Search :  

Text variations:

A+ R A-

SEStran seeks to decriminalise parking enforcement

Date : 15th October 2009

SEStran’s board is to consider a study that recommends a possible trial of decriminalisation of parking management.

 

The Decriminalised Parking Enforcement study (DPE) was carried out by consultants MVA, who examined parking provision and utilisation in detail, to determine whether a business cases exists for the introduction of DPE in towns across the region. The work was carried out as part of the development of the SEStran Regional Parking Management Strategy (RPMS) which was approved by the board in April 2008.

The study concluded, in light of the sensitivities surrounding changes to parking management  that a single SEStran area wide DPE scheme, or even one confined to a single local authority partner area would be inappropriate.

 

 

MVA are therefore proposing a 4 phase introduction:

 

SEStran Chair, Cllr Russell Imrie said:

“SEStran recognises that a decriminalised parking enforcement system represents a major change of approach for some partner authorities. That is why we are recommending a careful, phased, introduction”.

“The study considers the impact that introduction of DPE would have on each local authority partner, and while not all could operate a DPE scheme profitably on their own, there may be benefits to all partners through the introduction of a region-wide scheme”.

“The phased approach will allow problems to be anticipated and resolved with minimal disruption to existing parking enforcement and there will be full consultation with all stakeholders before any further action is taken”.

Overview

In 2007-08 SEStran commissioned Atkins to develop a Regional Parking Management Strategy (RPMS) and a business case for SEStran-wide Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE).  The Parking Management Strategy was approved by the SEStran Board but the DPE study was not considered detailed or robust enough by the member Councils to allow them to make a definitive decision on their involvement in the scheme.  Further, more detailed, work was therefore required to develop this element of the work, with specific reference made to the Regional Transport Strategy. 

To help develop the business case a cost/revenue model has been developed by MVA using a variety of information from each study town and local authority.  This included information on the number of penalty notices issued, details of available parking spaces and tariffs, estimates of parking duration and demand, and information on costs associated with parking.  This data was collected from three main sources:

n    Local Authorities;

n    Police Forces; and

n    MVA Parking Audit.

The cost / revenue model works with three sets of parameters, and each parameter has four possible values (scenarios), Table 1.1 below provides an overview of each.  The key scenarios used in the business case are explained in Section 2 of this note.

The nature of the current parking structure, and the data available, focuses on Local Authorities as the parking authority.  While recognising the necessity of gaining local authority support for a SEStran-wide DPE scheme, the purpose of this project is to analyse the case for a SEStran-wide DPE scheme.  We have however also considered the impact on each local authority individually.

Our analysis shows that while Fife and Falkirk could probably operate a DPE scheme profitably on their own, Clackmannanshire, West Lothian, Midlothian, East Lothian, and Scottish Borders would likely not benefit from an individual DPE scheme.  There may, however, be benefits to all Local Authorities through the introduction of a region-wide scheme. 

To establish the potential benefits of a SEStran-wide scheme, all of the study towns were grouped into the spreadsheet models – purely by geographic location and proximity to each other with no regard given fro local authority boundaries.  Regional offices were considered for Fife (1), Falkirk / Clackmannanshire (2), West Lothian / Midlothian / East Lothian (3) and a sub-regional office for Scottish Borders (3a). 

Table 1.1 Scenario Grid

Table 1.1

	Space Parameter	Enforcement Parameter	Cost Parameter
A	Current	Calibrated	Calibrated
B	Current	Calibrated	DPE Costs
C	Regional Parking Management Strategy	DPE Enforcement	DPE Costs
D	Break-Even	Break-Even	DPE Costs

 

Key Scenarios

To date, the model has produced results for 64 parameter combinations.  The most interesting of these are examined below.  The key scenarios used in building the business case are described in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1  Key Scenarios

Table 2.1

Scenario	Description
AAA	This models the current situation.  Existing space allocation is used and enforcement parameters are calibrated to data provided by the police forces.  Costs are modelled on a per-capita basis based on information given by Local Authorities, where available.  Space characteristics – demand, average duration, and tariff - are adjusted to calibrate income.
AAC	Scenario AAC models a situation in which the police forces stop enforcing parking restrictions immediately, forcing Local Authorities to take up the responsibility.  DPE costs are introduced without changing space allocation or characteristics and enforcement levels remain the same.  This, in effect, transfers costs which are currently covered by the police to the Local Authorities.
ACC	This scenario models a situation in which the police forces stop enforcing parking restrictions immediately.  Local Authorities are then forced to take on parking enforcement, but in doing so also establish a higher level of enforcement.  Note that increased enforcement results in greater income from notices as well as increased costs associated with enforcement.
CAA	Scenario CAA was added after the original Business Case was produced.  It represents a situation where the police remain in charge of parking enforcement, which also means that Local Authorities remain operating under the current cost structure.  Enforcement levels remain at current levels.
CAC	Under Scenario CAC the Local Authority is responsible for parking enforcement, modelled through the introduction of DPE costs.  Though enforcement remains at its current level, space allocation and characteristics change through the introduction of the RPMS.
CCC	Scenario CCC tests the joint impact of introducing DPE costs along with the number of parking spaces generally as set out in the RPMS and increased enforcement.  There remains both an increase in cost and an increase in income from the higher enforcement level.
DCC	Finally, Scenario DCC assesses what changes to space allocation and characteristics would be required for each Local Authority to be no better off and no worse off under DPE than under a base scenario (either AAA or CAA).  For Fife and Falkirk this means that the full RPMS is not required.  The remaining five Local Authorities must increase the number of charged spaces – along with changes in tariffs, demand, and average duration – above the RPMS level in order to reach a break-even point.

 

Recommendations

From the financial outcome tables presented in the full Discussion Note (20 May 2009), it can be seen that a single SEStran-wide DPE scheme is unlikely to find favour given the disparity in costs and revenues between each of the different Local Authorities.  We do not recommend this option is pursued.

However, there is growing pressure on police resources and a possibility, albeit a small one at present, that the police may decline to enforce non-criminal parking offences in future.  Given police resource constraints, it is possible that police forces will begin to step back from their duties in parking enforcement, leaving this to Local Authorities, who will have to assume the costs.  This, coupled with increasingly strong ties between parking enforcement and achieving local planning and transport policies, which require greater enforcement of parking regulations in order to be successful, exposes Local Authorities to a potential problem.  It would therefore be prudent for Local Authorities to be sufficiently ready to introduce DPE should police enforcement be removed. 

For these reasons, it is possible that DPE will become more of a necessity in the coming years.  However, in light of analysis undertaken to date and the politically sensitive nature of parking, and in view of the changes that would be required to successfully introduce a DPE scheme, either on an individual local authority basis or a SEStran-wide basis, it is our recommendation that the introduction of DPE be approached in phases.

The proposed phases of introduction are outlined below.

n    Phase 1:  The first phase, which should continue throughout the process, is ongoing police liaison, working towards greater enforcement of existing regulations whilst at the same time monitoring police attitude to enforcement responsibilities.

n    Phase 2:  The RPMS, which has been approved by the SEStran Board and Members, outlines parking measures available to Local Authorities to improve parking supply in their areas.  Phase 2 would see each Local Authority introduce RPMS measures in their area, increasing the number of controlled spaces. 

n    Phase 3:  A trial DPE scheme should be set up, likely in either Fife or Falkirk & Clackmannanshire (which could also potentially include Stirling); all of whom show a substantial rise in profitability under the RPMS scenario.  A pilot scheme would allow for more robust cost / revenue model parameters to be developed and would provide an opportunity to work on details of a larger scheme. 

n    Phase 4:  At the completion of the pilot period, should be scheme be seen as successful, then a sub-regional scheme could be introduced. 

  

Return to News Index