Annual Parking and

Enforcement Report

October 2007

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.


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


Table of Contents
Foreword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A note on the Council website . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
The purpose of this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Listening to community views on parking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
What’s new. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Ending widespread clamping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
The introduction of differential PCN charging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
The introduction of emission-based charges for residents’ parking permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
New arrangements and facilities for the owners of electric vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
The introduction of visitor permits south of Euston Road. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
The enhanced offer of visitor permits to elderly and housebound residents . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Changes to the way parking suspensions are conducted, including the provision of
a new e-alert service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Changes to vehicle removals policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Harmonisation of parking policy by central London boroughs through the Partners
in Parking project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.8 2.9

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 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Statistics, financial information, reviews and monitoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
The number of PCNs issued in 2006/7 by contravention type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Photographic records of contraventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
PCN recovery rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
The incidence of clamping and vehicle removals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24


3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9

Financial statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Where PCNs were issued in 2006/7 by type of road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Changing levels of demand for kerbside parking in the borough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Camden residents’ vehicle fleet composition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
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


1.1 1.1.1

Overview 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.


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:


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. 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.

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 1.2.1 1.2.2

A note on the Council website Up to date information about parking conditions in the borough is provided on the Council website. 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: Other general information about parking bays in Camden can be found at:


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.



Drivers can look up current and planned parking bay suspensions in any street or CPZ in the borough by visiting the following: Details about the Council’s online email alerts for suspensions are given on:


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:

1.3 1.3.1

The purpose of this document 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. 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). 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. 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). 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. 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.


1.3.3 1.3.4




1.3.7 1.4 1.4.1

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. Listening to community views on parking 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. 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. 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. The Council also recently consulted on CPZ arrangements in the borough (section 2.11).





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


2.1 2.1.1

What’s new
Ending widespread clamping 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. 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. 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.) The introduction of differential PCN charging 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. 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. 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



2.2 2.2.1




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


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. 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. Charges (£) Band A 80 120


Table 2.1: 2-tier charge levels for PCNs ‘Minor’ parking breaches ‘More serious’ parking contraventions and moving traffic contraventions


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. 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.



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



Further details about how the new system of differential charges works are given on the Council website:

2.2.10 The Council has produced a leaflet about avoiding fines, and this can be viewed on the Council website:
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 2.3.1

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



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. 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 Unbanded vehicles (registered before March 2001) Engine size (cc) 0-1299 1300-1849 1850-2449 Banded vehicles (registered on or after 1st March 2001) DVLA band (g/km) A, B, C D, E F up to 150 151-185 186-224 Annual (1) 70 85 105 Six months 37 45 56 Three months 20 25 30 One month 9 11 14

Tariff 4 2450+ G 225+ 145 77 42 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.


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


2.4 2.4.1

5 6

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.


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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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






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: 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. 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). The introduction of visitor permits south of Euston Road 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. 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. 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. 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.


2.5 2.5.1 2.5.2



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) ).



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. The enhanced offer of visitor permits to elderly and housebound residents 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. 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. 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. Changes to the way parking suspensions are conducted, including the provision of a new e-alert service Respondents to the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation raised concerns about when suspensions commence and end. 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. 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: • The Council considered whether e-alerts could also be sent via SMS-texting, but it was decided that this was not economically viable.

2.6 2.6.1 2.6.2


2.7 2.7.1 2.7.2



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


• 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 2.7.5 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. 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. Changes to vehicle removals policy 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. Harmonisation of parking policy by central London boroughs through the Partners in Parking project 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

2.8 2.8.1

2.9 2.9.1


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


(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.


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 2007.


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.


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


Table 2.3: The school run, the preferred option for each group
% of respondents stating choice as their ‘most preferred’ option Option 1 Zero permits from Sept 2007 Residents without children Residents with children Parents Schools Resident Associations 48% 13% 2% 0% 0% Option 2 Zero permits from Sept 2008 28% 8% 1% 8% 95% Option 3 Hold the permits at the 40% level (1) 13% 63% 53% 83% 3% Option 4 Hold the permits at the 20% level (1) 10% 16% 4% 8% 2%

No response 1% 0% 40% 1% 0%

Note: (1) The percentages quoted are relative to the 2004 allocation levels.


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

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.


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:

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.


3.1 3.1.1

Statistics, Financial Information, Reviews and Monitoring
The number of PCNs issued in 2006/7 by contravention type 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)


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


Controlled Parking Zones in Camden
Times shown are correct at time of publication (September 2007) and may change. Please check controlled times on-street when you 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.

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 1996. Licence No.LA086339, and mapping information from the Geographers’ A-Z Company Ltd licence No.134 to the London Borough of Camden. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.

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-H Hampstead – main sub-area Mon-Sat 09.00-20.00 (pay & display free after 18.00) CA-H(a) Hampstead – sub-area Mon-Sat 09.00-18.00 CA-H(b) Hampstead – sub-area Mon-Sat 09.00-20.00 CA-H(c) Hampstead – sub-area Mon-Sat 09.00-19.00 CA-H(d) Hampstead – sub-area Mon-Sat 09.00-22.00 CA-J Primrose Hill Mon-Fri 08.30-1800 CA-K Kilburn Priory Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 CA-L Outer West Kentish Town – sub area Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 CA-L Inner West Kentish Town – sub area Mon-Fri 09.00-11.00 CA-M East Kentish Town Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 CA-N Camden Square Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 CA-P(a) Fortune Green – sub-area Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 CA-P(b) Fortune Green – sub-area Mon-Sat 08.30-18.30 CA-P(c) Fortune Green – sub-area Mon-Fri 10.00-12.00 CA-Q Kilburn Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 CA-R(a) Swiss Cottage – sub area Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 CA-R(b) Swiss Cottage – sub area Mon-Sat 08.30-22.00 CA-S(a) Redington & Frognal – sub area Mon-Fri 12.30-14.30 CA-S(b) Redington & Frognal – sub area Mon-Sat 09.00-18.00 CA-S/W(a) Redington & Frognal – sub area Mon-Fri 12.30-14.30 CA-S/W(b) Redington & Frognal – sub area Mon-Sat 09.00-18.00 CA-U Highgate Mon-Fri 10.00-12.00 CA-V North End Mon-Fri 11.00-13.00 Except Sandy Road Mon-Sun 08.30-18.30 CA-X Elm Village Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 Park Crown Estates Mon-Fri 08.30-18.30 Sat 09.30-17.30 Sun (Res Only) 09.30-17.30


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.


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.


Details are given in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan.


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 3.2.1

Photographic records of contraventions 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. 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. 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. 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%. 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.







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 Vehicles Clamped Vehicles Removed 32,234 10,371 2003/4 29,554 9,456 2004/5 26,070 4,833 2005/6 26,453 8,697 2006/7 8,113 8,732


3.5 3.5.1

Financial statistics 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 Income Parking meters/pay & display Parking permits: residents Parking permits: other Clamping and removals Penalty Charge Notices Other income Total income Total expenditure Surplus £,000 11,070 2,373 958 2,635 12,061 162 29,259 15,979 13,280 2003/4 £,000 10,971 2,667 1,031 3,232 20,617 15 38,533 19,691 18,842 2004/5 £,000 11,047 2,670 1,210 3,047 23,467 287 41,728 20,814 20,914 2005/6 £,000 11,822 2,862 1,444 2,981 20,178 91 39,378 24,604 14,774 2006/7 £,000 12,045 2,910 2,193 1,928 24,522 253 43,851 24,553 19,298


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.


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.



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. 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).



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.


Table 3.4 Application of Surplus
2002/3 £,000 Off-street parking Highways and traffic improvement, and highways maintenance Concessionary fares (Freedom Pass) and Taxicard scheme Transport Planning costs Home to School transport Total expenditure from parking surplus 13,280 600 6,144 2003/4 £,000 881 8,810 2004/5 £,000 954 10,144 2005/6 £,000 821 7,243 2006/7 £,000 663 7,378

5,562 974

5,898 1,280 1,973 18,842

6,169 1,538 2,109 20,914


7,195 1,433 2,629




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.


3.6 3.6.1

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








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



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. 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.



Table 3.5 Where PCNs were issued in 2006/7 by type of public road maintained by Camden
Local roads – south of Euston Road (%) 25.8 2.4 0.0 34.3 24.4 Local roads – north of Euston Road (%) 40.7 6.2 0.0 22.3 32.6

Major roads (%) PCNs issued by Parking Attendants ‘on-street’ Parking PCNs observed by CCTV Bus Lane PCNs (CCTV) Moving traffic contraventions PCNs (CCTV) All PCNs 22.3 89.2 100.0 42.4 34.9

District roads (%) 11.2 2.2 0.0 1.1 8.0

Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Total Number of PCNs issued 379,615 55,031 15,324 109,186 559,156

Total Road lengths, public roads (km) Road lengths, public roads (%) PCNs/km (excluding MTC) 48.0 17.3 3,103 34.3 12.3 1,271 37.0 13.3 2,680 158.9 57.1 995 278.3 100.0 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 3.7.1

Changing levels of demand for kerbside parking in the borough 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. 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). 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.




Table 3.6 The ratios of permits to permit holder bays for all CPZs in Camden Controlled Parking Zone CA-B Belsize CA-C Holborn and Covent Garden CA-D Kings Cross CA-E Bloomsbury and Fitzrovia CA-F Camden Town CA-G Somers Town CA-H Hampstead CA-J Primrose Hill CA-K Kilburn Priory CA-L West Kentish Town CA-M East Kentish Town CA-N Camden Square CA-P Fortune Green and West End CA-Q Kilburn CA-R Swiss Cottage CA-S Redington and Frognal CA-U Highgate CA-V North End CA-X Elm Village ALL ZONES September 2005 1.13 1.35 1.18 1.48 1.13 0.98 1.23 0.86 1.12 0.60 0.91 0.84 0.99 0.91 1.19 0.66 0.74 0.77 1.77 0.99 January 2007 1.17 1.44 1.17 1.08 1.16 1.07 1.22 0.85 1.07 0.65 0.94 0.83 1.02 0.89 1.20 0.67 0.73 0.69 1.71 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 3.8.1

Camden residents’ vehicle fleet composition 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. 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). 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.



Table 3.7 Camden resident fleet composition (November 2006 sample survey)
Tariff 1 Unbanded vehicles (registered before March 2001) Engine size (cc) % of permits (based on sample survey) DVLA band (g/km) % of permits (based on sample survey) 0-1299 20.0 A, B, C up to 150 20.0 1300-1849 43.2 D, E 151-185 36.4 1850-2449 25.3 F 186-224 24.7 2450+ 11.4 G 225+ 18.9 Tariff 2 Tariff 3 Tariff 4

Banded vehicles (registered on or after 1st March 2001)

3.9 3.9.1

Statistics on appeals and related information 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. The number of ‘appeals allowed’ are those cases found against the Council. The number of ‘appeals refused’ are those cases found against the appellant. 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. 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.

3.9.2 3.9.3



Table 3.8 PATAS Statistics for Camden and London Authorities
% of PCNs going to appeal in Camden London (1) 1.13 1.00 (1) 0.54 0.45 0.23 0.22 33

Of cases going to appeal, % allowed Appeals allowed Appeals refused Average London authorities 58.9 60.8 55.6 42.4 43.2 40.5 54.7 55.6 Year Rank in London Number 3 6 9 2 2 15 1 3 Out of... 33 34 34 12 20 25 5 10

In Camden 41.2 35.4 40.1 35.2 28.6 47.1 53.2 46.5


2003/4 2004/5 2005/6

740 530 731 58 36 48 41 145

1,054 969 1,092 107 90 54 36 167

0.40 0.32 0.41 0.77 0.28 0.42 0.15 0.29

Bus Lane

2003/4 2004/5 2005/6

Moving Traffic

2004/5 2005/6

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


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.

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

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.


Table 3.10 KPIs for Camden’s Environment Locals
KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ENVIRONMENT LOCALS KPI 1: Opening/closing hours KPI 2: Number of complaints upheld per annum KPI 3: Cash handling accuracy KPI 4: Errors in administration of permits and other products Actual Expected 100% Less than 60 98% Less than 1% 2005/6 100% 0 100% 0% 2006/7 100% 2 100% 0.16%

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 Code Reds Code Yellows 89 65 2006/7 111 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.



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 CPZs with ‘standard control hours’ 8.30am-6.00pm or longer Primrose Hill West Kentish Town (Outer) East Kentish Town Camden Square Fortune Green Kilburn Swiss Cottage CPZs with 2-hour controls Fortune Green West Kentish Town (Inner) Redington/Frognal Highgate Daytime Evening

CA-J CA-L CA-M CA-N CA-P (a)/(b) CA-Q CA-R Average CA-P (c) CA-L CA-S CA-U Average

45 60 45 57 27 38 31 43 40 47 58 32 44

33 43 27 29 24 40 33 33 28 41 34 18 30


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:


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 eastwest 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 all screenlines Cycle Motorcycle Taxi Light goods vehicle Medium goods vehicle Heavy goods vehicle Bus and other PSVs Car Total flow Motorised vehicles Calendar Year 2001 12,070 18,026 27,081 40,563 12,737 1,688 5,611 2002 12,652 17,742 28,441 38,530 12,150 1,426 6,220 2003 13,974 17,484 30,800 37,718 11,653 1,602 7,060 2004 16,525 17,231 30,654 37,515 10,969 1,660 7,494 2005 20,416 18,129 31,954 38,776 10,281 1,865 8,820 2006 23,496 19,710 35,577 40,219 10,561 2,409 9,394 % Change % Change 2001 to 2005 to 2006 2006 94.7 9.3 31.4 –0.8 –17.1 42.7 67.4 –19.2 –2.6 –7.0 15.1 8.7 11.3 3.7 2.7 29.2 6.5 –2.9 2.8 1.7

159,577 145,539 134,344 129,349 132,672 128,869 277,353 262,700 254,635 251,397 262,913 270,235 265,283 250,048 240,661 234,872 242,497 246,739

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



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 to 2006 –6 –17 –16 –27 –2 –16 –12

Casualty type KSI total Slight total TOTAL – all casualties KSI children KSI pedestrians KSI cyclists KSI motorcyclists

2002 232 1,172 1,404 17 91 28 49

2003 192 1,078 1,270 18 86 23 36

2004 148 1,026 1,174 9 61 20 37

2005 131 905 1,036 11 58 19 33

2006 123 748 871 8 57 16 29

Casualty totals for target groups

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


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 (1994/98 average) 250 1,431 25 104 31 41 New Target for 2010 % reduction required 50 25 60 50 50 40 Casualty numbers 125 1,073 10 52 15 25 2006 casualties (% change from baseline) 123 (–51) 748 (–48) 8 (–68) 57 (–45) 16 (–48) 29 (–29)

Casualty type KSI total Slight casualties

Casualty totals for target groups KSI children KSI pedestrians KSI cyclists KSI motorcyclists


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.


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.


This glossary provides: • The full title to common acronyms used through the document. • Definitions of technical terms used. ALG Annual Report Association of London Government, now known as London Councils. This is the abbreviated name for this document, the Annual Parking and Enforcement Report. 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. ‘Closed Circuit Television’: relates to the camera and associated technology that may be used for surveillance and enforcement purposes. Charge Certificate 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. 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. 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). Enforcement Notice 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).

Bands (for PCNs)





EN Enforcement



Greater London Authority. This was formed in 2000 by the Greater London Authority Act 1999. Key Performance indicator Killed and seriously injured – this relates to annual road casualties. 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. Moving Traffic Contraventions Notice to Owner Parking And Traffic Appeals Service Parking Attendant Penalty Charge Notice Partners in Parking – is a partnership of Central London boroughs regarding parking matters – see section 2.9. 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). 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. London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee (formerly ALG TEC). Transport for London, one of the bodies that the GLA and the Mayor of London is responsible for. Transport for London Road Network – This is the ‘GLA Road’ network as defined and brought into being by the Greater London Authority Act 1999. 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.

KPI KSI London Councils


Recovery rate

Statemented pupils






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



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.


Street Policy Culture and Environment Directorate London Borough of Camden Argyle Street London WC1H 8EQ Telephone: 020 7974 4444

Parking Services Culture and Environment Directorate London Borough of Camden 100 St Pancras Way London NW1 9NF Telephone: 020 7974 4646

Published October 2007 CGS21556 Design and print by Cameron Graphic Services