Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
North Yorkshire Civil Parking Enforcement - 2007.08 Annual Reports

North Yorkshire Civil Parking Enforcement - 2007.08 Annual Reports

Ratings: (0)|Views: 0 |Likes:
Published by parkingeconomics

More info:

Published by: parkingeconomics on Nov 22, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/10/2014

pdf

text

original

 
NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNTY COUNCILBUSINESS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICESREPORT TO EXECUTIVE MEMBERS18 SEPTEMBER 2008CIVIL PARKING ENFORCEMENT – 2007/08 ANNUAL REPORTS1.0PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1To note the annual reports for 2007/08 produced by Harrogate BoroughCouncil (HBC) and Scarborough Borough Council (SBC) covering civil parkingenforcement (CPE).
2.0RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS
2.1Consideration of this report has no direct staffing or other resourceimplications.
3.0BACKGROUND
3.1As a result of changes brought in nationally through the implementation of Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA 2004) on 31 March 2008 thesystem of decriminalised parking enforcement (DPE) became known as civilparking enforcement (CPE) and for consistency all terms in the remainder of this report will use the terms associated with CPE.3.2CPE currently operates in the Harrogate and Scarborough districts of thecounty with enforcement carried out by HBC and SBC on behalf of the CountyCouncil in accordance with agreements that the County Council has enteredinto with both councils. Income from on-street charges and penalty chargenotices is used to fund the operation of the Harrogate and Scarborough CPEschemes and any remaining surplus is spent on transport and highwayimprovements in accordance with Section 55 of the Road Traffic RegulationAct 1984 (as amended by the TMA 2004).3.3Under the terms of the TMA 2004, enforcement authorities are required toreport annually to the Department for Transport on enforcement statistics andto publish them. The reports attached as Appendices 1 and 2 are the reportsproduced by HBC and SBC respectively which provide an overview of theperformance of the service for the 2007/08 financial year and therefore fulfilthe reporting requirements.
NYCC – 18.09.2008 – Exec MembersCivil Parking Enforcement – 2007/08 Annual Reports/1
 
4.0DISCUSSION
4.1The reports provide financial, operational and performance information on theCPE operations in Harrogate and Scarborough. The production andpublication of similar reports by authorities across the country will allow theCounty Council to make comparisons against national performance statisticsand will provide a further means of monitoring the performance of both HBCand SBC. The SBC operation only became operational on 31 July 2007therefore a direct comparison with HBC for the 2007/08 financial year is notpossible. When making comparisons, it must also be borne in mind that thetwo areas covered by CPE are quite different in terms of geographical size,seasonal differences in traffic patterns and the nature and extent of varioustypes of traffic restrictions.Finance4.2Table 1 in both reports shows that the CPE operations generated a surplus of £1,282,960 and £298,902 in Harrogate and Scarborough respectively. Thesurplus will be used to fund expenditure in accordance with Section 55 of theRoad Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (as amended by the Traffic ManagementAct 2004). It should be noted that CPE was only in operation in Scarboroughfor 8 months of the 2007/08 financial year.Operational and Performance Statistics4.3Table 3 in both reports shows that the payment rate for penalty charge notices(PCN) issued for parking contraventions in Harrogate is approximately 76%which is higher than the figure of approximately 56% for Scarborough. Part of the reason for this difference is the relatively short period of time that the SBCoperation has been in effect and that as a consequence there were 1,700outstanding cases in Scarborough that had only recently been registered withthe Traffic Enforcement Centre compared with 758 in Harrogate. The figurefor Scarborough represents approximately 11% of all PCNs whilst theHarrogate figure represents 4% of all PCNs.4.4Table 5 shows a variation between HBC and SBC when considering the topten reasons for issuing a PCN. In Harrogate 31.5% of PCNs were issued for parking in a residential disc parking place without displaying a valid disc. Incontrast in Scarborough this offence accounted for only 11.17% of PCNs.The highest proportion of PCNs issued in Scarborough were for parking ondouble yellow lines which accounted for 24.08% of the overall total comparedwith only 5.3% in Harrogate. Direct comparisons such as this will becomemore useful as the SBC operation matures however, the differing extent andnature of traffic restrictions and behaviour will always have to be taken intoaccount.
NYCC – 18.09.2008 – Exec MembersCivil Parking Enforcement – 2007/08 Annual Reports/2
 
4.5Table 7 shows that the cancellation rates for HBC and SBC are broadlysimilar at 20.2% and 22.77% respectively. Table 8 provides details of formalappeals that were made to the Parking Adjudicator and it can be seen that inScarborough a total of 3 appeals were successful compared with one inHarrogate. A greater number of appeals were refused in Scarborough (16)when compared with Harrogate (10). The number of appeals that wereuncontested by SBC (12) was much higher than the figure for HBC (1) andthe reasons for this will be explored further with both.4.6The information provided in the reports provides some useful initialcomparisons between the CPE operations in Harrogate and Scarboroughhowever, it must be remembered that the SBC scheme was only in operationfor two thirds of the 2007/08 financial year and therefore direct comparisonsare not possible. It must also be remembered that the two areas covered byCPE are quite different in terms of geographical size, seasonal differences intraffic patterns and the nature and extent of various types of traffic restrictions.The publication of national statistics in due course will allow the CountyCouncil to place the performance of both the SBC and HBC operations in amuch wider and useful context than is possible by making comparisonsbetween them both.
5.0CORPORATE PRIORITIES
5.1The effective management of on-street parking is consistent with pursuing theCounty Council’s corporate priorities.
6.0CONSULTATION
6.1This is not a matter which requires further consultation.
7.0COMMUNICATION
7.1This report and the associated appendices require publishing on the CountyCouncil website and making available in libraries.
8.0RECOMMENDATION
8.1It is recommended that:(i)Executive Members note the annual reports for 2007/08 produced byHarrogate Borough Council (HBC) and Scarborough Borough Council(SBC) covering civil parking enforcement (CPE).(ii)This report and the associated appendices are published on the CountyCouncil website and made available libraries.
NYCC – 18.09.2008 – Exec MembersCivil Parking Enforcement – 2007/08 Annual Reports/3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->