‘real-time’ information. Inbusy towns, goodcommunications can deliver priorinformation about the status ofcar parks and can divert andredirect drivers early and soavoid a build up of queuesaround the busiest car parks.Communication systems canalso be used to divert travellersto other facilities such as parkand-ride.Two types of real-timeinformation are widely used:variable-message signs (VMS),and local radio trafficprogrammes.MarketingThe main marketing need is towin hearts and minds in relationto the local parking strategy andthe various services related toparking that the local authorityprovides. For example, if highparking charges in the towncentre are designed to keeptraffic out, and to encouragepark-and-ride as an alternative,then it is the positive aspect of abetter town centre environmentthat can be marketed, not theparking charges. Marketing isthus an aspect of and supportsthe public involvement andconsultation processes.Private car park operators candevelop a marketing strategyacross different areas. For localauthorities, with theiradministrative area the only baseof operation, marketing is oftendeveloped with a locallydistinctive way. The service maybe branded, for example the Cityof Westminster’s “Master Park”,but the primary purpose is topromote awareness of thefacilities available and to steerusers towards the facilities thatbest meet their needs. In York,which is a major touristattraction, the city’s park-andridesites are heavily marketed tovisitors even though there aremany parking places in the citycentre.Car parking is not an end in itself.People park cars so that theycan do other things. Themarketing link between parkingand other activity can beunderstated. For example, atedge- and out-of-town retailfacilities the availability ofuncharged parking is a majorfactor in their commercialsuccess, but the marketing ofthis facility is almost subliminal; itis assumed rather than statedthat such facilities will haveplenty of “free” parking.Parking can also be used moredirectly to help promote otheractivities, for example, a dealbetween a car park operator anda cinema or theatre whereby thecustomer can buy an inclusivepackage deal of tickets andparking. Tour operators usesimilar offers to promotepackage holidays, where airportparking is included in thepackage. Local authorities areusually concerned to maximisethe competitiveness of publictransport and should, therefore,use their influence to make surethat similar deals are availablealso for those who choose totravel by bus and rail.To improve competitiveness,some town centre retailers whofeel threatened by edge- or outof-townshopping offer to refundparking charges to customers.Local authorities may not wish toencourage such offers because itmay undermine the effectivenessof the car parking strategy.

The Role of Marketing and Communications 169An alternative that providesmuch clearer benefits, and isalready offered by someretailers, is the provision of freeor cheap delivery services sothat people can use the shopwithout having to bring their carinto the town centre. Suchservices can be marketed in thestore, or more widely in thepress, with leaflet drops, and onthe Internet. The local authoritycan also play a role inencouraging such services, forexample by requiring theirprovision (as part of a TravelPlan) in a planning contributionsagreement when grantingpermission for new retailfacilities.Local authorities need to ensurethat the parking sections of thecouncil work with the sectionsdealing with tourism, economicdevelopment, town centremanagement etc. in order toensure that their towns aremarketed in a holistic manner.Formal communicationby Local AuthoritiesDesigning permits for onstreetparkingTo get a permit the user has toapply to the council and usuallyprovide evidence of their right tosecure a permit. This usuallyinvolves some sort of form andthe council needs to ensure thatthe design of the form is carefullyconsidered so that its purpose isclear and the requirements toqualify for the permit can beeasily understood. In manyareas this may mean that theform needs to be made availablein a range of languages to reflectthe national and ethnic mix of thelocal community.The design of the form will needto reflect the amount ofinformation required and thepotential for fraudulentapplications. Application for apermit in a small market townmay be very simple, requiringonly simple proof of residence. Inthe centre of London the value ofa permit is very much higher,and, therefore, tempts fraud. Forexample, an application in theCity of Westminster requires anendorsement by an independentreferee as well as proof ofresidence and car ownership. Inadjacent Kensington andChelsea, 8 pages of detailedexplanation and assistanceaccompany the 4-pageapplication form. Manyapplication forms are madeavailable for viewing anddownloading from the Internet,and it is, therefore, easy for localauthorities to compare examplesof current practice whendesigning their own.Ticket designOffenders who receive anexcess or penalty charge arerequired to make a payment tothe council. The paper ticket setsout their formal rights andobligations but this may bewritten in a formal legal way,which may be incomprehensibleto some drivers. An alternative isto keep the ticket simple, but toinclude details of how to obtainthe full legal information. A“parking shop” can provide aplain language explanation ofwhy the ticket was issued andwhat the recipient’s options are.Parking “shop”Providing a “parking shop” canenhance access for the public togain information and advice. Tobe effective, the opening hoursneed to be carefully considered,and should include some timeswhen those who work during theweek can get access, forexample during some eveningsor at the weekend. The parkingshop can be a source ofinformation and give access tomaps, forms and guidance aswell as providing a place wherethose who have received apenalty can pay. Some councilsoperate a “one-stop-shop”covering a range of councilservices including parking, andthis may be the best optionwhere the operation is too smallto justify a stand-alone shop justfor parking. Depending on thestyle of the operation,information may also be

170 Chapter 11available from the shop via thetelephone or on the Internet.Communication byprivate companiesPrivate sector companies do notnormally have to deal with thepublic in the same formal way asa local authority. A private carpark operator, however, doeshave a contractual relationshipwith its clients and, by means ofits published information, doesneed to make clear whatconditions are associated withthe use of its facilities. Manypeople believe, incorrectly, thatwhen they use a car park theoperator takes over responsibilityfor the safe keeping of their car.The Occupiers Liability Acts (1and 2) place someresponsibilities on the operators,but this includes ultimateresponsibility for the vehicle onlyif they have taken possession ofit (ie, they have the keys).Otherwise their liability is limitedto the actions of their staff andfailures of systems andequipment. Thus, if another carreversed into a parked vehicle,the car park operator would notbe liable, whereas if the car parkattendant dropped a litterbin onthe car they would.Information about the owner’sliability is often provided either invery small print on the ticket orby a remote legalistic noticewhich the driver may not see or,if they do, it is located where it isquite impractical for a driver tostop and read it before enteringthe car park. Conflict can beavoided by clear simple noticeswhich set out not only the legallimitations on the operator’sliabilities but also provide theuser with a point of contactwhere they can get clarificationor pursue a claim.Providing informationInformation about parkingavailability in an area can bemade available in a number ofways, some passive, some proactive,and some interactive.Whichever method is used, localauthorities should ensure thatthe information not only relatesto drivers’ interests, but alsohelps people to choosealternative means of travel. Inthis way information andmarketing should support thewider transport objectives of thecouncil. Examples of such multimodalinformation and promotionmight include:● Car park informationpromoting park-and-ride asthe preferred option;● Live radio updates giving theoperational status of publictransport services as well asroads and parking;● Leaflets designed astransport leaflets showingbus, cycle and walkingroutes as well as car parksand main roads; and● Pre-payment facilities withvalidity on public transportservices as well as forparking.Maps and GuidesUser surveys in West Sussexhave revealed that theproduction of parking informationleaflets and publicity is animportant aspect of on-goingcommunication. Local peopleusually know where their town’scar parks are. For everyone elsea good parking map is essential.The map, if possible, should be atown or city promotion map, onwhich parking information isshown along with other transportinformation. Such a promotionalmap needs to show as aminimum:● The main town centreattractions;● The main transport accesspoints, including stations,bus stations andshopmobility points;● The location of all thepublicly available car parks;●●●The main routes to the towncentre so that drivers canorientate themselves;One-way streets and accessroutes; andTourist information offices,public transport and parking“shops” or other places

The Role of Marketing and Communications 171where visitors can obtainfurther information.To be effective, town centreparking maps need to bedistributed as widely as possibleoutside the town so that a drivercan plan where to park beforereaching the town. Thus theyshould be available at servicestations and eating placesaround the town. The map canalso be included on the council’sweb page, which will be ofparticular value to people whoneed to pre-plan, such as thoserequiring a Shopmobility or otherspecial facility.Maps and other town informationshould also be made available topeople intending to move into anarea, for example through estateagents or mailing to peopleappearing for the first time on theelectoral register.Maps are usually made availablein tourist information offices, butthis may be of limited value if noshort-stay parking in availableoutside the office. Many towns inEurope have street maps onboards in lay bys on theapproaches to the town. Theseshow car park locations, andsometimes information on how tofollow specially signed routeslinking all the main car parks. Amap vending machine at suchlocations would enable a visitorto choose a target car parkbefore arriving in the towncentre.Traffic SignsRegardless of how good a mapis, drivers need direction signingto help guide them to a car park.Inevitably these signs will be ofmost value to the completestranger, but they can also helplocal people who do nothabitually go by car to the towncentre, or who have changedtheir home, work or otherlocation.It is important to integrateparking signs with other towncentre signing, but, wherepossible, there should beadvanced signing to help withearly, and hence safe, laneselection. Signing should alwaysterminate with an arrival sign sothat drivers know where to turninto the car park. This will help toavoid the frustration of driversfollowing signs to a car park in anunfamiliar town only to find thatthey have driven past theentrance, which was not signed,and have to circuit the towncentre again.Signing can be fixed or variable.Variable signing is useful to showthe dynamic changes in parkingavailability through the day andto show when a given car park isunavailable. There are severaltypes of variable sign in commonuse:●Prism signs that can showthree messages ie, “spaces”,“full” and “closed”; and● Roller blind signs that canshow several messages on amoveable blind.Dot Matrix signs that can showmultiple messages including thenumber of spaces available in acar park have to be speciallyauthorised.The information for these signs isusually delivered from the carpark management systems viathe local Urban Traffic Control(UTC) centre. In a fullyintegrated system the signals willalso adapt so that as car parksfill, the routes to them will begiven less green time sincetraffic flows should drop. Thesystem can also be used todivert parkers away from carparks in busy areas to avoidcongestion.Guide to places in Windsor and Etonand where to park in Worthing.

172 Chapter 11Providing information in various waysof where to park.If drivers arrive at their chosencar park to find that the site iseither full or closed, they willneed directions to alternativefacilities. In some towns inEurope there is a signed “parkingroute” to facilitate this. Driversare directed round an orbitalroute, which links the main carparks in the town. Variablesigning is then used to divertvehicles off the route to particularcar parks or to continue roundthe route if a car park is full. Theprimary purpose of the route is toprovide an easy-to-navigateroute which links the car parkingfacilities.Sometimes the routes aredesigned to include hotels andtheir private parking facilities.It is likely that in futureinformation will migrate to in-carnavigation systems such that thesystems provide the details ofcar park availability and thendirect the drivers to that car parkwith in-car mapping andnavigation systems. Similarsystems are beginning toemerge through the use of WAPphone technology or SMS textmessaging on ordinary mobilephones. Advances in this fieldare likely to be driven byadvances in route guidance andreal time bus information, butparking will be a beneficiary ofsuch technology.A signing scheme is equallyimportant for pedestrian accessroutes between town centredestinations and car parks (andother arrival points) that servethem. For further guidance onthis issue see the reference tothe National Retail PlanningForum (3).Signing within car parksGood information signing shouldbe provided within car parks tocommunicate with the user bothas a pedestrian and as a driver.As a driver the user needs clearsigns to show where and when toturn, which direction to take and,where traffic flows merge orcross, who has the priority. Thereare differing approaches tosigning in car parks. Somedesigners wish to introduce anoverall theme to a car park andsee the internal signing as anintegral part of that theme. Thedisadvantage of this is that theuser may not immediatelyrecognise the sign’s purpose andthis could create a safety risk ifdrivers fail to cede priority or turnthe wrong way. The contraryview is that, as far as possible,internal traffic signing should usethe same graphic designs as areused on the highway, based onthe argument that drivers arecompletely familiar with thesesigns and so are unlikely tomisinterpret them.For pedestrians the first task is tohelp them orientate themselvesin relation to exits and to helpthem memorise the location oftheir car for when they return.Depending on size this couldmean identifying the floor andeven the zone within a floor. Thiscan be done using colours,numbers, symbols or evensounds. Pedestrians also needto be signed via safe routes outof the car park and on to clearlywaymarked routes to keydestinations.A car park with good pedestriansigning will be easy to use andso attract visitors. A car park thatis user-friendly will be amarketable feature since theexperience will reflect themarketing message. Conversely,if a car park is of a poorstandard, a visitor may be initiallyattracted by a good sales pitchbut will be discouraged from a

The Role of Marketing and Communications 173return visit if their initialexperience is a bad one.Further, the source of the originalinformation will lose credibility,which can be particularlydamaging to future marketingefforts.The InternetThe Internet offers new facilitiesand opportunities and can beused:● As a reference source to findcar parks at a destination;● To identify the availability ofparking spaces; and● To book a space in advance.This can mean that when a userleaves home they already havereserved space available. If theuser knows where they are goingthis reduces search time anduncertainty. The technology isavailable to link also to an in-carroute guidance system. From anoperator’s viewpoint providingthis facility can attract extrabusiness, and monitoring theinformation collected on-line canhelp to target offers to maximiseuse of the facility.A website can also provideinformation on the status of carparking so that a parker canknow in advance if theirpreferred car park will beavailable or unavailable on agiven day. Car parkinginformation can also be linked toevents so that, for example, acinemagoer can be linked toinformation giving the price,location and availability of carparks near the cinema.RadioNo matter how good fixedsigning is, and no matter how upto date websites are,Information on parking.

174 Chapter 11circumstances can change.Whilst parkers are en-route totheir chosen destinationsomething can happen that willaffect their choice of either routeor final destination. Most largertowns and cities have at leastone local radio station and thesecan be invaluable in helping todisseminate near real timeinformation on local traffic andparking conditions. Of course thebulletins that they broadcast willonly be as good as theinformation provided, so towncentre managers or local parkingmanagers should designfacilities to pass data quickly tothe media if they want todisseminate information this way.Mobile Phone SystemsMobile phones can now be usedto contact dedicated numbers toget information on the status andavailability of parking in a townand to reserve a place. They canalso be used to get trafficupdates and routing information,either via voice or textmessages. In addition, they canbe used as a payment system. Ifusers have subscribed to aservice, they can call a dedicatednumber from which details canbe entered via a menu driven setof instructions to pay for theirparking. This creates obviousopportunities for downloadingadditional information to the userand, by analysis of their parkingpatterns, creates opportunitiesfor tailored promotions.References(1) Occupiers Liability Act, 1957.(2) Occupiers Liability Act, 1984.(3) National Retail Planning Forum, DTLR,2002, Going to Town: Improving TownCentre Access: a companion guide toPPG6, Llewelyn-Davies, London.

AnnexesAnnexesAnnex ANational PolicyDocumentsThe Integrated Transport White Paper 1998The White Paper set out five main objectives for transport policy, and parkingpolicies at national, regional and local level are designed to support them. Theobjectives are:● To improve safety;●●●To promote accessibility;To contribute to an efficient economy;To promote integration; and● To protect the environment.The main references to parking strategies and management are:● Concern about transport security, of which security in car parks is a keyelement;● Local traffic management as an element of Local Transport Plans;● Powers to charge for road use and workplace parking;● Enforcement, with bus lanes specifically mentioned; and● Powers to control wheel clamping on private land.The White Paper supports explicitly the following aspects of local trafficmanagement as related to parking:● Control of on-street parking to prevent vehicles obstructing traffic orpedestrians;● Parking control, on- and off-street, as a component of plans to reduce theamount of travel in and to congested town centres;● Parking restraint strategies that include packages of measures to improveaccess to town centres by public transport and deter through traffic. A levyon parking in the workplace can substantially reduce the amount of trafficin central areas;● New types of equipment for controlling on-street parking: electronicmeters, pay and display machines operated by magnetic cards, andvoucher systems; and● Parking enforcement by local authorities, penalties used to fundenforcement, scope for more authorities to take up new powers.

176 AnnexesAnnex ABreaking the LogjamThe Government produced a “daughter document” to the 1998 White Paperentitled Breaking the Logjam which provided further information on how localauthorities could introduce road user charging or workplace parking levies. Thepurpose of such charges were stated as being to reduce congestion or trafficgrowth, or to achieve other objectives contained in a Local Transport Plan.Advice was provided for local authorities bringing forward such schemes:“The Government will expect a local traffic authority to consider the contributionthat new charges might make in delivering the objectives contained in a localtransport plan. These plans will enable authorities to take a broader, morestrategic view detailing how integrated transport is to be delivered at the locallevel. New charges may also have a part to play in achieving other objectives,such as air quality objectives established under the National Air QualityStrategy. Authorities will need to be clear about how the introduction of newcharges would fit alongside other policies, including planning and land usepolicies. They will also need to be consistent with local development plans. Thenew generation of Regional Planning Guidance in England will establish theregional framework within which local development and transport plans will beprepared.” (Paragraph 2.9)The other key aspect of the policy was the hypothecation of revenues from localcharging schemes for local transport purposes, for a period of at least 10 years,provided that the scheme is introduced within 10 years of the enablinglegislation coming into force. This marked a departure from traditional practice,and enables local authorities to look upon charging schemes as a source ofrevenue to support a shift of travel demand from car to other modes. Thisarrangement thus allows sticks and carrots to be used simultaneously,potentially overcoming objections to demand restraint.Regional Transport StrategiesLocal authorities are required to take account of regional guidance on planningand transport matters.Regional Transport Strategies (RTS) are part of Regional Planning Guidance(RPG). Responsibility for preparing RPG lies with the Regional Planning Body(RPB).In general RTS in the first round of RPGs did not follow the guidance offered inPPG11, as production was well advanced before its publication. Revisions toRTS were, therefore, required, and the aim was for this to be completed by2004, before the preparation of the next round of full Local Transport Plans(LTPs). To help in this process ‘A Guide to the Preparation of RegionalTransport Strategies’ was published in 2003.Strategic park-and-ride facilitiesThe Government is keen to encourage park-and-ride (P&R) schemes, whichare well conceived and well integrated with other measures to reduce thenumber and length of car journeys and to reduce congestion in urban areas. Insome cases, P&R schemes could be of regional or sub-regional significance,and occasionally even of inter-regional importance. This might particularly applyto rail-based parkway schemes targeted at long distance commuters, orschemes involving the motorway network. Where P&R schemes are of suchsignificance, the RTS will need to advise on the regional or sub-regional criteria,which should be taken into account in their planning to ensure the optimumbenefit from an integrated planning and transport point of view.Managing DemandThe RTS should provide guidance on the regional context for demandmanagement measures, which local authorities may include in their LocalTransport Plans and development plans. Such measures may includeworkplace parking levies and road user charging schemes. The guidanceshould also make clear that restraint measures such as on-street parkingcontrol are also matters for RTS.Many of the Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPG) that follow are beingupdated to become Planning Policy Standards (PPS).

Annexes 177PPG 13 TransportPPG13 is the main policy guidance concerning the role of parking in managingtravel demand, since the availability of car parking has a major influence on thechoice of means of transport. Its overall objectives are:● To promote more sustainable transport choices for both people and formoving freight; and● To promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services bypublic transport, walking and cycling.It sets out a range of policies that broadly state that local authorities should:● Use parking policies, alongside other planning and transport measures, topromote sustainable transport choices and reduce reliance on the car forwork and other journeys.In particular, it calls on local authorities:● To reduce the amount of parking in new development, as part of a packageof planning and transport measures, to promote sustainable travel choices.Local authorities should:● Not require developers to provide more spaces than they themselves wish;● Encourage the shared use of parking, particularly in town centres and aspart of major proposals;● Take care not to create perverse incentives for development to locate awayfrom town centres;● Require developers to provide parking spaces for disabled people;● Introduce on-street parking controls in areas adjacent to major travelgenerating development to minimise the potential displacement of parkingwhere on-site parking is limited;● Require convenient safe and secure cycle parking; and● Consider appropriate provision for motorcycle parking.Local authorities should also:● Adopt on-street measures to complement land uses;● Use car parking charges to encourage the use of alternative modes;● Set out levels and charges for parking, which do not undermine the vitalityof other town centres;● Refuse permission for car parks that do not accord with PPG13, thedevelopment plan or the local transport plan; and● Encourage the redevelopment or re-use of existing parking.PPG13 sets out a range of national maximum parking standards for certaintypes of development, above given thresholds listed in Annex D of PPG13.Table A.1 National Maximum Parking Standards.Use National Maximum Parking Threshold aboveStandards 1 space perwhich standardsquare metre (m 2 ) of grossapplies (grossfloorspace unless otherwise stated floorspace)Food retail 1 space per 18-20m 2 1,000m 2Non food retail 1 space per 20-22m 2 1,000m 2Cinemas & 1 space per 5 seats 1,000m 2ConferenceFacilitiesD2 including 1 space per 22-25m 2 1,000m 2LeisureB1 including 1 space per 35m 2 2,500m 2OfficesHospitals As a general guide 1 space per 4 staff + 2,500m 21 space per 3 daily visitorsHigher & Further As a general guide 1 space per 2 staff 2,500m 2Education (parking for students to be providedwithin this overall figure)Stadia 1 space per 15 seats 1,500m 2

178 AnnexesAnnex ARegional Planning Bodies and local authorities may adopt more rigorousstandards, where appropriate. Maximum parking standards do not apply tosmall developments.PPG 2 Green BeltsAnnex E to PPG13 amended PPG 2 by adding guidance on Park-and-Ride inthe Green Belt. This defines the circumstances in which the location of Parkand-Ridesites in the Green Belt can be acceptable. In particular, it has to bedemonstrated that:● There is no suitable non-Green Belt site;● The proposal is an integral part of local transport policies; and● The scheme can be designed that causes minimal prejudice to Green Beltobjectives.PPG 3 HousingPPG3 makes clear the Government’s determination to meet the country’s futurehousing needs in the most sustainable way possible. Priority should be given tore-using previously developed land in urban areas, bringing empty homes backinto use and converting existing buildings, in preference to the development ofgreenfield sites. PPG3 also requires more efficient use of land through higherdensities and for high quality design. Local authority requirements for parking,especially off-street parking, are a significant determinant of both the amount ofland required for new housing and the quality of design that ensues.Within this context, PPG3 requires local authorities to anticipate the pattern ofparking needs in their area and draw up policies for car parking provision thatwill deliver the approach set out in PPG3. It advises local authorities that carparking standards that result, on average, in development with more than 1:5off-street car parking spaces per dwelling are unlikely to reflect theGovernment’s emphasis on securing sustainable residential environments.PPG3 also advises that parking policies should be framed with good design inmind, and recognise that car ownership varies with income, age, householdtype and the type of housing and its location. They should not be expressed asminimum standards.PPG 6 Town Centres and Retail DevelopmentsPPG6 emphasised the importance of a coherent town centre parking strategyand secure car parks. In particular it stressed that there was a need for:● Attractive, convenient, safe parking for shopping and leisure;● More effective use of town centre car parking;● Town centre strategies to include traffic management and parking policies;● Safe, secure parking close to evening leisure uses shared with daytimeuses;● Parking strategy, which should be comprehensive for town centres; and● Car parks to fit into the townscape;Local authorities should produce a comprehensive strategy and a set of policiesfor the provision and management of parking designed to reinforce theattractiveness and competitiveness of the town centre and to support thelocational policies in PPG13. In doing so they should consult the businesscommunity. Agreement is needed at a strategic level on the parking standardsto be adopted over the whole region if possible, but certainly at structure planlevel. Local authorities should ensure that parking provision at peripheraldevelopments is not set at high levels, which would have the effect ofsignificantly disadvantaging town centres and should also avoid competitionbetween town centres in terms of parking provision. The standards shoulddifferentiate between town centre and out-of-centre locations. Newdevelopments should, in line with PPG13, be subject to car parking standardsexpressed as a maximum provision, including minimum operationalrequirements. This applies to all non-residential uses, including retailing.In town centres, the main need is for parking which serves the centre as awhole, rather than dedicated parking for individual developments. The provisionof car parks can best be achieved through public-private partnerships, both inthe provision and management of car parks. A key role for the local planningauthority will be to ensure that land is allocated for this purpose.

Annexes 179Authorities should assess the overall availability of parking in the central area,on- and off-street, public and private, and develop policies covering all types ofparking, as well as management and pricing policies for public parking. Theyshould achieve better use of existing parking by adopting policies which givepriority to short-term parking for visitors to the town centre, such as shoppers,and discourage long-term parking for commuters. Much of this will need to beachieved through management and pricing policies and conditions or planningagreements, which should be carefully designed to meet local circumstances.Pedestrian access, security, lighting, signing and publicity, management andmaintenance should be improved, especially in multi-storey car parks.PPS 6 Planning for Town CentresPPS6 emerged in 2005 and brings up to date the guidance in PPG6. It focusesparticularly on putting town centres first. Its key objectives are:● To focus development in town centres in an attempt to promote their vitalityand viability;● To improve consumer choice by providing a wide range of shopping, leisureand local services for the whole community;● To ensure that developments are accessible through various transportoptions;● To encourage greater investment in disadvantaged areas to provideimproved services, create more employment and combat social exclusion;● To promote high quality design and make efficient use of land in towncentres to deliver more sustainable developments; and● To encourage cleaner, safer, greener town centres.Further guidance on need and impact assessments; sequential testing anddealing with smaller centres are due to be published later.Local Transport PlansThe Government recognised that the parking proposals in Local TransportPlans could play a key part in delivering transport policy objectives. TheGuidance on Full Local Transport Plans (LTPs), issued in March 2000, statedthat “local authorities need to establish an integrated strategy on parking,utilising planning policies and transport powers”. In assessing LTPs theguidance (Annex D Table 11) states that the following characteristics would beexpected in a good LTP:● Consistent and coherent strategy which brings together planningstandards, charging and on-street controls;● Clear strategy for effective enforcement;● Helps to reduce traffic levels in town centres whilst at the same theensuring enough good quality publicly available parking to support thecontinuing economic viability of retail and leisure investment in theselocations;● Discourages commuting by car, particularly into congested areas such astown centres through charging policies and active management to favourshort term visitor parking;● Where the overall amount, quality and location of publicly owned car parksare managed to favour short term visitor parking; and● Does not encourage developers to seek out-of-town locations.The Government, therefore, expected that the first round of LTPs should showhow local authorities would manage demand and seek to reduce car traveldemand.For the second round of LTPs that are due for submission in July 2005 therequirements would appear to be more flexible and less prescriptive. In newguidance issued in 2004 it will no longer be a requirement to produce a ParkingStrategy as part of the LTP submission.

180 AnnexesAnnex BAnnex BLegislationRoad Traffic Regulation Act 1984Part IV of the 1984 Act covers parking places and deals with the provision ofoff-street parking and parking on roads without payment. Section 32 states thatfor the purpose of relieving or preventing congestion a local authority may:● Provide off-street parking places; and● Authorise the use as a parking place of any part of the highway.Section 35 states that the order must cover:● The use of the parking places and classes of vehicles that can be parked;● Conditions on which the parking places can be used;● Charges to be made for off-street parking places; and● Provisions for the removal of vehicles left in contravention of the order.Sections 43 (within London) and 44 (outside London) give powers to localauthorities to issue licences for the operation of public off-street parking. Theselicences must specify:● The period of the licence;● The maximum number of parking places; and● Any conditions set by the local authority such as the scale of charges orminimum charge, proportion of spaces to be available for any particularcategory of vehicle; and opening and closing times.Section 45 gives local authorities powers to charge for parking on the highwayand section 46 covers the initial charges and excess charges for on-streetparking. Section 47 covers offences relating to designated parking places (i.e.spaces or bays that are marked out for the purpose of parking or loading); theseare criminalised offences.The Local Authority Traffic Orders (Procedure) Regulations 1996 (1996Regulations) provide further details of the order making process and LA Circular5/96 provides guidance on these regulations.The Process for making Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) is set out opposite.The 1996 Regulations stress the importance of consultation when making atraffic order. Part II of the 1996 Regulations covers the procedure before makingan order. This includes consultation, publication of the proposals and theholding of any necessary public inquiry into objections to the order. Part IIIcovers the making of the order and Part IV covers special procedural provisionsfor certain orders including experimental orders. A significant difference is thatconsultation requirements are fewer for an experimental scheme andconsequently the local authority is not bound to hold a public inquiry ifobjections are made. Experimental powers should not, however, be used as acynical means of avoiding thorough local consultation.It is essential that parking restrictions are up to date and enforcement prioritiesare identified and co-ordinated between neighbouring authorities. The BestValue environment in local government means that authorities should regularlyreview their parking restrictions to ensure that they are easily understood,accurate, consistent, and properly signed and marked. This helps to avoid asituation whereby changes occur only incrementally without having a full reviewof the quality and relevance of the parking operation.Use of Surplus FundsThe notion of “surplus” means that both income and expenditure (includingasset costs) must be known. Section 55 of the 1984 Act (as amended), requireslocal authorities to keep an account of income and expenditure relating to theiron-street parking places, as well as income and expenditure relating to thecollection of additional parking charges. Section 55 is modified, in London, byparagraph 5 of Schedule 7 of the 1991 Act and, for authorities outside London,by any decriminalised parking designation order. Section 55(4) identifies the

Annexes 181The Process for making TROs.Receive request for TROVisit site to determine problemsSet up new filePrepare PlanDraft Schedule and pass to ChiefLegal Admin Officer with reasonsConsult local member(2 weeks)Consult Police (2 weeks)Receive Draft OrderArrange Advertisement DatePrepare Site Notices andResidents lettersEnd of consultationPrepare and pass signs and linesschedule to works dept4 weeks Consultation periodObjectionsNo ObjectionsEvaluate ObjectionsInform local memberConsult local memberOverrule Objections and alterproposalsPrepare report to Chief OfficerWithdraw schemePrepare report to Chief OfficerConfirm Order can progressInform ResidentsConfirmation of order and resubmitto Chief Legal Admin OfficerAgree operative date with WorksDeptEndAgree operative dateInform ResidentsAdvertise operative datePlace on siteMonitor site

182 AnnexesAnnex Bpurposes to which any surplus funds can be put. In London this has beenextended by section 282 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 to coverexpenditure that facilitates the implementation of the Mayor’s TransportStrategy. These purposes are specifically identified on page 221 of the Mayor’sTransport Strategy.Section 55 has been amended by Section 95 of the Traffic Management Act2004 to add local environmental schemes to the list of permissible uses ofparking surpluses. Regulations under that Act will also enable high performingAuthorities the freedom to use parking surpluses for any purpose (see also thecomments set out under the Traffic Management Act 2004).The use of revenue from off-street car parks is not constrained in the way thaton-street revenues are, and local authorities can, and often do, use it to helpkeep down the local council tax. Such practice does tend to work against themore holistic approach to parking now required of urban policy makers.Although not specifically required by law, a good practice parking strategy willinclude the management of the on- and off- street parking accounts as a singleentity, within the wider framework of transport and planning policy. This is alsopertinent to DPE finances where increased off-street revenues result from themore effective enforcement of on-street controls, perhaps sufficient to achievea break-even point.Road Traffic Act 1991Decriminalisation of Parking OffencesThe 1991 Road Traffic Act enabled local authorities to take responsibility forenforcing non-endorsable parking offences. Parking offences aredecriminalised, and the penalties are civil debts paid to the council. The counciltherefore gets income from penalties to help fund the cost of enforcement. TheAct required all London authorities to take up the powers by 1st July 1994.Authorities outside London can apply to the Secretary of State for powers todecriminalise parking in all or part of their area. Initially the take-up was slow,with only five authorities having decriminalised by the end of 1997, and none ofthe major cities. However, by 2002 most of the major towns and cities haddecriminalised or were actively planning to do so.Government has encouraged decriminalisation and issued guidance.The Road Traffic Act 1991 sets out the approach to decriminalised parking inLondon (Sections 63 to 77), together with a power (Section 43) to extend theseprovisions outside London. The Act also allows (Section 63) for the Secretaryof State to issue parking guidance covering:● parking charges;● penalty charges;● charges for the removal, storage and disposal of vehicles; and● charges for the release of vehicles from immobilisation (wheel clamps).Guidance on Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE) for London wasprovided in Traffic Management and Parking Guidance for London, publishedby the DETR in 1998. This states that London local authorities should assessparking provision and develop a Parking Strategy, which includes a statementof parking and enforcement priorities and quantifiable standards ofperformance. Responsibility for guidance has now passed to the Mayor ofLondon, through the London Transport Strategy. Even so, the 1998 documentcontains much useful information and greater detail than the London TransportStrategy, and will continue to be useful for authorities both inside and outsideLondon.For authorities outside London adopting DPE, guidance is provided in LocalAuthority Circular 1/95 Guidance on Decriminalised Parking EnforcementOutside London (Welsh Office Circular 26/95), with amendments on chargelevels being given in subsequent circulars.In that Circular objectives for local parking controls were stated. They include:●●●Ensuring effective on-street enforcement to minimise the impact of carparking on other road users;Improving co-ordination between authorities;Introducing, strengthening or extending controlled parking zones in areasof parking congestion;

Annexes 183● Ensuring that parking space is effectively managed by time and price, tomeet traffic and transport objectives;● Providing for the needs of people with a disability;● Providing convenient coach parking and pick-up points at entertainmentand other visitor locations;● Reviewing the cost of public parking so that it restrains non-essentialjourneys by car and reduces the overall demand for parking;● Allocating parking space for specific users according to explicit prioritiesand criteria;● Adequately signing parking and loading controls, while seeking to minimisesign clutter; and● Developing a comprehensive approach to the management of on-streetand off-street parking.The decriminalised parking regime introduced by the 1991 Act created the roleof parking adjudicators, who must be qualified solicitors, to resolve disputesbetween local authorities and motorists. In London, section 73 of the 1991 Actrequires the establishment of a joint committee to appoint these parkingadjudicators. Outside London the Act gives powers, set out in Schedule 3, forthe Secretary of State to designate special parking areas where decriminalisedparking will occur. The National Parking Adjudication Service, established forEngland and Wales, is an independent tribunal where impartial lawyersconsider appeals by motorists issued with Penalty Charge Notices.The system of decriminalised parking brings greater responsibility for parking tolocal authorities who can now not only set parking policy but also ensure itsadequate enforcement, leading to a much stronger commitment and level ofenforcement than in the past.The Traffic Management Act 2004The Act is set out in seven parts with different parts of the Act coming into forceat different times. Implementation is allied mostly to the publication of statutoryguidance. Sections of particular relevance are noted below.Part 2 relates to the new statutory network management duty placed upon localtraffic authorities, which aims to secure and facilitate ‘the expeditiousmovement of traffic’; the appointment of a traffic manager and his powers; jointarrangements exercised by more than one authority; and the specialarrangements that apply in London.Part 6 consolidates existing legislation for civil enforcement (sometimesreferred to as decriminalised enforcement) and extends the number of offencesthat can be enforced in this way. Section 75 is of particular interest to thoseLocal Authorities, which have not yet taken on board civil enforcement ofparking offences in that it gives the Government the power to direct any suchAuthority to apply to acquire these powers. There are also provisions setting outhow a civil enforcement regime should be administered with powers given tothe Lord Chancellor to make regulations about the notification of penaltycharges e.g. by fixing notices and on immobilisation devices. Sections 84-86relates to the additional contraventions that apply to designated specialenforcement areas. In these areas there can be prohibitions on ‘double parking’and parking at dropped footways. Other Sections are framed so that they refereither particularly to London or elsewhere.Part 7 includes amendments to the rules in the Road Traffic Regulation Act1984 concerning how surplus income from parking management can be spent.It may now be spent on: public transport; road improvements; environmentalimprovements (as specified in Section 95); and in special cases where anAuthority is given permission.Workplace Parking Levies and Road User ChargesThe Workplace Parking Levies (WPL) legislation applies to parking spacesused by employees and business visitors to places that are primarilyworkplaces. It also applies to students at places of education. It does not applyto visitors to retail or leisure premises.Section 296 of the 1999 Act gives powers to Transport for London or anyLondon Borough to establish a workplace parking levy scheme in GreaterLondon. Schedule 24 of the 1999 Act sets out the detailed requirements of sucha scheme. A workplace parking levy scheme requires an order to be made so

184 AnnexesAnnex Bthat the local authority can charge the occupier of premises within a designatedarea for the use of workplace parking spaces. Any such scheme must be inconformity with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. An authority can make ascheme individually or jointly with another authority.In the 2000 Act, WPL provisions are set out as a licensing system: the localauthority becomes the licensing authority, which adopts a licensing scheme,and identifies licensed premises, where a licence is issued to the occupier.A licensing scheme must:●●●●Designate the area covered by the licensing scheme;State the days on which, and hours during which, a license is required;Specify the charges payable on licenses (expressed as a specific sum ofmoney for each licensed unit); andState whether or not the licensing scheme is to remain in force indefinitelyand, if is not to remain in force indefinitely, the period for which it is toremain in force.The contents of an individual licence made under a workplace parking licencescheme must:● State the name of the person to whom it is granted;● Identify the premises to which it relates;● Specify the maximum number of motor vehicles (not counting exemptvehicles) which may be parked at those premises at any one time; and● State the amount of the charge paid on the licence and set out thecalculation of that amount.The licensing authority must keep an account of the income and expenditure onthe scheme and as part of the WPL scheme order set out how they intend tore-invest the net proceeds into local transport improvements.The provisions for outside London are contained in sections 178 to 190 of theTransport Act, 2000. These cover a similar process to that in London.

IndexIndexSubjectPage NoAccessibility 56Audit and Fraud Prevention 102Baseline data sources 45Best Value reviews 161BPA model contract 142Bus Lanes/Bus Gates 114Bus Stops 113Business premises 88,123Car commuting 90Car-free and car reduced development 73,75Circular 1/95 34,143,147Circular 1/97 30,31Circular 5/92 143City car clubs 75,136Clamping 145,150,151Coaches 80,125Communal parking 83Consultation leaflets 136-138Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) 40,44,46,49,72,74,78,81-82,108,126,127,131133,134,138,160Conversion of front gardens 84-85Cycles 80,114, 126Decriminalisation of Parking Enforcement (DPE) 47,49,108,111,125,127,141,144,145,147,148,150,Annex BDesign of parking 28,60,76,81,82,83,105,109Development control 26Development Plans and Frameworks 25,26,30,53,70,129,130,141Disabled Badge Holders 28,63,78,119,147Disability Discrimination Act 1995 141Displacement 122-123Exhibitions 138-139

186 IndexIndexSubjectPage NoFixed Penalty Notice (FPN) 111-112Focus groups 136Footways 125,127Forums 136Free parking 91-92Greater London Authority Act 1999 32Home Zones 63,82Hotels/Guest Houses 125Human Rights Act 1998 141,146Immobilisation (see also clamping) 145-146Internet 103,173Local Transport Plans (LTPs) 31,37,38,41,42,43,45,53,54,55,56,58,68,128,129,130,133,155,160,Annex ALocation of parking 76Lorry parking 79,125Maps and Guides 170-171Methods of on-street charging 115-117Mobile phones 174Motorcycles 80,101,102,126New non-residential development 72-73New residential development 73Notice to Owner (NtO) 146,147Notice of Rejection 148Occupiers Liability Acts 170Off-street parking 69,75,97-102,150,153,155,158-160On-street parking 59,68,75,86-87,105,119,124-127,155,160-161,169On-street loading 118Ownership, control and management of car parks 69,163-164Park-and-ride59,60,71-72,103-104,Annex AParking charges 33-34,49,70,89-90,98-99,115-117,156,157Parking conditions 30Parking contributions (formerly obligations) 30-31,90,169Parking duration surveys 44-45Parking habit surveys 45Parking for disabled people 79,119Parking: other surveys 45Parking privileges 117-118Parking shop 169-170Parking standards21-22,26,76-77, Annex AParking surveys 44Parking use and accumulation surveys 44

Index 187SubjectPage NoParking zones 121-122Pay machines – on exit 101Payment systems 100Pay-and-display 100Pay-on-entry 100Pay-on-exit 101Pay-on-foot 100Pedestrian crossing places 111-112Permitted Parking Area/Special Parking Area Order (PPA/SPA) 108,144,145,150Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) 112,144,145,146,147,148,153,154,161Planning Policy Guidance 2 (PPG2)*Annex APlanning Policy Guidance 3 (PPG3)*34,61,68,73,Annex APlanning Policy Guidance 6 (PPG6)*58,Annex APlanning Policy Guidance 7 (PPG7)* 65Planning Policy Guidance 13 (PPPG13)* 21,22,26,27,28,30,65,79,103, Annex A*PPGs are gradually being updated and renamed Planning Policy Statements (PPS)Pre-paymentxxPrivate parking 70,104-105,151,162-163Radio 173-174Red routes 63,88-89Removal of vehicles 145-146,150Regional Transport Strategies32,39,40,58,Annex AResidential parking 34-35,82,87Residents’ parking permits 35,87,119-121,157,169Residents’ visitors 123Restrictions on traffic flow 112-113Retailers’ concerns 115Road Traffic Act 1991 32-33,47,58,144,145,147,148,150,158,Annex BRoad Traffic Regulation Act 1984 32-33,130,144,145,150,157,Annex BRoad safety 62,110-111Road user charges33,105,Annex BRural areas 65School entrances 111Security 62,84,102-103Security Industries Act 2001 151Shopmobility 79,103Short-stay parking 114-115Signs and road markings 109,143,171-173Special permits 124Special provisions 124Sports Stadia 127Stakeholder groups 134-136

188 IndexIndexSubjectPage NoStated Preference surveys 136Station car parks 72Street Markets and Street Trading 124Structured Questionnaires 136Surplus funds34,156,157,158,Annex BTariffs 89,90,98,99,100Taxis 81,127Ticket design 169Traffic Advisory Leaflet 5/95 79Traffic Advisory Leaflet 6/99 81Traffic Management Act 2004 21,32-33,59,112,113,144-145,157-158,Annex BTraffic Management Orders (TMOs) 142,143,144,145,148Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) 32-33,107-111,113,117-118,124,125,126129,130,132,142,143,144,145,148,Annex BTraffic Signs Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD) 81,82,104,106,109,119,123,126,143,Transport Act 2000 21,32Transport Assessments 21,27,28,29,30,42,56,68,77Transport White Paper 6,21,Annex ATravel Plans 28,29,31,42,56,60,68,169Workplace parking levies33,60,70,104-105,Annex B