Decriminalised Parking Enforcement Report
DECRIMINALISED PARKING ENFORCEMENT
1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1 To inform Cabinet of the findings of Stage 2 of the Decriminalised Parking Enforcement Study
1.2 To seek approval to proceed to Stage 3 of the study and to implement Decriminalised Parking Enforcement in Sheffield.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 With the exception of on-street pay and display parking places, all on -street parking enforcement is currently provided by South Yorkshire Police. The Police employ 31 Traffic Wardens across the whole City. Since the introduction of the Local Transport Plan, it has become clear that additional enforcement resources are required if the targets and objectives of the Plan are to be met. In particular, additional enforcement is key to the proper operation of the proposed residents' parking zone. However, parking enforcement is not a key objective in the South Yorkshire Policing Plan and they have indicated that no additional resources will be made available. Indeed it is likely that resources will continue to decline over time.
2.2 In view of this, the Local Authorities in South Yorkshire are investigating the possibility of decriminalising parking enforcement to enable enforcement to be undertaken by personnel acting on behalf of the Local Authorities.
2.3 The 1991 Road Traffic Act empowers the Secretary of State to designate Special Parking Areas (SPAs) in which most non-endorsable on-street parking and loading offences are decriminalised. Within these areas, enforcement ceases to be the responsibility of the Police and becomes the responsibility of the Local Authority. Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) issued by the Police and Traffic Wardens are replaced by Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) issued by Council employed parking attendants.
2.4 The main advantages of Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE) are:
• Local authorities are able to ensure that parking policies are effectively implemented and enforced, with consequent benefits in improved traffic and public transport flow, road safety, use of parking places and environmental benefits.
• The integration of all enforcement and parking policy provides opportunities for better monitoring and use of enforcement, enabling it to become more responsive to public needs and the authority’s requirements.
• Local authorities can use the revenue received from penalty charges to fund enforcement, adjudication costs etc and any surplus remaining can be used for transport related projects.
2.5 The Council is currently progressing the phased implementation of a large residents' parking scheme to the west of the City centre. The current situation is that whilst City Council parking attendants will be able to enforce parking contraventions in marked bays, enforcement of parking contraventions on yellow lines will remain the responsibility of the Police. However, should the Council decide to introduce DPE then the Council's parking attendants would be able to enforce the majority of parking offences. This would improve the operation of the residents' parking scheme.
2.6 On 8th April 2002 Cabinet approved the use of LTP funding to pay for limited bus lane and parking enforcement by the Police on 4 key corridors. This is having a positive impact on these corridors in terms of improving journey times for all road users. DPE would avoid the need to make such provision in the longer term.
2.7 The South Yorkshire Authorities have been working with consultant Colin Buchanan and Partners to investigate the feasibility and viability of introducing DPE in the four districts of South Yorkshire. Members were informed of the findings of Stage 1 (the first stage of a 3 stage study) at the 23rd October 2002 Cabinet meeting. Prior to this, officers held a seminar in Howden House to inform interested parties (including certain South Yorkshire Members) of the findings in more detail.
2.8 Cabinet agreed that Sheffield should proceed to Stage 2 of the study. This report summarises the findings of Stage 2 of the study in relation to Sheffield. In November, a seminar was again held in Howden House to discuss the findings with interested parties.
3.0 STAGE 2 OF THE STUDY
3.1 Activities undertaken as part of Stage 2 have included:
• Preparing a draft application to the Secretary of State for the powers to implement DPE. The final version must be submitted at least 7 months prior to the implementation date.
• The National Parking Appeals Service has been made aware that the Authorities of South Yorkshire are considering implementing DPE.
• ParkMap (a computerised GIS system) has been installed and all the Traffic Regulation Orders have been transferred from paper records onto this system. This process resulted in the identification of a number of anomalies which are being resolved. In preparation for DPE it is vital that the authority has a complete and accurate record of the TROs that will be enforced to ensure the validity of the PCNs issued and to enable staff to respond to representations and appeals.
• A full review of all relevant road markings and signs has been undertaken. A defects schedule is being prepared to enable remedial works to take place over the next year.
• Buchanans have examined various options for processing PCNs and recommend, in the light of experience from other authorities, that this a function which should be carried out in house as part of an integrated service. PCN processing is a Legal procedure that requires fair, consistent, reasonable and timely responses to correspondence and representations. Experience elsewhere is that this is best achieved by removing interfaces and developing a culture with a single service standard (see para 8.5).
• Buchanans have analysed the staffing requirements and have recommended a proposed structure (See Appendix 1).
• Accommodation requirements have been examined. Consideration was given to creating a Parking Shop in a central position in the City Centre to enable the public to access a range of parking services including purchasing residents parking permits, disputing the issue of a PCN, obtaining maps etc.. However, it was felt that this would duplicate some of the services provided by First Point. Also, the experience of a number of authorities that have implemented DPE suggests that a Parking Shop would be unnecessary. Notwithstanding this, new premises are required to accommodate the increase in staff levels and vehicles. Efforts are now being made to acquire a site outside the central area of the City Centre but within the Inner Ring Road.
• The IT requirements have been identified including software, hardware, internal interfaces (eg accounting systems), external interfaces (eg with DVLA) etc. These will be investigated in more detail during the next stage.
• The business plan produced as part of Stage 1 has been refined in the light of further information and analysis. (See Section 4)
4.0 BUSINESS PLAN
4.1 In terms of expenditure, Buchanans have analysed the extra over position as compared to the current situation. Account has been taken of start up costs such as upgrading notice processing systems, reviewing the Traffic regulation Orders (TROs), publicity, training etc and additional operating costs such as staffing (for enforcement and processing), processing, adjudication etc. Buchanans have stressed that DPE will be particularly demanding on the authority's own officers from now until implementation, and that consideration should be given at an early stage as to the resources required to cope with both DPE and existing workloads. This issue will be examined as part of Stage 3 of the study.
4.2 With regard to enforcement costs, in order to determine the number of parking attendants required, Buchanans first analysed Sheffield’s waiting restrictions by type and by geographic location. This enabled an estimate to be made of the total enforcement time required. This was then added to the time needed to enforce the parking bays and the off street car parks in order to calculate the overall level of parking attendant resource required. An allowance was then made for absence (such as training, sickness, non-productive time etc.) to derive the total number of parking attendants required.
4.3 For Sheffield, it is estimated that 55 parking attendants will be required to provide a reasonable level of enforcement throughout the City. In addition there would need to be a Parking Manager, Assistant Managers, Admin Assistants to undertake the processing of notices and an officer to deal with Traffic Regulation Order issues. In total, the overall establishment would need to be about 77 people strong (see Appendix 1). This is 50 more than the current position in terms of City Council personnel but not that dissimilar from the current combined City Council and Police resources. The current enforcement personnel consist of the 31 Police Traffic Wardens and the City Council’s 18 parking attendants
4.4 In terms of income it has been necessary to estimate the likely number of PCNs that will be issued on an average day which enables a projection to be made of the total volume of PCNs arising. A number of sources of data have been used including current issue levels, information from compliance surveys (having made allowances for the reduction that will occur with a reasonable level of enforcement) and comparisons with similar authorities. This resulted in an estimate of 81,000 PCNs per year.
4.5 The business plan includes a cashflow forecast which indicates that an annual surplus will be generated and that by part way through the 5th year of operation the start up costs will have been recovered. This is based upon the maximum currently permitted PCN rate of £60 which is used by the majority of authorities that have implemented DPE. Cabinet was advised of the need to use this rate as part of the Stage 1 report and this has been confirmed during the Stage 2 investigations. The £60 would be discounted to £30 for prompt payment at which level it would match Sheffield’s current discounted ECN rate and also the FPN rate currently charged by the Police. The cash flow forecast excludes the impact of inflation on items of expenditure. If inflation is included then this would extend the payback period significantly. However, it is envisaged that some of the income from the Council’s existing car parking operation could be used to cover the start up costs (see para 9.2).
4.6 Consideration has been given to the financial viability of a phased approach whereby only 50% of the additional parking attendants required are initially deployed. This results in a slightly improved financial position and could therefore be considered to be a low risk option but clearly the level of enforcement would be lower.
4.7 In terms of delivery, Buchanans consider that as the City Council already has an efficient, well run car parking section, dealing with significant numbers of Excess Charge Notices (ECNs) resulting from the combined on and off street activities, then the introduction of DPE could easily be introduced by expanding the existing operations. Buchanans have examined other models for delivering the enforcement and processing functions but believe they should be retained “in-house” for the following reasons:
• The Council’s legal duty to consider representations by motorists
• The close inter-relationship between other aspects of PCN processing and the consideration of representations
• Experience of other authorities of the practical advantages of undertaking processing and enforcement in-house. Indeed some of the authorities that originally outsourced the enforcement function have brought it back in-house.
5.0 RISK
5.1 The key element of the financial model is the estimate of the level of PCNs issued annually. The model assumes that the deployment of 55 parking attendants will result in 81,000 PCNs being issued. This is approximately 70% more than the current combined level of FPNs and ECNs issued by the Police and the City Council. However, as the Police traffic wardens undertake a variety of activities it is inevitable that they issue fewer notices per person than the City Council parking attendants. Under DPE the parking attendants will concentrate on parking contraventions and therefore the estimated level of PCNs appears to be a reasonable estimate.
5.2 A further risk in terms of the level of PCNs issued is that increased enforcement will lead to greater compliance and that the level of PCNs issued will reduce over time. However, in general, this has not been the experience of other authorities that have introduced DPE. Furthermore, the phased approach referred to in para 4.6 would reduce the financial risk allowing the number of PCNs issued to be monitored and an informed decision taken as to the rate at which the number of parking attendants employed is increased.
5.3 Inflation on expenditure items will erode the surplus year on year until by the end of year 7 the DPE operating surplus will have reduced to zero. However, it is considered likely that before this point is reached, Government will have increased the PCN value and the operation will continue to generate a surplus.
5.4 The financial model also assumes that under DPE the parking attendants will continue to enforce off street car parks in the City Centre so that the same parking attendants will be able to enforce all on street and off street parking offences thus enabling economies of scale and Best Value to be achieved.
5.5 The 1991 Road Traffic Act does not provide for “re-criminalisation” of parking offences once DPE is implemented ie there is no mechanism for going back.
6.0 CONSULTATION/COMMUNICATION
6.1 A representative from South Yorkshire Police regularly attends the South Yorkshire DPE project group meetings. South Yorkshire Police fully support the decriminalisation of on street parking but would prefer that all four authorities implement decriminalisation on as close a timescale as possible. There is clearly a risk that not all of the South Yorkshire authorities decide to implement DPE on a similar timescale (one or more of the districts may decide not to proceed at all) in which case it will be necessary to have further discussions with the Police as to whether they would support applications covering less than the whole South Yorkshire area. Officers in the other authorities are taking similar reports to their Cabinets over the next few weeks so the position should soon become clearer.
6.2 Draft letters have been prepared to be sent to all neighbouring authorities and the Highways Agency to inform them of Sheffield’s proposals.
6.3 As part of Stage 3 a publicity campaign will be developed and implemented, the aim being to deliver the clear and consistent message that the Council is introducing and will operate DPE to support Transport policies and to derive the benefits that better enforcement can achieve.
7.0 THE SOUTH YORKSHIRE POSITION
7.1 The 1991 Act requires each South Yorkshire local authority to implement DPE separately ie an application for a single SPA covering the whole County is not possible. However, should one or more of our South Yorkshire partners decide to implement DPE there may be opportunities for joint working and cost savings. This can only be determined once it is established which authorities will be proceeding to DPE. As mentioned previously, the other South Yorkshire districts are also currently deciding whether to proceed to Stage 3 ie implementation.
8.0 OTHER ISSUES
8.1 Implementation Date In view of the difficulties being experienced by the Police in providing an adequate level of enforcement, officers are keen that DPE be implemented as soon as possible. A target implementation date of Spring 2005 is proposed as this will provide sufficient time to enable all the necessary tasks to be undertaken and systems procured and installed. This would also coincide with the timetable currently being considered by the other South Yorkshire Districts.
8.2 Special Parking Area (SPA) Application This is an application to the Secretary of State for the powers to introduce DPE. It is recommended that a draft application is made at least 7 months prior to the DPE start date to ensure that any issues are resolved before the formal application (at least 5 months prior to the start date). Included within the application are the roads to be excluded from the DPE area. Currently, the only roads within the Sheffield boundary being considered for exclusion from the application are the M1 (together with the lower deck of the Tinsley viaduct), the Sheffield Parkway, Mosborough Parkway and the Stocksbridge Bypass as it is more practical for the Police to continue to enforce these roads. In addition, some of these are Trunk Roads and are therefore the responsibility of the Highways Agency. Within the application, the intention is to seek powers to clamp and remove vehicles although it is not proposed to implement these at the commencement of DPE. The Council’s intended PCN exemption and cancellation policies also need to be included in the application. Suggested policies are set out in Appendix 2 for Cabinet’s approval.
8.3 IT Requirements This is a key issue in order to efficiently process the anticipated levels of PCNs. As part of Stage 2, Buchanans have identified the requirement in terms of software, hardware and interfaces (eg with DVLA, the National Parking Appeals Service etc). A project group is now being established with Liberata to examine options and procure the most appropriate systems.
8.4 TUPE South Yorksire Police currently consider that, should DPE be implemented, they can offer suitable alternative employment to their existing Traffic Wardens. However, some wardens may wish to be transferred to the City Council under TUPE. This is not considered to be a significant issue in view of the likely numbers involved. See also below in relation to Liberata staff.
8.5 The Element of the Processing Work currently undertaken by Liberata If Buchanan’s recommendation that processing PCNs is a function which should be carried out in house as part of an integrated service is implemented, then this would result in the element of work currently being undertaken by Liberata in relation to excess charge notice processing being removed from the overall Liberata contract. There would be a small financial penalty in proceeding with this equivalent to Liberata’s loss of profit on this function but this is unlikely to be significant in terms of the benefits that would be achieved. In addition, those posts in Liberata directly engaged processing procedure (3.5 full time equivalents) would need to be transferred to Parking Services under the TUPE arrangements. Should the decision be taken to implement DPE then this issue will be examined in more detail.
8.6 National Parking Adjudication Service Joint Committee (NPASJC) It will be necessary for the City Council to identify an Elected Member to serve on this committee which will meet on up to 2 occasions per year. The principal purpose of the committee is to appoint independent adjudicators to deal with appeals.
8.7 Bailiffs Where the motorist fails to pay or complete a statutory declaration, the Local authority can arrange for a certified bailiff to seize and sell goods belonging to the motorist to the value of the outstanding amount, together with costs. The option of using a bailiff is considered essential to prevent abuse of the system and it is understood that they are used in all DPE areas.
9.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
9.1 The cash flow forecast relating to the implementation of DPE in Sheffield is described in Section 4 of this report and indicates that an annual surplus will be generated sufficient to recover the start up costs within the first few years of operation. Implementing DPE requires the establishment of a separate car parking account which in effect would be an extension of the Council's existing car parking account. A copy of the annual accounts must be sent to the Secretary of State each year. Any surplus on the account has to dispersed in accordance with Section 55 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 which allows for the surplus to be used to cover deficits incurred on the car parking account in the preceding 4 years (and any surplus over and above this to be used for transport related projects).
9.2 This suggests that should the Council decide to implement DPE then the start up costs incurred will be covered by future surpluses. However, as the Council's car parking account already shows a surplus each year, it appears that this would need to be used to cover the start up costs. The start up costs to be incurred in 04/05 are likely to be of the order of £550,000 and in addition £250,000 is required to bring existing signs and lines up to the necessary standard. Thus although DPE should be self financing overall, the City Council will need to consider how to deal with the cash flow issue which could arise during the first years of operation. This issue is being considered as part of an overall strategy for car parking which will be reported to Members in due course. However, it is envisaged that the likely level of income from the Council’s existing car parking operation will enable the start up costs to be covered by the end of 05/06 without any adverse effect on the Council’s overall budgetary position although there would be a cash flow problem in 04/05. Discussions are ongoing with Corporate Finance on this matter.
10.0 NEXT STAGES
10.1 Should Members decide to implement DPE, the following pieces of work will be carried out as part of Stage 3.
· Further investigation into a practical implementation date
· Completion of SPA application and submission to Secretary of State
· Remedial work to signs and lines
· Procurement of IT software and hardware
· Procurement of other equipment including vehicles, uniforms, radios, cameras etc
· Recruitment and training of staff
· Location of suitable premises and refitting as necessary
· Development and implementation of a communication strategy
· Appointment of bailiffs
· Establishment of interfaces with DVLA, Traffic Enforcement Centre, NPAS etc
10.2 In order to undertake the above it will be necessary to employ a consultant to advise and assist.
10.3 The consultants as part of the original tender process were asked to provide proposals for consultancy services and fixed cost prices for Stage 3 in addition to Stage 1 and 2. The tenders received were evaluated on the basis of the consultants' overall proposals for Stages 1, 2 and 3, in accordance with the corporate procurement strategy, to ensure best value.
10.4 It is therefore recommended that the current contract with Colin Buchanan and Partners be extended to include the work required under Stage 3.
11.0 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
11.1 There are no equal opportunity and environmental implications relating to this report.
12.0 PROPERTY IMPLICATIONS
12.1 Should Cabinet decide to implement DPE then it will be necessary to identify an alternative location for the Parking Services operation (see para 3.1).
13.0 CONCLUSIONS
13.1 Nothing has arisen from Stage 2 of the study that impacts on the fundamental conclusion from Stage 1, that DPE is both feasible and financially viable for Sheffield City Council.
13.2 The financial assessment must also be considered in the light of the stated desire for the Police to withdraw from parking enforcement to concentrate on more core policing activities. DPE will give the City Council the resources and flexibility to make parking enforcement a more effective part of its overall transportation objectives
14.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Cabinet is recommended to:
Cabinet is recommended to:
14.1 Confirm that DPE should be implemented within Sheffield.
14.2 Grant delegated authority to the Executive Director of Development, Environment and Leisure to take all necessary actions to implement DPE at the earliest possible time including:
• the retention of Buchanans to act as consultants during the lead up to DPE implementation and post implementation (ie Stage 3)
• appointment to the structure described in Appendix 1 at the appropriate time
• the procurement of all necessary IT systems, hardware etc
• in conjunction with the Cabinet Member for DEL, submitting the SPA application to the Secretary of State
• appointment of certified bailiffs
14.3 Approve the cancellation and exemption policies set out in Appendix 2 for inclusion in the SPA application.
14.4 Confirm the use of the £60 PCN discounted to £30 for early payment.
14.5 Delegate powers to the Director of Legal and Admin Services in consultation with the Cabinet Member for DEL to appoint an Elected Member to serve on NPASJC (see para 8.6)
D Curtis
Head of Development Services
Development, Environment and Leisure 3rd November 2003
Appendix 1
Proposed Parking Services Organisational Structure
(Existing numbers in brackets)
1 No. Parking Manager (1)
2 No. Assistant Parking Manager (1)
1 No. Enforcement Manager (1)
6 No. Senior Parking Attendants (3)
55 No. Parking Attendants (18)
11 No. Processing assistants (3 excluding Liberata staff)
1 No. TRO support (0)
Appendix 2
Exemptions, Waivers and Dispensations, and other Policy Issues
The existing parking exemptions, waivers and dispensations contained within the TROs have been reviewed and are summarised below - no significant (with the exception of the BMA dispensation below) changes are proposed for the DPE operation.
Exemptions:
· Fire, police and ambulance vehicles.
· A vehicle belonging to the military or visiting military forces.
· A vehicle that has been told to wait by a police constable in uniform or has had to stop in order to avoid an accident.
· Blue disabled badge holders (exemptions described in DfT leaflet “The Blue Badge Scheme” T/INF/222).
Dispensations and Waivers
· Permit to park for specified period and for specified purpose on yellow lines where no reasonable alternative parking is available. Permit must be clearly displayed in windscreen of vehicle at all times.
· Statutory Undertakers works. Gas, electricity, water, drains and communications companies carrying out emergency works in the highway or on properties adjacent to the highway where no reasonable alternative is available.
· Loading/unloading or delivering/collecting goods in the course of trade or business (max stay 30 minutes) on yellow lines or designated parking bays unless there are kerb stripes, a temporary ban on loading, bus clearway or school keep clear markings.
· A vehicle prevented from moving by circumstances beyond the driver’s control (breakdowns) for as long as is reasonable for the driver to arrange for tow away.
· Allow BMA Badge holders to park on a yellow line where no reasonable alternative parking is available or in a designated bay for 30 minutes after the time paid for provided information relating to the premises being visited is displayed at all times. This waiver does not apply in the vicinity of the holder's place of work
Policy Issues
The Council will:
· re-offer the discount if the first informal letter is received within 14 days and reinstate the discount when replying to the first formal representations.
· extend response to correspondence times to allow for mail delays;
· accept payment by cheque, 24 hour debit / credit card, at all council payment points, by web and mobile phone.
· consider representations whether formal or informal on the basis of :
Ø not to judge whether the breach of the order arose through neglect, mistake, error or any other reason but on the basis of the published conditions of use. This policy will avoid the inconsistencies that may arise from decisions based on arbitrary judgements regarding the cause of the breach of the regulations. Compassionate grounds will not extend to those engaged in charity work or in cases of financial hardship.
Ø not to press for payment when a certified serious medical condition or lapse in memory occasioned by recent domestic trauma recommend withdrawal of the charge on compassionate grounds.
Ø where a PCN is issued for overstay, not to press for payment in circumstances where a person is providing medical assistance to a third party and this is shown to be part of their duties as a medical practitioner.
· will issue a PCN:
Ø to all vehicles observed to be parked not in compliance with the regulations.
Ø the issue of a PCN will follow the recording of the details of the contravention in a pocket book and on the charge notice itself. (no observation period before commencing to record the details of the offence in the pocket book will be required).