Agenda item

This report sets out a response to an issue, raised by Councillor Osborne, requesting information on car parking enforcement and resident parking permits. 

Discussion:

Councillor Osborne was invited to address the committee as he had submitted the item for consideration. He expressed a view that the Council had a more aggressive policy on parking enforcement based on the high number of Penalty Charge Notices (PCN’s) that had been issued within Kent and Medway in comparison with other areas across the country, citing London as an example and the high number of appeals against PCNs in Medway. Councillor Osborne referred to information provided in the report showing a fall in the number of PCNs issued by the CCTV cars and questioned whether the cars were now cost-effective in terms of future revenue projections. He also drew attention to a significant rise in PCNs issued for bus lanes and queried whether the number of double yellow lines in Medway should be reviewed.

In response to the questions raised, officers advised the committee on the following issues:

CCTV cars – The Assistant Director, Frontline Services advised members that the two CCTV cars currently targeted cars parking outside of schools and were used in areas of high risk. In addition these cars were used as second resource in transporting Community Enforcement Officers (CEO’s) to areas where road safety was an issue or where CEO’s were subjected to abuse by the public. In response to concerns that the mobile units were now costing as much to run as money they made the Head of Highways and Parking informed members that as well as providing protection for CEO’s the CCTV cars were hugely visible, which had prevented people from parking illegally and had the ability to respond quickly to requests across a large area. In addition they provided protection to school children at the beginning and end of the school day, which was a primary concern for the Council.

The Assistant Director Frontline Services, in response to a question raised, informed the committee that in the year 2012/13 there had been 326 visits to schools.

A member commented that one of the issues that needed to be considered was how to best use the CCTV cars, in particular the amount of time these cars spent visiting schools. Members requested officers produce a statistical analysis of the number of visits made to schools by CCTV cars and the number of PCN’s issued in the vicinity of schools.

Appeal rates – The appeal rates reflected that there was a two-stage process in deciding appeals and that a significant number of appeals are upheld by the Council at stage 1.of the process. In total there had been 15,470 appeals received in 2012/13 of which 5326 had been upheld. The Assistant Director, Frontline Services reported that. in total 78 appeals had progressed to the external adjudicator at stage 2  of which   46 had been upheld.

PCN’s issued in bus lanes – The Assistant Director, Frontline Services confirmed that static cameras were now in place at Chatham bus station and in the bus lane at Canal Road. In addition the road layout at Chatham Bus station had been modified in the summer to deter drivers from driving through the bus station. Of the PCN’s issued in 2012/13 most of these had been issued at the bus station in Chatham. Since the completion of the road layout modifications six cases had been referred to the traffic adjudicator and of those, five had been rejected, and only one had been upheld on a technicality.

Double and single yellow lines – Members were advised that the CCTV cars were not generally used to enforce parking restrictions on double or single yellow lines because of the length of time involved. They are used to enforce parking restriction where loading is prohibited and on approaches to zebra crossings. .

CCTV car staff turnover – Members were informed that staffing for the mobile units operated on two levels involving temporary agency staff and permanent staff. The Assistant Director, Frontline Services explained that the turnover of staff figures detailed at Appendix A showed the turnover of permanent staff only.

Financial viability of CCTV cars - Benefits of the CCTV cars are their capacity to respond quickly over a large area and their use to protect CEOs from verbal and physical abuse as well as their visibility in terms of deterring parking offences. They continue to be a valued resource by Medway’s schools.

Ward parking reviews – The Assistant Director, Frontline Services advised the committee that the cost of reviewing car parking zones was between £100,000 and £150,000. At the current time the Council did not have the budgetary provision to carry out such reviews.

A member commented that they hoped the work that officers and ward councillors were engaged in to review parking r using a common sense approach in consultation with residents in several areas could continue without the need for these levels of expenditure.

In addition a member commented that the reason why London had a lower level of PCN’s issued per person in comparison with Kent and Medway was that most people in London used public transport, rather than cars.

Decision:

It was agreed that the committee:

1)      Thank officers for the report and commend the work of the Community Enforcement Officers

2)      Note the officer responses in the report and at Appendix A

3)           Requests that the information in the report be placed in the public domain

4)           Requests a briefing note detailing the number of PCN’s issued in the vicinity of schools and a breakdown of the number of visits made by the CCTV cars to schools.