Page 1

Agenda Item 1

TECHNICAL SERVICES, ENVIRONMENT, PROJECTS MANAGEMENT AND COASTAL AND FLOOD DEFENCES PORTFOLIO TO BE HELD ON 18 SEPTEMBER 2009
Key Decision Cabinet Portfolio Holder Corporate Priority: Improving the performance of our services and ensuring they provide value for money Date of Decision/ Referral to O&S Deadline for call-in 5.00pm Implementation Date (if no call-in) NO Cllr A Backhouse 18 September 2009

23 September 2009 24 September 2009

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF TECHNICAL SERVICES – 09/540 WARDS AFFECTED: ALL SUBJECT: PARKING SERVICES ANNUAL REPORT – 2008/09

RECOMMENDATION (S):
To receive and approve for publication the annual report on the performance of the Council’s parking enforcement operation.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION (S):
In order to comply with statutory requirements in relation to reporting of the performance of the car parking operation.

HIGHLIGHTED RISKS:
Failure to provide an annual report would mean that the Council is not complying with the requirements as laid down in Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 with regards to annual reports.

Page 2

1.
1.1

INTRODUCTION
The Borough Council has operated Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE) since the 31 July 2007. Under the terms of the Traffic Management Act 2004 the enforcement of parking became Civil Parking Enforcement (CPE) on 31 March 2008. The Council is required to report annually to the Department for Transport on enforcement statistics. This report provides an overview of the performance of the service. Under the terms of the Statutory Instrument, the Council is required to report annually to the Department for Transport on enforcement statistics. This report provides an overview of the performance of the service for the year to the 31 March 2009. Reporting is an important part of accountability. Monitoring also provides the Council with management information for performance evaluation and helps to identify where it needs to improve its DPE. Enforcement authorities are expected to produce an annual report about their enforcement activities within six months of the end of each financial year. The report is required to be published.

1.2

1.3

2.
2.1

CORPORATE AIMS/PRIORITIES AND THE COMMUNITY PLAN
The parking function relates to the following Corporate Objectives: Objective 5: To develop tourism and improve opportunities for leisure Objective 7: To help deliver an integrated transport system

2.2

In addition the key objectives of DPE are: To keep traffic moving through improving: • • • • Enforcement of loading restrictions and bus stops Enforcement of designated parking spaces, including disabled bays, taxi bays and residents parking zones Ensure compliance with parking regulations Links to integrated transport strategies and policies (including supporting park and ride services)

3.
3.1

BACKGROUND AND ISSUES
The Borough Council carries out enforcement of all on-street parking covered by a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) within the whole of the Borough, under a Parking Agreement with North Yorkshire County Council. The Parking Agreement operates on the basis that the Council recovers its costs for administering the DPE and any surpluses from this agreement are held by the Borough Council on behalf of the County Council and are ring-fenced for expenditure on transport related projects within the Borough. The County

Page 3

Council have indicated that this will include meeting any initial shortfall in funding arising from the operation of Park and Ride in Scarborough. 3.2 Information about parking and parking enforcement is available via the Borough Council’s website. The address is www.scarborough.gov.uk and in addition a number of guides are produced and distributed giving information about parking throughout the Borough. It should be noted that statistical information is taken from a ‘live’ system which updates daily. The figures in this report are correct as at the 1 September 2009. Enforcement of the TRO’s, including car parks, resident’s bays and waiting restrictions is undertaken across the Borough by Borough Council staff and in the case of on-street parking on behalf of the North Yorkshire County Council. In addition to the issuing of Penalty Charge Notices (PCN’s), these staff also undertake routine maintenance inspections, coning duties and the display of signs and setting out of cones for parking suspensions. The service has a Parking and CCTV Manager supported by an Enforcement Supervisor who in turn manages 3 Senior Civil Enforcement Officers with 15 full time Civil Enforcement Officers operating across the Borough. In addition up to 8 Seasonal Civil Enforcement Officers are employed to assist during peak periods. The Patrols are complemented by the use of two mopeds allowing better access to the more rural areas of the Borough. Patrols are carried out during the hours of 8 am to 8 pm. However, spot checks are carried out outside these hours, of areas where a problem occurs on a more regular basis. The collection of cash is undertaken by the Financial Services team and the in house parking engineer ensures the correct operation and the re-supply of tickets for the car park ticket machines across the Borough. Processing of PCN’s and informal objections are dealt with by a small team of officers also under the Parking and CCTV Manager comprising of a Parking Services Officer and 3 full time Parking Admin Assistants. There is a full time Representations Officer who deals with formal objections. Training is given to all enforcement staff in Customer Care, Health and Safety, Personal Safety and First Aid. All staff have an annual appraisal to establish learning gaps and personal development needs. Since DPE was introduced there has been a more rigorous enforcement of TRO’s. This has prompted some public comment. Nevertheless most people acknowledge that the approach is warranted and the Council received many requests for enforcement from, the public who appreciate the need for traffic regulation orders to help regulate the use of highway and other lands.

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

3.10

Page 4

4.
4.1

CONSULTATION
Enforcement authorities are expected to produce an annual report about their enforcement activities within six months of the end of each financial year. The report should be published and as a minimum it should cover the financial, statistical and other data. Enforcement authorities should make annual returns to the Government about the number and speed of payment of PCNs. In addition authorities must advise the appropriate Parking Adjudication Service in a timely fashion about how many PCNs they have issued. The Secretary of State recommends that each authority should publish the report on their website and this will be the case in Scarborough. Elected Members are engaged in this matter at various levels from Portfolio Holder, Scrutiny Committee and Full Council as a result of the Council’s reporting mechanisms and constitution.

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

5.
5.1

ASSESSMENT
The information below is intended to give an overview of the parking service. This covers the period from the 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009. In addition, the information also covers that which an enforcement authority is required to produce on an annual basis as indicated within the statutory guidance. Financial Statement

5.2

5.3

The income and expenditure of the Council in connection with its on-street charging, and with both its on-street and off-street enforcement activity, are governed by Section 55 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. This section has recently been amended by regulations issued under the Traffic Management Act. The new regulations require that the on-street parking account is no longer limited to on-street parking income and expenditure. It must also include income and expenditure for all parking contraventions within the Borough off-street as well as on-street. The Council’s accounting structure will ensure that it is easy to distinguish between income from off-street car parks and income from on-street parking. The latter is currently passed over to the County Council. The regulations also reinforce the requirement that the Council is not permitted to set a budgetary target for penalty charge income, and that any surplus income earned from off-street penalty charges may be used only to fund expenditure on parking and other transport related functions set out in Section 55.

5.4

5.5

Page 5

5.6

In the past, on-street income has been used to subsidise the existing park and ride scheme at Weaponness. From February 2009 Weaponness closed as a Park and Ride site following the opening, by North Yorkshire County Council, of two new Park and Ride sites on the A64 and A165. The new park and ride sites will be subsidised by the County Council directly from the on-street parking income. Future surpluses from Borough Council off-street car parking penalty charges will be used only to cover car parks expenditure thus complying with the Act and the regulations. TABLE 1 FINANCIAL INFORMATION 2008/09 Income - total Expenditure – total Surplus Surplus (excluding Off Street PCN's) INCOME Parking Meters Penalty Charge Notices (On Street) Penalty Charge Notices (Off Street) Residents Permits Business Permits Trades Permits Residents Scratch Cards Smart Cards / Garage Permits Hoteliers Permits Hotel Visitor Scratch Cards Dispensation/Suspension TOTAL EXPENDITURE On Street Employees Premises Supplies & Services Transport Payment to Third Parties Support Services Sub Total Park & Ride - Payment to Outside Contractors TOTAL £630,301 £472,297 £100,252 £81,766 £34,739 £28,100 £14,726 £861 £40,795 £52,123 £4,117 £1,460,077 £1,460,077 £949,117 £510,960 £410,708

£6,254 £13,119 £207,933 £2,036 £18,300 £638,405 £886,047 £63,070 £949,117

Page 6

Areas Identified for Improvement and Development 5.7 The Borough Council is, through its parking strategy for Scarborough, examining areas where car parks can be either better utilised, changed in operation or developed upon. Civil Enforcement Officers are identifying areas within the Borough whereby the control is either not adequate or not enforceable. In many cases these involve consideration by the County Council. Operational Statistics 5.9 The key operational statistics are as follows: TABLE 2 KEY OPERATIONAL STATISTICS

5.8

Number of Penalty Charge Notices (PCN’s) Issued Number of higher level PCNs issued Number of lower level PCNs issued Number of PCN’s paid at discount rate Number of PCN’s paid at non discount rate Total Number of PCN’s paid Total Number of PCN’s unpaid Number of Charge Certificates registered at TEC Number of PCN’s which had informal or formal representations made against them Number of PCN’s cancelled as a result of informal or formal representations made against them Number of PCN’s written off for other reasons Number of PCN’s which resulted in adjudication because of representations 5.10

On Street 17,591 10,483 7,108 9,199 1,066 10,265 7,326 2,644 5,319 2,624

Off Street 4,822 639 4,183 2,400 281 2,681 2,141 468 1,742 1,167

Total 22,413 11,122 11,291 11,599 1,347 12,946 9,467 3,112 7,061 3,791

713 48

236 3

949 51

At the time of reporting the payment rate is 57.76%. Payment and cancellation figures are subject to a variation at the time the report is run due to changes on a daily basis. Table 3 breaks down the number of PCN’s issued into numbers issued per calendar month On Street.

5.11

Page 7

TABLE 3 PENALTY CHARGE NOTICES ISSUED BY MONTH On Street 2007/08 0 0 0 11 1,727 1,038 1,896 1,736 1,305 1,346 1,610 1,534 12,203 2008/09 1,265 1,543 1,513 1,970 2,028 1,439 1,246 1,405 1,137 1,485 1,250 1,326 17,607 % Change on last year

April May June July August September October November December January February March TOTAL

17.43 38.63 -34.28 -19.07 -12.87 10.33 -22.36 -13.56

On Street PCN's Issued (Comparable months only)
2,500 2007/08 2,000 No. Of PCN's 1,500 1,000 500 0
em be r N ov em be r D ec em be r ct ob er Ja nu ar y Fe br ua ry Au gu st M ar c h

2008/09

Se pt

5.12

Table 4 breaks down the number of PCN’s issued into numbers issued per calendar month Off Street.

O

Page 8

TABLE 4 PENALTY CHARGE NOTICES ISSUED BY MONTH Off Street 2007/08 April May June July August September October November December January February March TOTAL
0 0 0 0 756 453 443 263 250 288 344 479 3276

2008/09
466 624 381 518 617 396 470 228 239 243 245 437 4864

% Change on last year

-18.39 -12.58 6.09 -13.31 -4.40 -15.63 -28.78 -8.77

Off Street PCN's Issueed (comparable months only)
800 700 600 No. of PCN's 500 400 300 200 100 0
Se pt em be r N ov em be r D ec em be r ct ob er Ja nu ar y Fe br ua ry Au gu st M ar c h

2007/08

2008/09

5.13

Based on comparable months (September – March) the number of PCN’s issued On Street has decreased by 887 or 7.27% and Off Street has decreased by 401 or 12.24%. It is pleasing that there has been a drop in the number of PCN’s issued and this is a reflection that enforcement is effective and working, resulting in reduced congestion.

5.14

O

Page 9

Penalty Charge Notices Issued by Contravention (Top 10) 5.15 Table 5 (a) shows the Top 15 contravention codes where PCN’s have been issued On Street and Table 5 (b) shows the Top 5 Contravention codes for Off Street parking places.

TABLE 5(a) TOP FIFTEEN ON STREET CONTRAVENTION CODES FOR PCN’S ISSUED Higher % of or No of Total Contravention Lower PCN's PCN's Level Issued Issued Charge 01 - Parked In A Restricted Street Higher 3,880 22.04 12 - Parked In Shared Use Bay No Permit Higher 2,657 15.09 19 - Parked In Shared Use Bay Invalid Permit Lower 2,266 12.87 35 - Parked In Disc Parking Bay Without Disc Lower 1,739 9.88 30 - Parked For Longer Than Permitted Lower 1,200 6.82 40 - Parked In Disabled Bay Without Badge Higher 1,069 6.07 25 - Parked In A Loading Bay During Restricted Hours Higher 942 5.35 02 - (Un)Loading During Prohibited Hours Higher 893 5.07 06 - Parked Without Clearly Displaying Valid P&D Lower 859 4.88 36 - Parked In Disc Parking Bay For Longer Lower 793 4.50 23 - Parked In Bay Not Designated Of Vehicle Higher 296 1.68 45- Parked In A Taxi Rank Higher 260 1.48 47 - Parked On A Restricted Bus Stop/Stand Higher 254 1.44 21 - Parked In A Suspended Bay/Space Higher 216 1.23 05 - Parked After The Expiry Of Paid For Time Lower 202 1.15

TABLE 5(b) TOP FIVE OFF STREET CONTRAVENTION CODES FOR PCN’S ISSUED Higher % of or No of Total Lower PCN's Contravention PCN's Level Issued Issued Charge 83 - Parked Without Clearly Displaying P&D 82 - Parked After The Expiry Of Time Paid For P&D 85 - In A Permit Bay Without Permit 86 - Parked Beyond The Bay Markings 81 - In A Restricted Area In Car Park 5.16 Lower Lower Higher Lower Higher 3,289 908 571 60 39 67.62 18.67 11.74 1.23 0.80

The analysis of this will allow the Council to review its public information to help clarify to motorists the nature of orders.

Page 10

Top 10 Area’s where enforcement has been undertaken 5.17 Tables 6 (a) and 6(b) show the top 10 areas where enforcement action has been taken on and off street respectively, together with information in relation to dealing with those penalty charge notices issued.

Table 6 (a) Top 10 Areas where PCN's are Issued - On Street (Scarborough unless stated) PCN's Higher Lower PCN's PCN's PCN's Issued Level Level Paid Cancelled Outstanding Foreshore Road 522 522 0 352 98 72 Sandside 403 382 21 307 60 36 Albemarle Crescent 853 672 181 538 192 123 North Street 374 266 108 235 80 59 Queen Street 269 52 217 96 69 104 St Nicholas Cliff 639 399 240 393 186 60 St Nicholas Street 526 402 124 335 119 72 The Crescent 402 182 220 239 108 55 Vernon Road 309 297 12 207 59 43 Church Street Whitby 505 185 320 393 65 47

Table 6 (b) Top 10 Areas where PCN's are Issued – Off Street (Scarborough unless stated) PCN's Higher Lower PCN's PCN’s PCN's Issued Level Level Paid Cancelled Outstanding St Thomas Street 3 411 232 64 118 Upper 414 Country Park Filey 351 0 351 176 150 25 North Street 311 1 310 178 59 74 Victoria Road 222 0 222 47 39 136 Church Street 4 211 139 51 25 Whitby 215 West Pier 213 28 185 96 62 55 Marina Front (Upper Harbour) Whitby 201 1 200 129 43 29 Station Avenue Filey 165 3 162 86 68 11 Falconers Road 160 0 160 101 20 39 St Nicholas Parade 130 0 130 81 24 25 Scalby Mills 130 1 129 99 26 5

Page 11

Cancellations 5.18 Table 7 below gives information on the top 5 reasons why cases have been cancelled: TABLE 7 (a) CANCELLATIONS SUMMARY TABLE (On Street) % of Total PCN's Issued 6.31 2.73 2.73 1.95 1.10 0.82 0.66 0.64 0.30 0.27 % of Total Number of On Street Cancellations 27.50 11.91 11.91 8.51 4.80 3.56 2.87 2.77 1.29 1.16

Total Valid Ticket Or Permit Supplied Disabled Driver General Cancellation Error In Ticket Issue Loading / Unloading To Late To Send Nto Foreign, Stolen Or Abandoned Gone Away Breakdown - Proof Supplied Admin Error

Higher Lower

1,111 481 481 344 194 144 116 112 52 47

399 424 267 220 171 101 81 63 37 31

712 57 214 124 23 43 35 49 15 16

TABLE 7 (b) CANCELLATIONS SUMMARY TABLE (Off Street) % of Total PCN's Issued 17.15 3.29 1.71 1.23 1.23 0.25 % of Total Number of On Street Cancellations 52.06 9.99 5.18 3.75 3.75 0.75

Total Valid Ticket Or Permit Supplied General Cancellation - No Letter Error In Ticket Issue - No Letter To Late To Send Nto Foreign, Stolen Or Abandoned Vehicle Loading/Unloading Proof Supplied

Higher Lower

834 160 83 60 60 12

140 63 13 6 1 6

694 97 70 54 59 6

Page 12

5.19

The cancellation reasons listed above cover the majority of all cancellations. The remainder of cancellations are made up of reasons such as disabled driver, machine faults, vehicle breakdown and other medical reasons. Representations and Appeals

5.20

The Borough Council deals with all appeals in the following way:The vehicle owner may dispute the issuing of a PCN at three stages: Owners may make so-called ‘informal challenges’ or ‘informal representations’ (or ‘pre Notice to Owner letters’) against the PCN before the Borough Council has served a ‘Notice to Owner’. Once a ‘Notice to Owner’ has been served, an owner may make a formal representation against the Notice to Owner to the Borough Council; and If a formal representation is rejected the owner may appeal against the ‘Notice of Rejection’ to an independent adjudicator.

5.21

The Council has appointed staff to deal with appeals. The Council’s Representations Officer deals with all cases whereby a formal representation has been made to the Parking Adjudicator. Table 8 below gives unattributed details of Formal Appeals received by the Council and the outcome or Adjudicators decision. TABLE 8 CASES APPEALED TO NPAS Appeal Allowed (1) 28 2 2 0 0 1 Appeal Not Refused (2) Contested (3) 23 11 0 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 Pending (4) 0 0 0 0 0 0

5.22

Scarborough (NYCC area) Scarborough Off Street Car Parks Whitby (NYCC area) Whitby Off Street Car Parks All other NYCC areas All other Off Street Car Parks

(1) - Successful appeal by an appellant (2) - Unsuccessful appeal by an appellant (3) - Appeal not contested by the Council, due to further consideration of evidence or additional evidence provided (4) - This is a case still with the adjudicators awaiting a decision

Page 13

Summary of Appeals Allowed by the Adjudicator (1) 5.23 Below are some examples of appeals that have been allowed by the adjudicator and the reasons why Case 1 The appellant appealed on the grounds that a break in yellow lines rendered the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) unenforceable. Although the adjudicator found that “the lines were in excellent order apart from a very small repair, which made the restriction perfectly clear to a reasonable motorist”, the appeal was allowed as the PCN was illegible. Case 2 The appellant had stated that his vehicle had broken down. The adjudicator found that the motorist has provided a written statement that his vehicle was immobilised due to key fob failure and that in certain breakdown situations motorists do not require help from mechanics and therefore cannot provide corroborative evidence. The appeal was allowed on the basis that a breakdown is a permitted exemption. Case 3 The appellant had parked using a Hotel accommodation scratch card which she had filled in incorrectly. The appellant had appealed on the grounds that she had been given the incorrect instructions for completing the card by the Hotel. Although the Council contended that the instructions for use were clear on the reverse of the permit, the adjudicator allowed the appeal on the grounds that it was reasonable for the driver to expect the information provided by the hotel to be correct. 5.24 The Parking Service will learn from these matters and adjust its operations accordingly. Summary of Appeals Refused by the Adjudicator (2) 5.25 Below are some examples of selected case information where the adjudicator has dismissed an appeal and ruled in favour of the Council Case 1 The appellant appealed on the grounds that she was loading and unloading at the time of the contravention. The Adjudicator considered all the evidence before him from written representations and by telephone hearing. The appellant had a conversation with the Civil Enforcement Officer and made informal representation at the time of the contravention and did not claim she was loading and unloading on either occasion. This claim was only

Page 14

made after the Council’s letter of rejection which pointed out that a vehicle was only permitted to park on yellow lines for this purpose. The conclusion was that the appellant had not discharged the burden upon her to establish that her vehicle was parked for the purpose of loading/unloading and that the contravention occurred. Case 2 The appellant requested liability for the Penalty Charge Notice to be transferred to the Garage where his vehicle was in for service at the time of the contravention. The adjudicator found that the relevant legislation makes the owner of the vehicle not the driver responsible for payment of the penalty charge. Liability can only be transferred in circumstances where the vehicle has been taken without consent or transferred permanently. Therefore the appellant was responsible for the charge. The Council agreed to still accept the discounted payment, as the garage had not informed him of the PCN. Case 3 The appellant claimed they were not aware the area where they parked was a pay and display parking bay. The adjudicator found that the pay and display bays are properly and adequately signed and that the appellant ought to have seen them and realised that she was in a pay and display bay. Case 4 The appellant appealed as he believed that the signing in the Car Park did not make it clear that it was to be used by staff permit holders Monday to Friday. The adjudicator found that the restriction would reasonably have been brought to the attention of any driver, as the sign was large, could be seen from all areas of the car park and clearly stated in red lettering that on week days the car park is to be used by permit holders only.

6.

IMPLICATIONS
(a) Policy

6.1

There are no changes in overall Council policy arising from this report (b) Legal

6.2

The Council as agents to or under agreement with the County Council has powers under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to make relevant orders, levy charges and carry out enforcement. In addition to carry out enforcement under Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004.

Page 15

(c) 6.3

Financial

There are no adverse financial implications arising from this report (d) Equalities and Diversity

6.4

I have considered whether any implications arise from this report relating to Equality and Diversity and am satisfied that there is no identified adverse implication that will arise from this decision (f) Other

6.5

I have considered whether the following implications arise from this report and am satisfied that there is no identified adverse implication that will arise from this decision: Staffing Planning Crime and Disorder Health and Safety Environmental

7.
7.1

ACTION PLAN
The Service will reflect upon the statistics of this report and make adjustments to its operations as necessary. A further report will be presented within 6 months of the end of the next financial year.

7.2

John Riby Head of Technical Services Author: Telephone No: Fax No: E-mail address: Stuart Clark 01723 383582 08701913997 stuart.clark@scarborough.gov.uk

Background Papers: • Traffic Management Act 2004 - Part 6 • Operational Guidance to Local Authorities: Parking Policy and Enforcement Traffic Management Act 2006

Risk Matrix Issue/Risk Consequences if allowed to happen Likelihood Impact Mitigation Mitigated Likelihood Mitigated Impact

Failure to comply with requirements of Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004

Unable to comply with requirements of Statutory Instrument

Likely

Major

Accept Report

Very Low

Low

Page 16