Annual Parking and

Enforcement Report

October 2007
Foreword
I am very pleased to present Camden’s first Annual Parking and Enforcement Report.
The Partnership Administration set out its agreed policy agenda in June 2006. We have been
responsible for delivering on a number of the policy commitments including: offering a fair deal
on parking for residents; improving our environment – globally and locally; involving residents in
key decisions and protecting their interest; making our street environment more attractive; and
improving local transport.
We want to make Camden a borough of opportunity and transport has a key role to play in
delivering that aspiration. Our work will focus on delivering a sustainable Camden which manages
its growth; provides a strong economy; and a Camden which is safe, inclusive and vibrant. In
doing so we hope to be at the forefront of innovation as far as transport delivery is concerned.
This we will achieve while employing an evidence-based strategy; testing whether the methods
and new ideas used actually work; and we will remain willing to make changes on the basis of
the data and the input we receive from our residents, businesses and visitors to our borough.
This report focuses on what we have done in the sometimes controversial area of parking. We will
increase transparency by publishing this parking report annually and continue to make
improvements to the parking regime by promoting fairness for Camden residents and businesses.
Sustainability is one of the key priorities for the Partnership Administration; it permeates the
services we provide and is embedded in Camden’s transport policies. We have helped people to
take responsibility for their own actions, especially in relation to tackling climate change and
promoting sustainability. In parking we have agreed to introduce charging for residents’ parking
permits on the ‘polluter pays’ principle, where the fees are based proportionately on the
emissions that vehicles produce. We are also developing a range of concessions for
electric vehicles.
I am committed to ensuring that the Partnership Administration’s aspiration of making Camden a
more listening Council is at the heart of what we do. We need to make sure we treat and
communicate with people professionally and in a caring manner. To this end we have carried out
training sessions which started in Parking Services and are now being rolled out across the
Culture and Environment Directorate. This has improved the tone of our correspondence and our
responsiveness, which in turn has delivered results on the ground. The work is not complete, but
people have noticed a change in attitude. We have also implemented a number of changes that
have embedded this commitment to listening. We have ceased clamping except for persistent
evaders, stopped towing from Residents’ and pay & display bays unless the vehicle has been
there for 24 hours, and introduced a seven-day grace period for removals if people forget to
renew their residents’ permit. We have introduced visitor’s permits to the CPZs south of Euston
Road where residents were crying out for them. We are consulting on a borough-wide review of
CPZ boundaries, hours and days of operation. We have trialled cashless pay & display machines
with Westminster Council and are in the process of introducing this facility in high tariff areas.
We have improved how we manage parking suspensions by introducing a new mobile patrol to
remove redundant suspensions and we now make every attempt to reduce the hours of the day
and days of the week for which a suspension is in place. We have introduced innovative e-alerts
to residents to inform them of forthcoming suspensions. Our Suspension Notices have been
altered a number of times following advice and ideas received from residents. In Parking, as well
as other fields, I firmly believe the Council does not have a monopoly on good ideas.

i
The Partnership Administration was clear in its policy agreement that we had to be fairer to
residents in relation to parking and the above changes demonstrate this. The fines for parking
and traffic contraventions set by London Councils on behalf of all London Boroughs have been
criticised for not being ‘proportionate’ to the infringement concerned. The Council has supported
the development of differential penalty charges for different contraventions and has listened to
what our residents and businesses have said about which parking and traffic contraventions they
regard as being ‘more’ or ‘less’ serious in influencing the new system of differential charges being
introduced by London Councils.
Being fairer about how our Parking Service is delivered does not mean that we will be softer on
enforcement. Persistent evaders who regularly flaunt parking and traffic regulations are still liable
to have their vehicles clamped or towed. The enforcement of parking and traffic regulations
enables traffic to flow more smoothly and improves road safety. I am delighted that in 2006 total
road casualty statistics in Camden fell below 1,000 for the first time.
We also want to make Camden a better place to do business in. We are continuing our rolling
programme of waiting and loading reviews of town centres and are making improvements to
parking facilities in Tottenham Court Road, Holborn and Fortess Road.
A lot has changed in Parking over the last year and I hope residents and businesses are feeling
the benefits. There is still work to be done, but this year’s achievements should mean there are
firm foundations to build on.

Cllr Mike Greene

Executive Member for Environment
June 2007

ii
Table of Contents

Foreword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.2 A note on the Council website . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.3 The purpose of this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.4 Listening to community views on parking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2 What’s new. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.1 Ending widespread clamping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.2 The introduction of differential PCN charging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.3 The introduction of emission-based charges for residents’ parking permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.4 New arrangements and facilities for the owners of electric vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.5 The introduction of visitor permits south of Euston Road. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.6 The enhanced offer of visitor permits to elderly and housebound residents . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.7 Changes to the way parking suspensions are conducted, including the provision of

a new e-alert service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.8 Changes to vehicle removals policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.9 Harmonisation of parking policy by central London boroughs through the Partners

in Parking project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.10 Pilot project on ‘cashless’/Chip and PIN pay & display machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.11 Consultation on CPZ arrangements in the borough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2.12 Review of the Council’s school run policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2.13 Review of Blue Badge arrangements south of Euston Road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

2.14 Training of Parking Services staff and the customer services review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.15 An update on the programme of reviews of waiting and loading facilities in

town centres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3 Statistics, financial information, reviews and monitoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.1 The number of PCNs issued in 2006/7 by contravention type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.2 Photographic records of contraventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3.3 PCN recovery rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

3.4 The incidence of clamping and vehicle removals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

iii
3.5 Financial statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

3.6 Where PCNs were issued in 2006/7 by type of road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3.7 Changing levels of demand for kerbside parking in the borough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

3.8 Camden residents’ vehicle fleet composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

3.9 Statistics on appeals and related information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.10 Performance statistics relating to Camden’s enforcement contracts, Environment

Locals and Parking Attendants’ safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

3.11 Traffic flow data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

3.12 Road Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

3.13 Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Appendix 1: Moving traffic contraventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

iv
1 Introduction
1.1 Overview
1.1.1 This is Camden’s first Annual Parking and Enforcement Report. Two broad themes are
covered in the report:
• What’s New – this deals with changes in policy and enforcement practices (for
example, the ending of widespread clamping and reducing the extent of vehicle
removals) and new parking products and services that appeared over the last year.
• Reviews and Monitoring – this provides updates on parking related reviews that are
occurring and the results of relevant monitoring activity. Reference is also made to
parking and enforcement statistics, as well as financial information with comparative
data for previous years.
1.1.2 Camden’s parking and enforcement activity is described in detail in the Council’s interim
Parking and Enforcement Plan, which can be viewed and downloaded from the following
web page:
www.camden.gov.uk/pep
1.1.3 The interim Parking and Enforcement Plan and this document – the “Annual Report” are
companion documents. The former is the more comprehensive document and it is
intended that it will be revised every four or five years. The interim Parking and
Enforcement Plan not only covers the enforcement of parking regulations, but also that of
bus lanes and certain moving traffic contraventions (such as banned movements), which
are specified in Appendix 1. The purposes of regulations are indicated in the discussion
box below.
1.1.4 Technical terms and acronyms are explained in the glossary.

The purpose of parking and traffic regulation and why they are enforced
This annual report sets out some of the facts and figures of Camden’s parking and
enforcement activity but it is important also to bear in mind why the borough manages
parking in the first place. The various parking policy objectives are set out more fully in the
interim Parking and Enforcement Plan, but are also summarised here.
Demand for parking in Camden far outstrips the supply of kerbspace available and the
Council seeks to maintain an active balance between the different demands – from residents,
their visitors, businesses and their deliveries and customers, access for disabled people, etc.
This also needs to be balanced with the duty on the Council to keep traffic moving, avoiding
unsafe and obstructive parking, and making sure there is good access for pedestrians,
cyclists, buses and vehicles of all sorts.
Alongside this is the aim of sustainability, restraining inessential traffic so that we achieve
efficient movements for essential vehicles (e.g. emergency services and deliveries). In a
crowded inner city we encourage people to move in the most efficient and sustainable ways
possible and to help achieve this we improve conditions for walking and cycling, including
making these movements safer, and improve the flow of public transport. In addition to the
efficiency of our road network this has clear links to minimising the wider impacts of traffic
on poor air quality and on the contribution to climate change.

1
Parking conditions before and after Controlled Parking Zones ( CPZs) were introduced: Glenilla Road. Surveys
showed that after CPZ introduction the number of vehicles parked reduced and ease of parking was improved – see
the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan, section 8.4.

Parking conditions before and after CPZs were introduced: Belsize Park Gardens at junction with Belsize Grove.

1.2 A note on the Council website

1.2.1 Up to date information about parking conditions in the borough is provided on the
Council website.
1.2.2 Motorists can search for places to park in particular streets or CPZs, with information
given on the types of bays available and the hours of parking control that apply:
www.camden.gov.uk/wheretopark
Other general information about parking bays in Camden can be found at:
www.camden.gov.uk/cpz
1.2.3 A detailed map showing Camden’s CPZ structure is available in this report, and can be
downloaded from the Council website from the above weblink.

2
1.2.4 Drivers can look up current and planned parking bay suspensions in any street or CPZ in
the borough by visiting the following:
www.camden.gov.uk/parkingbaysuspensions
Details about the Council’s online email alerts for suspensions are given on:
www.camden.gov.uk/parkingalerts
1.2.5 Suspensions may arise for various reasons including, in particular, streetworks.
Streetworks can affect local traffic flows, for example if they involve temporary street
closures. Advance notification of streetworks is given on the Council website:
www.camden.gov.uk/streetworks

1.3 The purpose of this document

1.3.1 Following the election of the partnership administration in May 2006, several aspects of
Camden’s parking and enforcement policies have changed. A revised, final version of the
Council’s Parking and Enforcement Plan will be prepared and published in due course.
1.3.2 However, the Council’s parking and enforcement policies are subject to further changes
and the services Camden provides in this area continue to be modified and/or expanded,
with new products coming on line (such as the new visitor permit schemes south of
Euston Road) and further information being made available on our website (such as
details of where to park).
1.3.3 To keep the local community and other interested parties abreast of these changes the
intention is that the Council will publish this parking and enforcement report each year.
1.3.4 The first Annual Report covers changes made in financial year 2006/7 and includes those
that will be made up until summer 2007, notably with the introduction of emission-based
parking permits (section 2.3).
1.3.5 The Council is committed to making its parking operation fairer. It is committed to being
transparent about its parking and enforcement activity for which it is accountable and
intends to publish the same core statistical and financial information each year: the
number of traffic and parking ‘tickets’ it issues, the income and expenditure on its
‘parking account’ and how the parking surplus is spent. The Council will also publish
other up to date information, such as the number of appeals made to the Council, and
comparative data with other London boroughs.
1.3.6 Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 consolidates the law regarding civil
enforcement of parking, bus lane, moving traffic contraventions and other traffic
contraventions. Department for Transport guidance to local authorities on civil
enforcement has just been published (Traffic Management Act 2004, Statutory Guidance
to Local Authorities on the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions, DfT, July 2007)
and requires that local authorities produce an annual report on their enforcement
activities. This guidance will come into force in April 2008. The indicative scope of
statistics to include under this guidance is similar to that given in this document.
However, we cannot be precise about the future statistical content of the second
Annual Report, though it is likely to be similar to that here. This is because London
boroughs are likely to work together and discuss the common content they are likely to
include in their Annual Reports.

3
1.3.7 This Annual Report has been produced in advance of a legal requirement to produce
such a report, and is likely to be one of the first of its kind in the country.

1.4 Listening to community views on parking

1.4.1 Parking matters are invariably contentious, with widely differing views often held within
the community. By listening to and taking account of these views, the Council aims to
make its parking policies and practices fairer.
1.4.2 General views about parking and enforcement have been the subject of two quite
separate investigations recently that have helped to identify subjects for further inquiry
and provide the support for change. Parking was the subject of an all-party Parking
Scrutiny Panel, which took evidence between November 2004 and April 2005 and
presented their report, Parking in Camden, to the Executive in July 2005.
1.4.3 In addition, the interim Parking Enforcement Plan was consulted on between January and
March 2006. Questions were posed to test local community views on issues that arose
through Parking Scrutiny and those that officers consider may improve the service to
better meet local needs. The consultation also invited respondents to make their own
comments. Questions were asked on views about the level of parking enforcement, about
clamping and removals, about which parking and traffic contraventions were regarded as
‘less’ or ‘more’ serious, whether residents with second or more cars per household or
larger cars should pay higher charges for residents’ parking permits and other issues.
The results of this consultation were presented to the Executive on 5th July 20061.
1.4.4 The Council also recently consulted on CPZ arrangements in the borough (section 2.11).

Parking and Enforcement Plan (PEP) – Report on Consultation.

1

4
2 What’s new
2.1 Ending widespread clamping
2.1.1 Parking Scrutiny’s report recommended that clamping in Camden be studied.
Accordingly, compliance surveys were undertaken in March and April 2006 to establish
whether the visual deterrent of a clamped car in various locations throughout the borough
had an effect on the amount of non-compliant parking activity. Each site was observed
with and without a clamped vehicle present under test conditions. The surveys showed
that the number of non-compliant acts was greater when a clamped vehicle was present
though the total duration of stay of non-compliant vehicles was lower.
2.1.2 The interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation asked respondents for their views
on clamping. On balance respondents considered that there was ‘too much’ clamping
activity in Camden.
2.1.3 A report about clamping2 was presented to the Executive in July 2006. It recommended
that clamping should cease except for persistent evaders (with three or more repeatedly
unpaid and unchallenged parking tickets) and Blue Badge fraudsters. These
recommendations were accepted and widespread clamping ended on 6th September
2006. It was also decided that clamping could still be used as an enforcement action on
those parking in housing estates without a valid permit. (PCNs cannot be issued on these
roads, which are not public highways.)

2.2 The introduction of differential PCN charging

2.2.1 The level of charges imposed for contraventions stated on PCNs are set by London
Councils, which represents all 33 boroughs in London (including the Corporation of
London). The London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee (TEC) decides on
charge levels every four years. When charge levels are set by TEC, they must be agreed
by the Mayor of London and ratified by the Secretary of State. PCN charges levels are set
to discourage contraventions. Various factors are taken into account when setting
charges, such as local traffic conditions, evidence about the effectiveness of charges and
inflation. The demand for road space and parking is more acute towards the centre of
London, and hence PCN charges are generally higher in Central and Inner London.
Except for a few boundary roads, PCN charges for Camden are in ‘Band A’, the highest
charge level, which reflects the borough’s central location.
2.2.2 PCN charge levels for parking and traffic contraventions have been criticised for not
being ‘proportionate’ to the contravention. For example, many consider that
contraventions such as driving the wrong way down a one-way street are more serious
and should attract a higher fine than, say, overstaying in a pay & display bay.
2.2.3 The Council has supported the development of differential penalty charges for different
contraventions, as the Council considers that this will lead to enforcement practices
perceived to be fairer and more proportionate to the seriousness of the regulations and
restrictions contravened. If enforcement is seen to be fairer, this will help improve the
repute of enforcement, and, in particular, should assist in improving compliance. The
Council considers that to be acceptable to the public, a system of differential charges

2
Wheel Clamping – The Effect Of Wheel Clamping On Compliance With Parking Regulations On-Street – Results Of Study (CENV/2006/84).

5
 must be perceived to be reasonable. It must also be understandable by motorists in order
that compliance can be improved.
2.2.4 The results from the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation show that there is
support in Camden for higher penalty charges to apply to the following types of
contraventions showing how seriously they are regarded:
• Those liable to increase road danger.
• Those in the way or obstructing efficient bus operation.
• Those parking in disabled bays.
• Those liable to be obstructive to traffic movement, including cyclists and pedestrians,
and in other ways contributing towards congestion.
2.2.5 Last year London Councils consulted on behalf of itself and TfL on whether a system of
differential charges could be introduced for parking, bus lane and moving traffic
contraventions. Various options were put to the London boroughs. Research was also
undertaken on the public’s view of introducing differential charges for PCNs. Camden
responded to the consultation, using the results from the interim Parking and
Enforcement Plan consultation on local community views on what is a less or more
serious contravention.
2.2.6 Based on investigations undertaken by London Councils, TEC decided in December 2006
to introduce a two tier system of charges based on the charge levels shown in table 2.13:
The penalty for bus lane contraventions has been set at £120 regardless of locations (i.e.
bands). If PCNs are paid promptly within 14 days of the date of notice, the charge level is
reduced by half. Recipients of PCNs who contact the Council within 14 days of the notice
date can do so without prejudicing their ability to receive the reduced rate for a further
14 days.

Table 2.1: 2-tier charge levels for PCNs

Charges (£)
Band A
‘Minor’ parking breaches 80
‘More serious’ parking contraventions and moving traffic contraventions 120

2.2.7 Differential PCNs were introduced by all London boroughs and TfL from 1st July 2007.
Prior to this date all PCNs in Band A were £100. Under the new two tier system the
charge for ‘minor’ parking breaches has decreased while the charge for more serious
contraventions has increased.

2.2.8 The only difference between the categories that TEC decided to put contraventions into
compared to Camden’s own consultation results is that contraventions of residents’
parking bays are treated as a serious contravention rather than as a ‘minor’ breach. While
this is disappointing Camden must enforce the system of differential charges that has
been agreed by the Mayor of London.

3
The charges that apply on the few roads that are in Band B in the borough are £60 and £100.

6
2.2.9 Further details about how the new system of differential charges works are given on the
Council website:
www.camden.gov.uk/pcnlevels
2.2.10 The Council has produced a leaflet about avoiding fines, and this can be viewed on the
Council website:
www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/avoidparkingfine

Electronic permits for

residents and businesses
are attached to
windscreens for
inspection by Parking
Attendants. The PA
simply scans the permit
and checks details shown
on the hand-held DAP
computer are correct.
Vehicles in contravention
are issued with Penalty
Charge Notices directly
from the DAP.

2.3 The introduction of emission-based charges for residents’ parking permits

2.3.1 Camden Council wants to encourage residents to think about the way they get around
and the impact that this has on climate change and air quality. Consequently, Camden is
introducing a new system of charging for residents’ parking permit based on the
emissions that cars produce4. The new system was introduced in August 2007. The
interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation results supported higher resident
permit charges for larger vehicles.
2.3.2 The charges have been set at levels directly proportional to the CO2 emissions that
vehicles produce. Charges are based on the ‘the polluter pays’ principle – the minority
whose cars are causing greater damage to the environment will be charged
proportionately more for their parking permits. We want to encourage residents to take
sustainable transport modes such as walking, cycling or public transport to help tackle
CO2 emissions, but when people do need to drive the new system will offer them an
incentive to switch to lower emission and electric cars if possible.
2.3.3 For vehicles registered on and after 1st March 2001, the Government introduced a
system of variable car tax (Vehicle Exercise Duty or VED) charges based on the level of
CO2 produced. Vehicles with higher amount of emissions – measured in grams of CO2
per kilometre (g/km) – pay higher VED charges; those with lower emissions pay lower
VED charges. The VED charges are placed in ‘bands’, the lowest being band ‘A’, the
highest band ‘G’. For ‘banded’ vehicles the g/km is given on the vehicle registration
document, the V5 log book. Sometimes the band letter (A to G) is also given. The new
system of charges for residents’ parking permits is based on VED bands.
4
Following recommendations to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group on 23 January 2007 in the report Review of Charges for Larger and
Second Vehicles (CENV/2006/112).

7
2.3.4 For vehicles registered before 1st March 2001, which do not fit into DVLA bands,
residents’ parking permit charges are based on engine size, since in general larger
engines produce higher emissions.
2.3.5 The Council has developed four tariff levels for residents’ parking permit charges, as
shown below.

Table 2.2: Tariff levels for residents’ parking permit charges

Tariff charges (£)

Tariff 1 Tariff 2 Tariff 3 Tariff 4
Unbanded vehicles (registered before March 2001)
Engine size (cc) 0-1299 1300-1849 1850-2449 2450+
Banded vehicles (registered on or after 1st March 2001)
DVLA band (g/km) A, B, C D, E F G
up to 150 151-185 186-224 225+
Annual (1) 70 85 105 145
Six months 37 45 56 77
Three months 20 25 30 42
One month 9 11 14 19
Note (1) This compares with the previous flat rate annual charge of £90. Other charges for shorter periods were
similar pro rata to those above.

2.3.6 The intention of the new system is that the owners of higher polluting vehicles will pay
more, and that owners of lower polluting vehicles will pay less – on the ‘polluter pays’
principle. Changing to the new system has been designed to be ‘revenue neutral’ and it is
expected that the Council will neither gain nor lose revenue beyond the cost of
introducing the new system. This assessment is based on a sample of permit
applications made in November 2006. Data will be collected on the resident permit
vehicle fleet as a basis for reviewing the charges in future. Permit charges were last
increased three years ago in April 2004. It is expected that the revenue from residents’
permits will be lower than that obtained three years ago when permit charges were last
changed, when account is taken of inflation over this period.
2.3.7 Based on the November 2006 fleet sample it is estimated that about 60% of residents
will pay less for their parking permits compared to the previous flat rate charge system
and that about 40% will pay more.

2.4 New arrangements and facilities for the owners of electric vehicles
2.4.1 A report5 set out the pros and cons of various policies designed to encourage electric
vehicles. The committee decided to introduce:
• Free annual residents’ parking permits for electric vehicles that use renewably sourced
electricity. (This was introduced in conjunction with emission-based charges for
residents’ parking permits, section 2.3. Camden’s groundbreaking study6 on the full life

5
This was submitted to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group on 23 January 2007, Promoting Electric Vehicles (CENV/2007/01).

Life Cycle Assessment of Vehicle Fuels and Technologies, Final Report, January 2006. Written by Dr Ben Lane, Ecolane Transport Consultancy on

behalf of London Borough of Camden.

8
 cycle impacts of private vehicles of various sizes and different fuelling showed that
electric vehicles using renewably sourced electricity had the lowest carbon footprint.
Take-up of these vehicles in place of conventionally fuelled vehicles would reduce
global CO2 emissions and improve local air quality conditions.)
• 25% of the Tariff 2 charge for electric vehicle owners that do not use electricity from
renewable sources. (This was introduced in conjunction with emission-based charges
for residents’ parking permits, section 2.3.)
• Free short-stay parking in pay & display bays north of Euston Road for residents with
electric vehicles (expected to be introduced later in 2007).
• Trials of a number of on-street re-charging points for electric vehicles.
2.4.2 These policies are being introduced in stages. For further details see the forthcoming
Electric Vehicle User Guide on the Council website. This guide will be available on the
Council website and will be updated as things develop.
2.4.3 A scheme is being developed that will enable Camden residents who own an electric
vehicle to park for free in pay & display bays up to the maximum time allowed in the bay.
Maximum times vary across the borough, and if drivers stay beyond the maximum time
allowed they may be liable for a fine. This scheme will be open to residents only, and will
not apply to pay & display bays south of Euston Road. Applicants will be provided with a
permit to display on their windscreen when they park in a pay & display bay. To receive
the permit applicants will be required to show proof of residence and vehicle ownership.
The online Electric Vehicle User Guide will indicate the target date when this scheme will
be available.
2.4.4 The number of electric vehicles operating in Camden and in London remains relatively
low and a critical issue to the take up and expanded use of electric vehicles is the
provision of public charging points. The technology to facilitate on-street charging of
electric vehicles is being tried and tested: Camden is working in partnership with the City
of Westminster to investigate this through the Clear Zone Partnership. In December 2006
the City of Westminster installed charging points in two streets off the Strand, in
Wellington Street and Southampton Street in a pilot scheme.
2.4.5 Camden has been given funding from TfL in the current financial year (2007/8) to develop
recharging infrastructure in the Clear Zone area (south of Euston Road) and expand
facilities in this area. This will encourage the use of electric vehicles instead of petrol and
diesel vehicles. This will build on the research undertaken by the Clear Zone team in
Westminster and raise awareness and provide a focus for the promotion of electrically
powered vehicles. It is proposed that these points would not be assigned to individuals or
companies but be available at a specially designated communal parking space for the
charging of electric vehicles.
2.4.6 In Camden it is proposed that to use on-street bays users will have to join Camden’s
‘electric vehicle club’ and will be charged for using the facilities involving a registration
fee.
2.4.7 Camden has several off-street electric charging points in the borough. ‘Newride’ was
developed in 2005 as a Clear Zone initiative, and is an off-street charging infrastructure
and promotion programme designed to encourage people who live and work in the
borough to use electric vehicles (electric scooters, bikes and now cars) for their

9
 commuting and leisure journeys. There are Newride charging points in Royal College
Street and two public car parks in Camden operated by NCP – at Drury Lane and Saffron
Hill. There are also charging facilities in numerous Council operated car parks in
Westminster and details about charging facilities in the whole of the Clear Zone area are
being put on the New Ride website:
www.newride.org.uk/
2.4.8 Camden also operates nine charging points in the Council’s public car park in
Bloomsbury Square; there were three points initially and increased demand for the
facilities led to a further 3 points, then 3 more. The electric charging is offered free of
charge, with reduced rate parking for electric vehicles being charged there.
2.4.9 Residents and businesses have been invited to suggest possible locations for on-street
charging facilities throughout the borough in the consultation about CPZ arrangements
(section 2.11).

2.5 The introduction of visitor permits south of Euston Road

2.5.1 Residents living north of Euston Road can apply for visitor permits that can be used in
residents’ bays in the older CPZs and in permit holder bays in the newer zones.
2.5.2 Residents living in zones south of Euston Road – CA-C (Holborn and Covent Garden),
CA-D (Kings Cross) and CA-E (Bloomsbury & Fitzrovia) – in the past have requested
similar arrangements for visitor permits, but historically, due to parking pressure in this
area, it has not been possible to introduce suitable schemes.
2.5.3 Following the introduction of congestion charging in February 2003 traffic levels reduced
sharply in this area. The Parking Scrutiny report recommended that it was timely to
reconsider visitor permit schemes south of Euston Road. The interim Parking and
Enforcement Plan consultation results showed support for visitor permit schemes in this
area. Accordingly, a partial parking occupancy survey was undertaken in May 2006 of
selected streets in this area. This followed a reallocation of some underused pay & display/
meter bays in zones CA-D and CA-E to residents’, disabled and motorcycle bays
between July 2005 and April 2006.
2.5.4 The results of the May 2006 parking occupancy survey were compared with a full parking
occupancy survey undertaken in March 2000. Based on the survey results a report7
recommended that a pilot visitor permit scheme be established as follows:
• In Zones CA-D and CA-E: 40 hours @ 50p per hour per quarter per adult resident.
• In Zone CA-C: 20 hours @ 50p per hour per quarter per adult resident (the lesser
amount of hours was suggested on account of the relatively high levels of occupancy
still observed for this zone).
• That visitor permits are valid for use only in residents’ bays and a maximum hourly stay
of 4 hours will apply per visit (as is the case in the rest of the borough).
• That no all-day visitor permits be offered for the pilot scheme.

7
The report went to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group on 19 September 2006 (Pilot Visitor Permit Scheme For Controlled Parking Zones
South Of Euston Road & Visitor Permits For The Housebound (CENV/2006/105) ).

10
2.5.5 The Executive (Environment) Sub-Group agreed the recommendations. However, a
number of objections were made to the traffic management order for the scheme in CA-C
on account of the high levels of parking stress still present in the zone, in which
underused pay & display bays had not been reallocated. Following consultation with local
councillors it was recommended that the two schemes start from July 2007, and work
should commence on proposals to convert underused pay & display bays to additional
residents’ bays within a provisional completion date for this work of January 2008.

2.6 The enhanced offer of visitor permits to elderly and housebound residents
2.6.1 In the September 2006 ‘visitor permit’ report (section 2.5) consideration was also given to
enhancing the offer of visitor permits to disabled and elderly housebound people.
2.6.2 The quantity of visitor permits available per resident per quarter varies according to the
hours of controlled parking. In 2-hour zones residents are allowed up to a maximum of 30
hours per quarter; in other zones the maximum allocation is 120 hours. A third of the
allocation is charged at the rate of 50p per hour, the next third £1.00 and the final third at
£1.50. Disabled and elderly housebound people are charged a flat rate of 50p per hour
for their entire allocation.
2.6.3 The September 2006 report recommended that the quarterly allocation for housebound
residents is increased from 30 hours to 40 hours in 2-hour zones and from 120 hours to
150 hours in other zones. The increased allocation is available from 1st July 2007. This
enhanced allocation does not apply for the pilot visitor permit schemes south of Euston
Road.

2.7 Changes to the way parking suspensions are conducted, including the provision of a
new e-alert service
2.7.1 Respondents to the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation raised concerns
about when suspensions commence and end.
2.7.2 Camden aims to provide resident permit holders advance notice of a suspension
although sometimes the normal notice period is not possible due to emergency works
that have to be undertaken by utility companies.
2.7.3 A report8 recommended the following (follow up actions are shown in italics):
• The introduction of a mobile patrol to monitor suspended parking bays, and release
them back into use more quickly. This mobile patrol commenced in October 2006.
• The introduction of e-mail alerts to inform recipients when bays are due to be
suspended. This service started in April 2007. Drivers can register to be sent details of
parking bays in their street or CPZ that will be suspended in the next 14 days. The
‘e-alerts’ provide an extra reminder to park elsewhere, in addition to the bright yellow
suspension signs posted in the street nearby to the suspended bay. The e-alerts tell
motorists the street name, location, start and end date of the suspension, and why it is
happening. To sign up to this service, visit:
www.camden.gov.uk/parkingalerts
• The Council considered whether e-alerts could also be sent via SMS-texting, but it was
decided that this was not economically viable.

Review Of The Management Of Parking Suspensions (CENV/2006/106), put to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group in October 2006.
8

11
 • The introduction of a new charging system for parking suspensions requested by utility
companies undertaking statutory works. This commenced in April 2007, with utility
companies being charged £10 per day per suspended bay. This is to encourage them to
complete their work as quickly and efficiently as possible, minimising frustrations for
residents when bays are suspended when work is not going on and to minimise
consequential traffic problems.
2.7.4 In addition to the above, the Council has increased its suspensions signage by including
suspension information on each time plate relating to a suspended bay.
2.7.5 The Council would like to impose an indemnity charge to ensure that when parking
places are suspended it is for works that actually take place. However at present local
traffic authorities do not have these powers.

2.8 Changes to vehicle removals policy

2.8.1 The Council has reduced the number of circumstances in which vehicle removals formerly
applied. From October 2006 vehicle removals no longer applied to the following situations
(although drivers are still liable for a PCN):
• If residents’, traders’, businesses’ or doctors’ parking permits expire the owner will get
a seven days’ grace period, during which time their car will not be towed away.
• Residents with a valid parking permit for one CPZ will not have their vehicle towed at
all if they park in another zone in a resident/permit holder bay as long as they are not
committing a further contravention that would make them liable for removal.
2.8.2 Further relaxation of the Council’s vehicle removals policy has been agreed9. From July
2007 we will not tow cars committing contraventions in a pay & display or residents’ bay
on the day the contravention occurs, although they will be liable to removal if still parked
in contravention on the following day. If vehicles are parked in an obstructive position
they will be liable for removal. It is expected that that this change will reduce removals by
a further 60% to that already made by the Council’s vehicle removals policy described in
the preceding paragraph.

2.9 Harmonisation of parking policy by central London boroughs through the Partners in
Parking project
2.9.1 The Partners in Parking (PiP) project is a new approach to parking matters initiated by
central London boroughs and Transport for London. It has commenced work in two
areas.
• Harmonising and updating parking technologies, services and practices across
councils and TfL.
• Making savings through grouped procurements.
2.9.2 The intention is that by working collaboratively local authorities can harmonise systems,
controls and practices and have greater buying power as a group. The aim to agree a
harmonised approach as far as possible should make it easier for drivers regarding
policies and practices for suspensions and loading/unloading, for example. Some central
London boroughs are wholly or partly exempt from the Blue Badge disable scheme

9
This was proposed in a report to the 27th June Executive, Review of On-Street Removal Policy (CENV/2007/46).

12
 (see section 2.13), and by working together common arrangements have been agreed by
Camden, City of Westminster and the RB of Kensington and Chelsea to offer an extra
free hour in a meter or pay & display bay to Blue Badge holders who have made an initial
payment.
2.9.3 Increased buying power would secure larger volume discounts than any one council
could achieve by itself. To enable this, a legal entity for group procurement is required
and a report10 was agreed to endorse a London Councils’ approved Partnership
Agreement and set up a cross Council Partnership Board of elected Members to create
such an entity between City of Westminster (lead), Transport for London, LB Islington,
LB Camden, City of London, RB Kensington and Chelsea and LB Lambeth.

Camden’s pay & display ticket

machines are being converted to
allow payment by means other than
cash, including credit and debit cards.

2.10 Pilot project on ‘cashless’/Chip and PIN pay & display machines
2.10.1 Camden, City of Westminster and Lambeth took part in a PiP trial project in which pay &
display machines of three different suppliers offering credit/debit card acceptance were
tested. The aim of the trial was to evaluate the functionality, practicability, reliability,
security and user-friendliness of the trial machines and to see if volume savings could be
made by ordering on-street equipment jointly, under a contract drawn up by Westminster.
Users could either pay using coins or insert their credit/debit card and enter a PIN to
confirm payment. A receipt is given from machines with this ‘Chip and PIN’ capability.
2.10.2 Camden’s trials took place in autumn 2006. Camden considered that the trial machines
were not suitable for use in the borough, although Westminster’s framework contract
would allow other boroughs to procure equipment from the trial suppliers.

The report, Partnerships in Parking – Formal Partnership Agreement (CENV/2006/124), went to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group in January
10

2007.

13
2.10.3 Beyond the PiP trial, Camden also carried out trials on a fourth machine from its existing
supplier, who has proved to be robust and reliable over the years. This has resulted in a
current project of upgrading 55 machines in the high-tariff area south of Euston Road to
‘Chip and PIN’ and a further 11 new machines will be installed in Kentish Town that will
be networked so that occupancy, income levels and tracking fault information can be
monitored, and tariff charges and other conditions can be readily updated. In addition, it
is intended to procure a further 55 ‘Chip and PIN’ machines later in 2007/8 as part of a
ten year investment programme.

2.11 Consultation on CPZ arrangements in the borough

2.11.1 Between May and June 2007 the Council conducted a general consultation on controlled
parking zones (CPZs) to establish a programme of reviews where these are needed. A
questionnaire was sent to almost 1,100 groups throughout the borough. Councillors were
also consulted and the consultation was open to individuals and other interested parties.
General questions were posed about the size of zones, hours of control and days of
control. The consultation exercise also posed additional questions about making common
arrangements for some business permits, whether motorcycle bays should operate all
day and canvassing views on where to locate electric vehicle charging bays.
2.11.2 There are nineteen controlled parking zones (CPZs) across the whole of the borough and
the hours of operation vary depending on local needs identified in their own consultation
exercises. Several zones have sub-areas, which have their own hours of control. A map
of Camden’s CPZ is given in this document.
2.11.3 In recent years Camden’s CPZs have tended to become more complex through the use
of sub-areas and buffer zones. This complexity was introduced to meet local
communities’ requirements. Although Camden’s zoning arrangements may appear
complicated they have been tailored to solve particular problems in the areas concerned,
based on local people’s knowledge about parking conditions.
2.11.4 The consultation results will be presented to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group in
November and a programme of CPZ reviews will be presented for approval. In areas
where reviews are required the Council will set up a Consultation Steering Group of
representatives from the local community to advise the Council on the problems in the
local area and to assist in the design of consultation documents, and then consult all
households and businesses involved. CPZ reviews are lengthy and costly activities to
undertaken, and it is anticipated that the programme of reviews may take place over
several financial years depending on the number of reviews required.

2.12 Review of the Council’s school run policy

2.12.1 The cross party School Run Scrutiny Panel of 2002 proposed a number of policies to
tackle the school run issue, which were adopted by the Council in July 2002. One of
these was the Parking Dispensation Scheme for schools, based on parking permits
issued by the Council. The number of permits issued was decreased by 20% each year
from 2004, with the intention of reaching zero by the end of summer term 2008. By this
time parents and schools were expected to have adjusted their travel behaviour to take
account of the elimination of permits.

14
2.12.2 Travel by car has reduced to schools with Travel Plans. Travel Plans aim to reduce car
travel and develop alternatives, so that schools become active players in seeking to
address the problems caused by school run traffic. Camden received the London
Transport Award for the ‘The Most Innovative Transport Project’ in 2006 for its work on
school travel. However, overall, traffic levels in the Hampstead/Belsize area have not
declined. This is partly due to the slow development of Travel Plans by some schools and
the increase in school rolls in this area.
2.12.3 The Council has been reviewing the Parking Dispensation Scheme since October 2006,
consulting with parents, residents, schools, children and other interested groups, the
results of which are summarised below.
2.12.4 The impact of policy: the consultation results and studies show:
• No perceived improvement in environmental conditions. This is consistent with
environmental information collected and the increase in school rolls up to 10%.
• The majority of parents are not made aware of the policy to discontinue with the
permits before joining their school.
• In 2006 and 2007 the majority of permits were issued to new starters, contrary to the
policy of phasing out over five years.
• Children’s preferred modes of travel are bicycle (24%) and walking (24%), followed
by car.
2.12.5 The views: the consultation results also show:
• A strong polarity of views on options between residents and parents.
• Support of parents and schools for prioritising young children, with lesser support by
residents without children and no support of residents associations.
• Support by emergency services for current scheme and removing parking obstructions
impeding access to buildings.
2.12.6 The options: the table below shows the most preferred option for each group of
respondents.
2.12.7 The consultation results were considered in coming to a decision11, amongst other things,
that dispensation be reduced to 1,000 from September 2007 and then to 500 from
September 2008. The permits are to be limited to nursery and Key Stage 1 (under 7s)
children. The permits are to be issued at no charge and a transferable clock dial system
is to be used with separate cards for AM and PM. From September 2008 permits will
only be issued to schools with a DfES (Department for Education and Skills) compliant
Travel Plan.

The results were considered by the Culture and Environment Scrutiny Committee (Review of School Run Policy and the Issue of Dispensation
11

Permits, CENV/2007/68, 12 June 2007) and a decision on policy was made by the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group on 21 June 2007.

15
Table 2.3: The school run, the preferred option for each group

% of respondents stating choice as their ‘most preferred’ option

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4
Zero Zero Hold the Hold the
permits permits permits at permits at
from Sept from Sept the 40% the 20% No
2007 2008 level (1) level (1) response
Residents without children 48% 28% 13% 10% 1%
Residents with children 13% 8% 63% 16% 0%
Parents 2% 1% 53% 4% 40%
Schools 0% 8% 83% 8% 1%
Resident Associations 0% 95% 3% 2% 0%
Note: (1) The percentages quoted are relative to the 2004 allocation levels.

2.13 Review of Blue Badge arrangements south of Euston Road

2.13.1 Many of the parking concessions offered by The National Disabled Persons’ Parking
Badge Scheme (Blue Badge) do not apply in central London, including part of Camden
south of Euston Road. This is due to congestion in Central London and the severe
pressures on both parking and space for traffic to keep moving. Central London’s special
exemption started in the 1970’s.
2.13.2 In each of the authorities where the exemption operates (Westminster, Kensington &
Chelsea, the City and part of Camden), local disabled parking schemes are in place that
offer parking concessions for residents and those in regular employment or education
within the respective areas. In Camden the local scheme is called the Green Badge
scheme and its extent is shown in Figure 4.3 of the interim Parking and Enforcement
Plan.
2.13.3 Over the past few years, the four authorities have worked closely together to harmonise
the different schemes as far as possible, and to ensure that the arrangements for Blue
Badge holders who are not eligible for a local scheme badge are as consistent as can be.
These authorities are continuing to monitor the situation, and to improve information and
publicity about arrangements in central London.
2.13.4 The Department for Transport has commissioned studies into parking facilities for Blue
Badge holders in central London, though the results have yet to be presented. It is
anticipated that this will form part of a comprehensive review of the Blue Badge scheme,
which will be the subject of a report expected in April 2008. The Council will work with
the other authorities to produce a response to any proposals which emerge from this
review at the appropriate time, including any which relate to possible changes to the
present central London exemption.
2.13.5 Over the past two years Camden has increased the supply of disabled parking bays
available to Blue Badge holders in the central area by converting a number of under used
pay & display bays. The number of Blue Badge parking spaces in zones CA-C and
CA-E (which covers most of the Green Badge area south of Euston Road) more than

16
 doubled between March 2000 and May 2006, from 25 to 57, while in the Kings Cross
zone, CA-D (part of which is included in the Green Badge area), the number of Blue
Badge bays increased from 32 to 78 over this period. Further bays will be provided where
opportunities arise.

2.14 Training of Parking Services staff and the customer services review
2.14.1 Parking Services staff received training in disability equality awareness and had ‘Tone of
Voice’ training in 2006/7. The disability awareness training provided staff with an
understanding of some of the key disability exclusion issues that limits or prevents
access to our services. The ‘Tone of Voice’ training was designed to ensure that all our
letters in response to customer representations relating to PCNs were more user-friendly
whilst maintaining the necessary legal and statutory requirements.

2.15 An update on the programme of reviews of waiting and loading facilities in town
centres
2.15.1 The Council is conducting a rolling programme of waiting and loading reviews across
Camden’s town centres.
2.15.2 Restrictions on waiting and loading have developed historically, and may not reflect
existing requirements. When reviewing arrangements in these areas the opportunity is
taken to simplify arrangements as far as possible and to reduce street signage clutter.
At the completion of each project the Council intends to publish a guide to parking
and loading in these areas to show what facilities are available and help drivers avoid
receiving a PCN. In addition to showing waiting and loading facilities, the guides will
show where loading bays and pay & display bays are located.
2.15.3 The Council’s first such review of Kentish Town was completed in 2004/5 and the guide
for this area is available on the Council website:
www.camden.gov.uk/ktloadingplan

17
Similar guides to that for parking and loading in Kentish Town will be rolled out to other town centres in Camden.

2.15.4 Arrangements in and around Tottenham Court Road were studied in 2005/6, and
proposals were consulted on in 2006/7. The scheme will be implemented in 2007 with a
guide produced.
2.15.5 Arrangements in and High Holborn/Holborn were studied in 2006/7, and proposals are
being consulted on and implemented in 2007/8. Waiting and loading arrangements were
also studied in Chalk Farm Road in 2006/7 as part of a wider project for the town centre
involving urban realm works. The minor changes to waiting and loading arrangements are
likely to undertaken in 2008/9. A scheme is being implemented in Fortess Road in
2007/8.
2.15.6 The maximum loading and unloading time for vehicles parked on yellow lines where it is
safe to do so is 20 minutes. In June 2007 London Councils recommended that the
London boroughs adopt a new maximum time of 40 minutes. It is anticipated that
Camden will introduce this longer time soon, probably in late 2007.
2.15.7 The Council is receptive to listening to other requests from businesses to make parking
arrangements easier, such as additional pay & display bays.

18
3. Statistics, Financial Information, Reviews and Monitoring
3.1 The number of PCNs issued in 2006/7 by contravention type
3.1.1 Table 3.1 gives details on the number of PCNs issued each year from 2000/1 to 2006/7
by different types of contraventions:
• Those relating to parking, enforced by Parking Attendants and by CCTV
• Bus lane contraventions
• Moving traffic contraventions (defined in Appendix 1)
3.1.2 Table 3.1 shows that the number of parking contraventions reached a peak in 2004/5.
Since then compliance with parking regulations has improved and the number of PCNs
issued has fallen. The Council would like to see the level of compliance improve further
and the number of parking PCNs issued to continue downwards. The Council supports
the introduction of differential charging for PCNs (section 2.2), which should produce a
fairer system of parking enforcement and assist the further improvement of compliance
with parking regulations.

Table 3.1: The number of PCNs issued in 2006/07 – by Contravention type

Financial year
2002/3 2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7
Parking 421,151 446,212 463,944 448,085 434,646
Bus Lane 19,911 21,471 45,778 24,514 15,324
Moving Traffic ,0 ,0 52,091 106,479 109,186
Total – all PCNs 441,062 467,683 561,813 579,078 559,156

19
Controlled Parking Zones in Camden This drawing is based upon the 1:1250 Ordnance Survey Digital Mapping with
permission of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Crown Copyright
Times shown are correct at time of publication (September 2007) 1996. Licence No.LA086339, and mapping information from the Geographers’
A-Z Company Ltd licence No.134 to the London Borough of Camden.
and may change. Please check controlled times on-street when you Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings.
park. You can park in any sub-area or ‘buffer zone’ with the main
letter of your permit. For example, with a Swiss Cottage permit,
CA-R, you can park in either sub-areas, CA-R(a) and CA-R(b),
or any of the buffer zones with this letter – e.g. CA-R/Q,
CA-Q/R, CA-R/K/Q. The zone times of buffer zones
follow the first letter – e.g. CA-D/E follows CA-D
zone times, rather than those of CA-E.

CA-B Belsize
Mon-Fri 09.00-18.30
Sat 09.30-13.30
CA-C Holborn & Covent Garden
Mon-Sat 08.30-18.30
Residents’ Bays 24 hour
CA-D Kings Cross
Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
Sat 08.30-13.30
CA-E Bloomsbury & Fitzrovia
Mon-Sat 08.30-18.30
CA-F(n) Camden Town –
sub-area (north)
Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
Sat-Sun 09.30-17.30
CA-F(s) Camden Town –
sub-area (south)
Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
Sat 09.30-17.30
Sun (Res Bays only) 09.30-17.30
CA-G Somers Town
Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 CA-L Outer West Kentish
Town – sub area
CA-H Hampstead –
Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
main sub-area
Mon-Sat 09.00-20.00 CA-L Inner West Kentish
CA-R(a) Swiss Cottage – CA-U Highgate
(pay & display free after 18.00) Town – sub area
sub area Mon-Fri 10.00-12.00
Mon-Fri 09.00-11.00
CA-H(a) Hampstead – Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
CA-V North End
sub-area CA-M East Kentish Town
CA-R(b) Swiss Cottage – Mon-Fri 11.00-13.00
Mon-Sat 09.00-18.00 Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
sub area Except Sandy Road
CA-H(b) Hampstead – CA-N Camden Square Mon-Sat 08.30-22.00 Mon-Sun 08.30-18.30
sub-area Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
CA-S(a) Redington & Frognal – CA-X Elm Village
Mon-Sat 09.00-20.00
CA-P(a) Fortune Green – sub area Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
CA-H(c) Hampstead – sub-area Mon-Fri 12.30-14.30
Park Crown Estates
sub-area Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
CA-S(b) Redington & Frognal – Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30
Mon-Sat 09.00-19.00
CA-P(b) Fortune Green – sub area Sat 09.30-17.30
CA-H(d) Hampstead – sub-area Mon-Sat 09.00-18.00 Sun (Res Only) 09.30-17.30
sub-area Mon-Sat 08.30-18.30
CA-S/W(a) Redington & Frognal
Mon-Sat 09.00-22.00
CA-P(c) Fortune Green – – sub area
CA-J Primrose Hill sub-area Mon-Fri 12.30-14.30
Mon-Fri 08.30-1800 Mon-Fri 10.00-12.00
CA-S/W(b) Redington & Frognal
CA-K Kilburn Priory CA-Q Kilburn – sub area
Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 Mon-Sat 09.00-18.00
3.1.3 Camden introduced the enforcement of bus lanes using 10 CCTV cameras in October
2002. Although the number of cameras used to enforce bus lanes increased in following
years, the number of bus lane PCNs reached a high point in 2004/5 and has decreased
sharply thereafter, indicating that compliance with bus lane regulation has improved. The
role of CCTV enforcement in improving compliance is key. This is because the photographic
record of the infringement makes it less likely that people will contest that contraventions
took place. The PCN recovery rate – the % of PCNs that are paid – has risen in consequence.
Recognition by drivers that they have contravened and hence pay up is a powerful
incentive for them to follow traffic regulations in future; drivers are less inclined to ‘take a
chance’. This means that compliance with bus lanes has improved and that bus lanes
operate more efficiently and effectively in conveying passengers to their destinations.

Bus lane contraventions

have decreased
dramatically over the last
three years, indicating
that CCTV enforcement
has proved very effective.

3.1.4 Camden took up powers and started to enforce moving traffic contraventions (MTCs) in
June 2004. MTCs are enforced entirely through CCTV cameras. The CCTV Code of
Practice12 recognises that the cameras are used for a wide variety of purposes – including
traffic regulation (for bus lanes, MTCs and parking), community safety and town centre
management – and are used by the Police on request. Most CCTV cameras are located
in fixed positions, but in addition Camden currently has 5 mobile CCTV units.
The number of MTC PCNs has been growing annually, as have the number of cameras
deployed, but there is not a simple relationship between them since CCTV cameras are
used for a variety of purposes. The mobile units are used on a roving basis where
enforcement action is required, including enforcement of parking contraventions relating
to the school run.
There is evidence that compliance with MTCs has improved through CCTV enforcement
(section 6.3 of the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan). However, there is a large churn
of drivers coming into the borough who may not be aware that these regulations are
being enforced (since not all authorities have taken up the powers to enforce MTCs).
We have observed less compliance in areas where there are no fixed cameras but are
enforced in rotation by the mobile units.

12
Details are given in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan.

22
 CCTV cameras are used
to enforce moving traffic
contraventions, such as
the banned right turn
into John Street from
Theobald’s Road, and bus
lanes (see the camera above
the bus lane on the right).

3.2 Photographic records of contraventions

3.2.1 Bus lanes and moving traffic contraventions are enforced using CCTV cameras (section
3.2). Additionally, we have used CCTV to record some on-street parking contraventions
since July 2003. In 2004/05, 20.9% of PCNs used photographic evidence using CCTV
cameras.
3.2.2 Since December 2005 our Parking Attendants have been taking photographic images of
on-street parking contraventions as a matter of course. Once a PCN has been printed the
Parking Attendant is able to take photographs using an integrated digital camera on the
handheld machine.
3.2.3 Photographs were introduced to portray the contravention that had occurred and show
the relevant signs and road markings that are in place. While accompanying photographs
are desirable, they are additional to the pocket book notes made at the time and were
introduced as an initiative to provide transparency. The notes are legally sufficient and we
will always rely on the accuracy of the notes made by the Parking Attendant.
3.2.4 Of the PCNs issued in 2005/06 31.1% included a photographic record of the
contravention, and the increase in this percentage from the previous years was due to the
use of digital camera by Parking Attendants. In 2006/07, the first full year for which
Parking Attendants had digital cameras, the percentage of PCNs with a photographic
record of the contravention increased to 93.9%.
3.2.5 Unfortunately, it is not always possible for Parking Attendants to take photographs when
issuing a PCN. For example, there are instances when the vehicle is driven away before
they can be taken.

23
3.3 PCN recovery rates
3.3.1 PCN recovery rate has improved substantially over the last two financial years. Since
payments are not received immediately, recovery rate increases over time – though can be
treated as actual after 18 months. Actual recovery for 2005/6 was 64%, and the
anticipated recovery rate for 2006/7 is 70%. A target recovery rate for 2007/8 is 70.5%.
3.3.2 There are two factors that helped to improve recovery rates in the later part of 2005/6 and
thereafter. In December 2005 all Parking Attendants were supplied with digital cameras;
this provides proof of the contravention and reduces the likelihood of disputes with the
owner of the vehicle. In the same month the Council began using a new parking
management information system (ICPS). This automatically sends out the requisite notices
to owners and hence progresses cases more quickly. The system also alerts PAs (via their
hand held computers) to the presence of a persistent evader so that appropriate
enforcement action can be undertaken, possibly involving clamping.
3.3.3 In May 2006 the Council created a Recovery Rate team whose responsibility it is to look at
all aspects of PCN recovery. The introduction of the Recovery Rate team, in conjunction
with the facility in ICPS to alert back office staff to follow up unpaid PCNs, has greatly
improved the recovery rate.
3.3.4 In January 2007 the Council began clamping persistent evader motorcycles and scooters
in line with its existing policy to take a firm line with all persistent evaders.

3.4 The incidence of clamping and vehicle removals

3.4.1 The numbers of vehicles clamped and removed are shown in Table 3.3. The amount for
each of these categories peaked in 2002/3. The number of vehicles clamped as a
percentage of all PCNs has been steadily falling since 2002/3, and fell sharply on the
ending of widespread clamping in September 2006. Likewise the number of removed
vehicles is expected to fall sharply with the policy changes in 2007/8 (see section 2.8).

Table 3.2 Clamped and removed vehicles

2002/3 2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7

Vehicles Clamped 32,234 29,554 26,070 26,453 8,113
Vehicles Removed 10,371 9,456 4,833 8,697 8,732

24
3.5 Financial statistics
3.5.1 Within the Council’s budgeting processes and procedures the Parking Account is a
‘memorandum account’, which is set up and collated into this account from the Council’s
accounts. It is necessary to set up the Parking Account as a memorandum account, since
any surplus generated must be spent on certain allowable purposes specified by law and
to be accounted for separately in the Council’s accounts to show transparency in this
respect. The income and expenditure on the Parking Account is presented in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 Parking Account: income and expenditure

2002/3 2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7

Income £,000 £,000 £,000 £,000 £,000
Parking meters/pay & display 11,070 10,971 11,047 11,822 12,045
Parking permits: residents 2,373 2,667 2,670 2,862 2,910
Parking permits: other 958 1,031 1,210 1,444 2,193
Clamping and removals 2,635 3,232 3,047 2,981 1,928
Penalty Charge Notices 12,061 20,617 23,467 20,178 24,522
Other income 162 15 287 91 253
Total income 29,259 38,533 41,728 39,378 43,851
Total expenditure 15,979 19,691 20,814 24,604 24,553
Surplus 13,280 18,842 20,914 14,774 19,298

3.5.2 The total expenditure stated in Table 3.3 relates to direct expenditure incurred in running
the services that generate the Parking Account income. The income categories relate to
the following:
• Parking meters/pay & display – income from parking meters and pay & display
machines.
• Parking permits: residents – income from parking permits issued to residents in the
London Borough of Camden.
• Parking permits: other – income from parking permits issued to businesses, doctors,
visitors, market traders, and miscellaneous permits in the London Borough of Camden.
• Clamping and removals – income from the penalty fees from clamping cars and the
removal of cars to the car pound and storage fees while at the pound.
• Penalty Charge Notices – income from parking tickets issued to drivers who commit
parking and moving traffic contraventions.
• Other income – this is a variety of income that falls outside the other Parking Account
categories, e.g. the grant from TfL for the Persistent Evader Scheme in 2004/5.
3.5.3 The Parking Account figures for 2006/7 are provisional in that they are from unaudited
accounts and may change as a result of the audit. This does not include all Parking
Service income and expenditure – only the on-street income and expenditure.

25
3.5.4 Although the level of permit and pay & display charges are set by Camden Council, the
level of Penalty Charge Notices, clamping, and removal fees are set externally – by
London Councils with the Mayor of London’s approval and ratified by the Secretary of
State (section 2.2). Table 3.4 shows the highest proportion of income is derived from
PCNs. The relatively high proportion of income from short term parking (now almost
entirely from pay & display bays) reflects the demand for these facilities given Camden’s
central London location.
3.5.5 Changes that have occurred to income levels over this period are due to several factors:
• Penalty charge, clamping and removal fees are changed every four years. There were
increased in 2003/4, hence the step increase in PCN income in that year. They have
changed again in 2007 (in July – section 2.2).
• The range of parking and traffic contraventions that the Council enforces has increased
over this period (section 3.2) so PCN numbers have increased to a peak level in
2004/5.
• Recovery rates for PCNs have improved in recent years (section 3.4). Even though the
total number of PCNs fell in 2006/7 (Table 3.1), the surplus rose in 2006/7 due to
improved recovery rates (section 3.3).
• At the end of each financial year there are a large number of PCNs that have been
issued but have not been paid. We make a prudent estimate of the income we expect
to receive in relation to these tickets and include the figure in the accounts for Parking
Services in the year in which the PCNs were issued. Accounts need to be closed three
months after the end of the financial year. If the amount actually collected is different to
that estimated then an adjustment is made in the subsequent financial year. Since
PCNs payments can occur later than after year close, then the accounts for PCN
revenues in the previous financial year are necessarily estimated. The recovery rate of
PCNs issued in 2003/4 was better than expected, so the adjustment was carried over
as PCN revenue in 2004/5. Hence the increase in PCN revenue in 2004/5 is partly due
to the better than expected revenue from PCNs issued in 2003/4. Similarly a ‘jump’
appears in the PCN revenues for 2006/7 as a consequence of the very strong recovery
rate observed for PCNs issued in 2005/6 (section 3.3).
3.5.6 Table 3.4 shows how the parking surplus identified in Table 3.3 is spent. The Council has
discretion on how to spend any surplus that may arise, within the allowable uses set by
law. What are deemed to be allowable uses have changed over time as new Acts of
Parliament have been passed, hence the relatively recent inclusion of categories of spend
‘highways maintenance’ and ‘home to school transport’. Under current legislation the
application of any surplus is limited to meeting the cost of providing and maintaining
parking facilities, highways improvement schemes, highway maintenance, public
passenger transport services and certain other categories (as explained in Annex C of the
interim Parking and Enforcement Plan). Any amount not so used may be carried forward
in a parking reserve account to the next financial year.

26
Table 3.4 Application of Surplus

2002/3 2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7

£,000 £,000 £,000 £,000 £,000
Off-street parking 600 881 954 821 663
Highways and traffic
improvement, and highways 6,144 8,810 10,144 7,243 7,378
maintenance
Concessionary fares (Freedom
5,562 5,898 6,169 6,710 7,195
Pass) and Taxicard scheme
Transport Planning costs 974 1,280 1,538 1,433
Home to School transport 1,973 2,109 2,629
Total expenditure from
parking surplus 13,280 18,842 20,914 14,774 19,298

3.5.7 Table 3.4 only presents the relevant expenditure in each category up to the amount of the
surplus for each year. The surplus only makes a contribution to these budget heads, the
rest of which comes from other sources. Explanations of allowable relevant expenditure
for these categories are as follows:
• Off-street parking – This relates to staff and running costs at the car parks Camden
manages at Bloomsbury Square, Brunswick Square, and Henderson Court. This
excludes income and includes staff salaries (both temporary and permanent), rent,
rates, and telecoms.
• Highway and traffic improvement, and highways maintenance – This relates to the
highway and traffic improvement expenditure, the debt charge and contributes towards
maintaining Camden’s public highway. It covers items such as contractor and client
project management costs for covering the highway partnering contract, the public
lighting contract, gully cleaning contract, gully repairs and maintenance, traffic
management and control and contribution to improvements such as pedestrian
crossings, cycling facilities and upgrades to the walking environment.
• Concessionary fares (Freedom Pass) and Taxicard scheme.
• Transport Planning costs – This relates to transport planning activities such as the
project management of road safety projects, urban realm improvements, town centre
improvements, preparation of the plans and strategies such as the Walking Plan,
Cycling Plan, Streetscape Design Manual, School Travel Planning, Travel Plans, and
other such activities facilitating the implementation of the Mayor of London’s Transport
Strategy.
• Home to School transport – This relates to the home to school transportation
expenditure under the Special Educational Needs service for certain statemented
pupils (see the Glossary for definition of this term), and certain pupils of the primary
pupil referral unit.

27
3.6 Where PCNs were issued in 2006/7 by type of road
3.6.1 Parking and traffic regulations are in place to satisfy a variety of requirements. Roadspace
for traffic movements and kerbspace for parking are in intense demand in Camden given
the borough’s central London location. Regulations are in place to help balance demand
between different road users and over different times of the day. Further details about
balancing demand are given in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan.
3.6.2 Balancing demand is relatively more important on main roads. For example, the kerbside
lane on a given stretch of road in the ‘rush hour’ might operate as a bus lane, while
between the peaks might have pay & display and loading bays along it. In the evening on
the same stretch there might be no parking controls. On local roads, where the main
parking activity relates to that for residents and their visitors, balancing demand between
different users is generally less of an issue.
3.6.3 Parked vehicles obstructing bus lanes or at bus stops reduces bus efficiency and has
traffic flow consequences. Poorly parked vehicles might obstruct traffic flow, which can
have serious consequences on main roads, or might increase road safety risks.
3.6.4 Figure 3.1 shows the road classification used for Camden’s network management duty.
Transport for London is responsible for certain main roads in London – the ‘red route’
network, also known as the TLRN. All other public roads in Camden are the responsibility
of Camden Council. ‘A’ roads that are not part of the TLRN have been classified as
London’s ‘Strategic Road Network’. The figure shows other major roads in Camden and
district roads (the local distributors). All other roads controlled by Camden Council –
70% of them by road length – are local roads.
3.6.5 Table 3.5 shows the percentage of PCNs issued on different types of roads in the
borough. 57% of PCNs are issued on local roads – which is less than the percentage of
local roads (70%). This reflects the fact that enforcement activity is concentrated on
major roads where there is a strong need to keep traffic moving and balance competing
demand for kerbspace.
3.6.6 Local roads south of Euston Road also have relatively high volumes of PCNs/km,
reflecting the very special nature of these roads in the context of London as a whole,
which are in Central London and comprise part of the Central London Activity Zone.
Nationally significant land uses and buildings are located in this area or adjacent to it –
such as the British Museum, Bloomsbury, Fitzrovia, part of the West End and Covent
Garden, Kings Cross Station, Euston Station, University of London, Hatton Garden and
the City fringe and legal areas around Holborn. Very many businesses are located here.
The demand to balance the use of roadspace and kerbspace is high. As well as having
critical functions in terms of moving traffic it is also a place of great importance to
London and to the nation.
3.6.7 As explained in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan, the Council also responds to
requests from the local community to enforce parking controls in specific local areas as
issues arise. This means that where enforcement activity takes place is liable to vary from
year to year.

28
Figure 3.1 Road classification used for Camden’s network management duty

Key

3.6.8 The enforcement of moving traffic contraventions (MTCs) is strongly related to road
safety. As the table shows, a high percentage of PCNs for MTCs occurs on local roads.
There are specific locations on certain local roads where there is a history of poor
compliance with traffic regulations that need to be adhered to, which relate to road safety
issues. For example, in Boswell Street a left turn into Theobalds’ Road is enforced, since
right turns would conflict with the Holborn gyratory.
3.6.9 Excluding the very local nature of MTCs, the table shows that the number PCNs per km
is highest on major roads, with higher ratios occurring for roads higher up the borough’s
road hierarchy.

29
Table 3.5 Where PCNs were issued in 2006/7 by type of public road maintained by Camden

Local Local
roads – roads – Total
south of north of Number
Major District Euston Euston of PCNs
roads (%) roads (%) Road (%) Road (%) Total (%) issued
PCNs issued by Parking
22.3 11.2 25.8 40.7 100.0 379,615
Attendants ‘on-street’
Parking PCNs observed
89.2 2.2 2.4 6.2 100.0 55,031
by CCTV
Bus Lane PCNs (CCTV) 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 15,324
Moving traffic
contraventions PCNs 42.4 1.1 34.3 22.3 100.0 109,186
(CCTV)
All PCNs 34.9 8.0 24.4 32.6 100.0 559,156

Total
Road lengths, public
48.0 34.3 37.0 158.9 278.3
roads (km)
Road lengths, public
17.3 12.3 13.3 57.1 100.0
roads (%)
PCNs/km (excluding MTC) 3,103 1,271 2,680 995 1,617

Note: SRN PCNs includes some 800 PCNs issued on the TLRN on certain pay & display and residents’ bays originally
established by Camden and for which the Council can enforce.

3.7 Changing levels of demand for kerbside parking in the borough

3.7.1 The demand for kerbspace in Camden is variable and can be very high in certain areas.
Parking controls in general attempt to strike a balance between conflicting demands for
parking. An indicator of parking pressures in a CPZ is the ratio of the number of resident
and business permits (annual equivalents) to the bays that these permit holders may use.
3.7.2 The Table 3.6 gives the ratios of permits to bays for all CPZs in Camden, firstly for
September 2005 – as published in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan – and as at
January 2007. The large reduction of the ratio for zone CA-E arose from the reallocation
of pay & display bays in this zone to residents’ bays (see section 2.5).
3.7.3 As discussed in Camden’s Local Implementation Plan, Camden’s population and the
number of cars owned by residents in the borough is steadily increasing. This means that
the ration of permits to bay is likely to increase over time, since new kerbspace cannot be
created for parking. While there are variations in these ratios betweens zones due to local
factors, the overall pattern over all zones is that the ratio is increasing, as shown at the
bottom of the table.

30
Table 3.6 The ratios of permits to permit holder bays for all CPZs in Camden

Controlled Parking Zone September 2005 January 2007

CA-B Belsize 1.13 1.17
CA-C Holborn and Covent Garden 1.35 1.44
CA-D Kings Cross 1.18 1.17
CA-E Bloomsbury and Fitzrovia 1.48 1.08
CA-F Camden Town 1.13 1.16
CA-G Somers Town 0.98 1.07
CA-H Hampstead 1.23 1.22
CA-J Primrose Hill 0.86 0.85
CA-K Kilburn Priory 1.12 1.07
CA-L West Kentish Town 0.60 0.65
CA-M East Kentish Town 0.91 0.94
CA-N Camden Square 0.84 0.83
CA-P Fortune Green and West End 0.99 1.02
CA-Q Kilburn 0.91 0.89
CA-R Swiss Cottage 1.19 1.20
CA-S Redington and Frognal 0.66 0.67
CA-U Highgate 0.74 0.73
CA-V North End 0.77 0.69
CA-X Elm Village 1.77 1.71
ALL ZONES 0.99 1.00
Note: The high ratio for Elm Village is due to very particular circumstances: some off-street parking is available to
residents but this is not enough for their parking needs. Residents in this zone find it convenient to purchase
sufficient permits to arrange their parking needs flexibly within households with respect to the private and public
spaces available.

3.8 Camden residents’ vehicle fleet composition

3.8.1 To assist in developing an emission-based charging system for resident’s parking permits
(section 2.3) and tariff’s appropriate to the composition of Camden’s fleet, data was
collected in November 2006 on vehicles associated with resident permit applications
throughout the borough.
3.8.2 A total of 2,204 vehicle details were obtained, with an almost 50/50 split of vehicles
registered before March 2001 (‘unbanded’) and those registered on or after March 2001
for which VED banding applies (‘banded’). The average engine size of unbanded vehicles
(1775cc) was smaller than that of banded (1905cc). As older unbanded vehicles are
traded in for newer banded vehicles – and treating this data as typical of the entire
Camden residents’ vehicle fleet – the sample survey indicates that the average vehicle
size in Camden in terms of engine size may well be increasing, which would put more
pressure on available kerbspace to park (section 3.7).
3.8.3 The sample below gives the results of the November 2006 sample survey in terms of the
percentage of the vehicle fleet corresponding to the new tariff structure.

31
Table 3.7 Camden resident fleet composition (November 2006 sample survey)

Tariff 1 Tariff 2 Tariff 3 Tariff 4

Unbanded vehicles (registered before March 2001)
Engine size (cc) 0-1299 1300-1849 1850-2449 2450+
% of permits (based on sample survey) 20.0 43.2 25.3 11.4
Banded vehicles (registered on or after 1st March 2001)
DVLA band A, B, C D, E F G
(g/km) up to 150 151-185 186-224 225+
% of permits (based on sample survey) 20.0 36.4 24.7 18.9

3.9 Statistics on appeals and related information

3.9.1 The Table 3.8 gives the results of parking appeals considered by London’s independent
adjudicators, the Parking And Traffic Appeals Service, PATAS, and the data is derived
wholly from PATAS’s own statistics drawn from reports on its website. Recent data is
given up to the latest information available – for 2005/6.
3.9.2 The number of ‘appeals allowed’ are those cases found against the Council. The number
of ‘appeals refused’ are those cases found against the appellant.
3.9.3 The table shows the percentage of appeals found against the Council for parking
contraventions has generally fallen over this period. In 2005/6, for instance, Camden had
the 9th lowest ‘% appeals allowed’ of the 34 authorities in London (all 33 London
boroughs and TfL) and had a lower figure for this statistic (at 40.1%) than the average for
London authorities (55.6%). The statistics also show that the percentage of cases going
to appeal relative to the number of PCNs issued is less than the London average. The
relatively low number of cases going to appeal in Camden reflects the Council’s success
in resolving matters at an early stage when representations are made to the Council
about tickets issued.
3.9.4 Camden generally is also towards the top of the ‘league’ table in terms of its rank for bus
lane and moving traffic contraventions. Note that, as shown in the table, the number of
authorities enforcing bus lane and moving traffic contraventions has increased over time,
so Camden’s rank should be looked at from that perspective.

32
Table 3.8 PATAS Statistics for Camden and London Authorities

% of PCNs
going to
Of cases going to appeal, % allowed appeal in

Camden
Appeals

Appeals
allowed

London
refused
Average Rank in London
Year
In London
Camden authorities Number Out of...
Parking 2003/4 740 1,054 41.2 58.9 3 33 0.40 (1)
2004/5 530 969 35.4 60.8 6 34 0.32 1.13
2005/6 731 1,092 40.1 55.6 9 34 0.41 1.00
Bus Lane 2003/4 58 107 35.2 42.4 2 12 0.77 (1)
2004/5 36 90 28.6 43.2 2 20 0.28 0.54
2005/6 48 54 47.1 40.5 15 25 0.42 0.45
Moving 2004/5 41 36 53.2 54.7 1 5 0.15 0.23
Traffic
2005/6 145 167 46.5 55.6 3 10 0.29 0.22

Source of data: PATAS

Notes: (1) The number of PCNs issued by London authorities is not available for these years from PATAS statistics

3.10 Performance statistics relating to Camden’s enforcement contracts,

Environment Locals and Parking Attendants’ safety
3.10.1 The Council operates two parking enforcement contracts, for north and south of Euston
Road, and uses the following Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to monitor the
performance of its parking enforcement contracts:
• KPI 1, Staff retention – the contractor has to ensure that the majority of parking
enforcement staff has more than six months experience. It is expected that more than
75% will have more than six months experience through the contractor’s staff retention
scheme.
• KPI 2, Staff training and Training Plan progress – the staff training package has to
include a minimum of two weeks classroom based and four weeks on the job training
for each Parking Attendant. This should cover technical issues on the Road Traffic Act
1991, customer care and dealing with confrontational situations.
• KPI 3, Daily deployment levels – minimum daily deployment levels of Parking Attendants
and supervisory staff are set to ensure that parking compliance is achieved across the
borough.
• KPI 4, Complaints upheld against Parking Attendants – this indicator measures the
number of complaints about Parking Attendant behaviour that are upheld in the
complainants’ favour.

33
 • KPI 5, Reduction in Parking Attendant errors – the contractor has to ensure that
measurable Parking Attendant errors are kept to low levels, with targets for the number
of errors as a proportion of PCNs issued set to reduce over the period of the contract.
• KPI 6, Penalty Charge Notice Achievement Level – the contractor is expected to reach
certain levels of PCNs correctly served in any period based on ongoing practical
experience of the operating environment. The contractor cannot introduce an incentive
scheme that is only related to this level. The Council is negotiating to remove KPI 6 as
a contractual requirement.
3.10.2 The current enforcement contracts started in 2005/6 and Table 3.9 gives the expected
and actual KPIs for the last two financial years.

Table 3.9 KPIs for Camden’s parking enforcement contracts

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Actual

PARKING ENFORCEMENT Expected 2005/6 2006/7
NORTH
KPI 1: Staff retention More than 75% 70% 82%
KPI 2: Training Plan progress 100% 100% 100%
KPI 3: Daily deployment 92% 98% 96%
KPI 4: Complaints upheld against PAs per annum Less than 240 2 0
KPI 5: Parking Attendant errors 2005/6 Less than 5% 2.4%
KPI 5: Parking Attendant errors 2006/7 Less than 4% 2.0%
KPI 6: PCN achievement 2005/6 281,704 245,781
KPI 6: level 2006/7 242,361 244,704
SOUTH
KPI 1: Staff retention More than 75% 66% 83%
KPI 2: Training Plan progress 100% 100% 100%
KPI 3: Daily Deployment 92% 101% 98%
KPI 4: Complaints upheld against PAs per annum Less than 240 0 2
KPI 5: Parking Attendant errors 2005/6 Less than 5% 1.9%
KPI 5: Parking Attendant errors 2006/7 Less than 4% 2.1%
KPI 6: PCN achievement 2005/6 168,780 140,353
KPI 6: level 2006/7 132,176 132,219

3.10.3 Camden also collects KPIs for its Environment Locals – those directly operated by
Parking Services (St Pancras Way, Hampstead and Holborn, which closed in 2006/7) and
under contract in Kilburn.

34
Table 3.10 KPIs for Camden’s Environment Locals

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Actual

ENVIRONMENT LOCALS Expected 2005/6 2006/7
KPI 1: Opening/closing hours 100% 100% 100%
KPI 2: Number of complaints upheld per annum Less than 60 0 2
KPI 3: Cash handling accuracy 98% 100% 100%
KPI 4: Errors in administration of permits
Less than 1% 0% 0.16%
and other products

3.10.4 Unfortunately, Parking Attendants are subject to high levels of abuse and assault, both
verbal and physical, whilst carrying out their duties. In order to provide support to PA’s
our contractor has implemented an alarm system that can be sent by personal radio to
their control room.
• If code yellow is sent by a PA it indicates that he or she is being subjected to an
intense verbal assault that could become physical. PA’s are encouraged to distance
themselves from the person who is abusing them at this point.
• Code red indicates that a PA either has been subjected to a physical assault or feels
that it is imminent. If a Code Red is broadcast all PA’s and mobile units in the area will
move to provide support to the threatened PA.
The statistics shown in the Table 3.11 show that the incidence of verbal assault has fallen
sharply but the number of physical assaults has risen.

Table 3.11 Annual statistics on Parking Attendants’ safety

Actual
2005/6 2006/7
Code Reds 89 111
Code Yellows 65 33

3.10.5 Camden has entered into a ‘Partnership Plus’ agreement with the Police and its parking
enforcement contractor. The aims of this agreement include the reporting and
investigating of allegations of assaults on enforcement staff, the sharing of
information/intelligence relating to preventing crime, disorder and similar incidents, how
support may be provided to deal with civil and local emergency events and training
relating to these issues. All acts of abuse or assault on enforcement staff are
unacceptable and Camden treats them with the utmost seriousness; the ‘Partnership
Plus’ agreement underscores our commitment to dealing with them.

35
3.11 Traffic flow data
3.11.1 Managing the road network in London is challenging given that there is a finite supply of
roadspace and kerbspace. Demand for the use of this space – for moving traffic, for
servicing and for parking – considerably exceeds capacity in many parts of London,
especially in the inner areas.
3.11.2 Camden, situated as it is in the centre of London, experiences some of the worst
congestion in Britain. Parking and enforcement policies offer important and effective
means of managing demand: the extent, location and cost of parking have major
implications for traffic levels, traffic congestion, the efficiency of public transport services
and the health of the local economy. Parking controls should therefore be seen as a
component of wider demand management techniques that restrain traffic.
3.11.3 The introduction of CPZs resulted in a reduction of traffic as our parking beat surveys
demonstrate, Table 3.12.

Table 3.12 The results of parking beat surveys

Reduction in parked vehicles

(%)
Zone Daytime Evening
CPZs with ‘standard control hours’
8.30am-6.00pm or longer
CA-J Primrose Hill 45 33
CA-L West Kentish Town (Outer) 60 43
CA-M East Kentish Town 45 27
CA-N Camden Square 57 29
CA-P (a)/(b) Fortune Green 27 24
CA-Q Kilburn 38 40
CA-R Swiss Cottage 31 33
Average 43 33
CPZs with 2-hour controls
CA-P (c) Fortune Green 40 28
CA-L West Kentish Town (Inner) 47 41
CA-S Redington/Frognal 58 34
CA-U Highgate 32 18
Average 44 30

3.11.4 Further details about the relationship between restraining traffic, parking policies and
other Council policies are dealt with in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan,
Camden’s Local Implementation Plan and the Network Management Plan, which may be
found on the Council website:
www.camden.gov.uk/parkingplan
www.camden.gov.uk/lip
www.camden.gov.uk/nmp

36
3.11.5 Changes in road traffic flows are monitored by determining the change in volume and
type of traffic passing across a screen lines. There are four screenlines in Camden – three
assess changes in north-south radial traffic through the borough and one catches east-
west orbital traffic across the borough.
3.11.6 The results of the latest counts in 2006 are given in the Table 3.13. Data has been
collected from 1996 onwards, though data is presented here from 2001, which is the
baseline for our motorised traffic reduction target of 15% by 2011.
3.11.7 In summary:
• Cycling grew strongly by 15% between 2005 and 2006, and by 95% between 2001
and 2006.
• The trend is that car traffic continues to fall. Even though it increased in 2005, between
2005 and 2006 it fell by 2.9%. Over the whole period 1996-2006 it fell by 31%, with a
fall of 19% from the 2001 baseline.
• Traffic levels for buses, motorcycles, taxis and light goods vehicle flows have
increased.
• Overall, motorised traffic (i.e. excluding cycles) grew by 1.7% between 2005 and 2006,
but otherwise fell by 7% between 2001 and 2006 – largely due to the fall in car traffic.
There was a low in 2004 and slight rises since.

Table 3.13 Traffic flow data

6hr count totals over Calendar Year % Change % Change

all screenlines 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2001 to 2005 to
2006 2006
Cycle 12,070 12,652 13,974 16,525 20,416 23,496 94.7 15.1
Motorcycle 18,026 17,742 17,484 17,231 18,129 19,710 9.3 8.7
Taxi 27,081 28,441 30,800 30,654 31,954 35,577 31.4 11.3
Light goods vehicle 40,563 38,530 37,718 37,515 38,776 40,219 –0.8 3.7
Medium goods vehicle 12,737 12,150 11,653 10,969 10,281 10,561 –17.1 2.7
Heavy goods vehicle 1,688 1,426 1,602 1,660 1,865 2,409 42.7 29.2
Bus and other PSVs 5,611 6,220 7,060 7,494 8,820 9,394 67.4 6.5
Car 159,577 145,539 134,344 129,349 132,672 128,869 –19.2 –2.9
Total flow 277,353 262,700 254,635 251,397 262,913 270,235 –2.6 2.8
Motorised vehicles 265,283 250,048 240,661 234,872 242,497 246,739 –7.0 1.7

Notes: PSVs are ‘Passenger Service Vehicles’, such as coaches and minibuses.
Notes: Motorised vehicles exclude cycles.

37
3.12 Road Safety
3.12.1 Camden enforces its parking and traffic regulations vigorously in an even-handed way so
as to improve compliance with regulations, which in turn has a general beneficial impact
on road safety. Badly parked cars, for example on street corners, can pose safety
hazards, while enforcing bus lanes has the effect of reducing conflicts between buses
and other road traffic. Enforcing moving traffic contraventions has obvious road safety
benefits, and these can be very localised in nature – such as enforcing one ways
(section 3.2). Under the new system of differential penalty charges, moving traffic
contraventions involve the higher penalty charge rate as an explicit address to safety
concerns (section 2.2). Further details about the relationship between road safety
and enforcing parking and traffic regulations are given in the interim Parking and
Enforcement Plan.
3.12.2 Camden continues to adopt a wide ranging approach to casualty reduction in the
borough involving education, training and publicity programmes, engineering measures
and the full use of our enforcement powers. Further details are given in Camden’s Local
Implementation Plan and in particular the Road Safety Plan.
3.12.3 Overall, total casualties in 2006 – the latest year available – were down (by 16% on
2005) for the fifth year in succession. For the first time, in 2006 the total number of
casualties – slight casualties and killed or seriously injured casualties (KSIs) – fell
below 1,000.

Table 3.14 Road casualty statistics

% annual
change 2005
Casualty type 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 to 2006
KSI total 232 192 148 131 123 –6
Slight total 1,172 1,078 1,026 905 748 –17
TOTAL – all casualties 1,404 1,270 1,174 1,036 871 –16
Casualty totals for target groups
KSI children 17 18 9 11 8 –27
KSI pedestrians 91 86 61 58 57 –2
KSI cyclists 28 23 20 19 16 –16
KSI motorcyclists 49 36 37 33 29 –12

3.12.4 Camden had already met most of the Mayor’s original 2010 casualty reduction targets by
2004. Tougher targets were introduced in 2004 and are set out below. Camden remains
on course to meet all the new 2010 targets. There were reductions in every category for
2006 compared with 2005, with the target for killed or seriously injured casualties (KSIs)
now met. For the fourth year running there were no child fatalities and we have now met

38
 the new 60% child KSI casualties’ target. Despite a continued fall in motorcycle
casualties this group remains the most difficult to influence in London, although we are
making steady progress towards this target. Reductions in cycle and pedestrian
casualties were achieved against a background of rising numbers of both on
Camden’s streets.

Table 3.15 Road casualty targets

Baseline New Target for 2010 2006 casualties

(1994/98 % reduction Casualty (% change from
Casualty type average) required numbers baseline)
KSI total 250 50 125 123 (–51)
Slight casualties 1,431 25 1,073 748 (–48)
Casualty totals for target groups
KSI children 25 60 10 8 (–68)
KSI pedestrians 104 50 52 57 (–45)
KSI cyclists 31 50 15 16 (–48)
KSI motorcyclists 41 40 25 29 (–29)

3.13 Air Quality

3.13.1 Air pollution is an important environmental issue in Camden. Despite the reduction in
motorised traffic in the borough over the last decade (section 3.11) the Council’s
monitoring of air quality has shown that Camden has exceeded the Government’s
health based air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter for
the last seven years. This is because Camden cannot be isolated from the
wider pollution effects of being situated in the centre of one of Europe’s largest
conurbations and the broader influence of levels of pollution originating elsewhere in
Britain and Europe. Poor air quality is also a serious issue for Camden’s neighbouring
authorities.
3.13.2 Having said this, road traffic is the dominant source of nitrogen oxides (33%) and
particulate matter emissions (53%). Road transport is responsible for 85% of carbon
dioxide emissions in the borough, with cars contributing the largest proportion of
emissions. Carbon dioxide is a green house gas responsible for global warming and
driving climate change, and it is intended that the Council’s emission-based charging
policy for residents’ permits (section 2.3) and its policy of encouraging the use of electric
vehicles (section 2.4) will help address this issue, in conjunction with other measures to
encourage a mode shift to public transport, walking and cycling (as discussed in
Camden’s Local Implementation Plan).
3.13.3 Fuel efficiency and vehicle size are important characteristics that influence exhaust
emissions. Measures to encourage people to use more fuel efficient and smaller vehicles
will benefit both air quality and climate change.

39
3.13.4 It should be highlighted that diesel vehicles produce lower carbon dioxide emissions than
vehicles fuelled by petrol. However, diesel vehicles give rise to higher emissions of
nitrogen oxides and particulate matter.
3.13.5 Further details about air quality monitoring can be found in the Council’s Air Quality and
Action Plan Progress Report 2007.

40
Glossary
This glossary provides:
• The full title to common acronyms used through the document.

• Definitions of technical terms used.

ALG Association of London Government, now known as London Councils.

Annual Report This is the abbreviated name for this document, the Annual Parking and
Enforcement Report.

Bands (for PCNs) PCN levels for Camden are in Band A – the highest band – except for a
few boundary roads that are in the next lowest level, Band B, which
generally applies in Outer London. The interim Parking and Enforcement
Plan specifies which roads are in Band B.

CCTV ‘Closed Circuit Television’: relates to the camera and associated

technology that may be used for surveillance and enforcement purposes.

CC Charge Certificate

CPZ Controlled Parking Zone. All public highways in Camden are covered by
CPZs in which parking is regulated within certain controlled hours. The
hours of control vary between CPZs, and in some CPZs there are sub­
areas with their own hours of control. The hours and days of control in
CPZs and sub-areas have been developed to meet local community
needs following detailed consultation.

Contravention This refers to a breach of parking, bus lane and certain moving traffic
regulations. This was formerly referred to as an ‘offence’ when regulations
were enforced by the Police. All London traffic authorities – the London
boroughs, the City of London and Transport for London (TfL) – have taken
up enforcement powers for parking and bus lanes. Not all London traffic
authorities have taken up enforcement of certain moving traffic
contraventions (see Appendix 1), though an increasing number of
authorities are doing so. Other traffic offences, such as speeding and
dangerous driving, are still enforced by the Police.

Decriminalisation This is the process whereby local authorities take up enforcement powers
from the Police. Camden has taken up powers to enforce parking, bus
lanes and certain moving traffic contraventions (such as banned moves).

EN Enforcement Notice

Enforcement In this document ‘enforcement’ activity by the Council covers that of

parking controls and decriminalised traffic contraventions (enforcement of
bus lanes and of moving traffic offences).

41
GLA Greater London Authority. This was formed in 2000 by the Greater
London Authority Act 1999.

KPI Key Performance indicator

KSI Killed and seriously injured – this relates to annual road casualties.

London Councils This body represents the interests of local government in London,
comprising nominated representatives, with a small specialist staff. It is
responsible for the parking adjudication service, and administration of the
London lorry ban.

MTCs Moving Traffic Contraventions

NTO Notice to Owner

PATAS Parking And Traffic Appeals Service

PA Parking Attendant

PCN Penalty Charge Notice

PiP Partners in Parking – is a partnership of Central London boroughs

regarding parking matters – see section 2.9.

Recovery rate The percentage of PCNs issued that have been paid. Non payment of
PCNs may arise due to those receiving the PCN or as a consequence of
the Council not being able to obtain the keeper details from the DVLA
(Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency).

Statemented pupils This relates to pupils with special education needs, whose needs are
assessed by the Council and described in a ‘statement’ describing the
special help they should receive.

TEC London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee (formerly

ALG TEC).

TfL Transport for London, one of the bodies that the GLA and the Mayor of
London is responsible for.

TLRN Transport for London Road Network – This is the ‘GLA Road’ network as
defined and brought into being by the Greater London Authority Act 1999.

TMO Traffic Management Order. TMO is used as a generic term in this report to
cover any traffic management or traffic regulation orders that are used to
designate parking and traffic controls.

42
Traffic authority This has the same meaning as in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.
‘Local traffic authority’ (“LTA”) means a traffic authority other than the
Secretary of State or the National Assembly for Wales – i.e. the
appropriate level of ‘local government’ that pertains to a particular area.
In London each of the 33 London Boroughs (including the Corporation of
London) is the LTA for borough roads. TfL is the LTA for the TLRN.

VED Vehicle exercise duty – the annual ‘car tax’.

43
Appendix 1: Moving Traffic Contraventions
The Council has taken up powers to enforce the following moving traffic contraventions that are
clearly indicated by road signs and lines.

44
 Design and print by Cameron Graphic Services
Published October 2007 CGS21556

Street Policy Parking Services

Culture and Environment Directorate
London Borough of Camden
Argyle Street
London WC1H 8EQ
Telephone: 020 7974 4444
www.camden.gov.uk
Culture and Environment Directorate
London Borough of Camden
100 St Pancras Way
London NW1 9NF
Telephone: 020 7974 4646
www.camden.gov.uk