LB Camden Oct 2007

8/8/2019 LB Camden Oct 2007

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lb-camden-oct-2007 1/49

Annual Parking andEnforcement ReportOctober 2007



Foreword

I am very pleased to present Camden’s first Annual Parking and Enforcement Report .

The Partnership Administration set out its agreed policy agenda in June 2006. We have been

responsible for delivering on a number of the policy commitments including: offering a fair deal

on parking for residents; improving our environment – globally and locally; involving residents in

key decisions and protecting their interest; making our street environment more attractive; and

improving local transport.

We want to make Camden a borough of opportunity and transport has a key role to play in

delivering that aspiration. Our work will focus on delivering a sustainable Camden which manages

its growth; provides a strong economy; and a Camden which is safe, inclusive and vibrant. In

doing so we hope to be at the forefront of innovation as far as transport delivery is concerned.

This we will achieve while employing an evidence-based strategy; testing whether the methods

and new ideas used actually work; and we will remain willing to make changes on the basis of

the data and the input we receive from our residents, businesses and visitors to our borough.

This report focuses on what we have done in the sometimes controversial area of parking. We will

increase transparency by publishing this parking report annually and continue to make

improvements to the parking regime by promoting fairness for Camden residents and businesses.

Sustainability is one of the key priorities for the Partnership Administration; it permeates the

services we provide and is embedded in Camden’s transport policies. We have helped people to

take responsibility for their own actions, especially in relation to tackling climate change and

promoting sustainability. In parking we have agreed to introduce charging for residents’ parking

permits on the ‘polluter pays’ principle, where the fees are based proportionately on the

emissions that vehicles produce. We are also developing a range of concessions for

electric vehicles.

I am committed to ensuring that the Partnership Administration’s aspiration of making Camden a

more listening Council is at the heart of what we do. We need to make sure we treat and

communicate with people professionally and in a caring manner. To this end we have carried out

training sessions which started in Parking Services and are now being rolled out across the

Culture and Environment Directorate. This has improved the tone of our correspondence and our

responsiveness, which in turn has delivered results on the ground. The work is not complete, but

people have noticed a change in attitude. We have also implemented a number of changes that

have embedded this commitment to listening. We have ceased clamping except for persistent

evaders, stopped towing from Residents’ and pay & display bays unless the vehicle has been

there for 24 hours, and introduced a seven-day grace period for removals if people forget to

renew their residents’ permit. We have introduced visitor’s permits to the CPZs south of Euston

Road where residents were crying out for them. We are consulting on a borough-wide review of

CPZ boundaries, hours and days of operation. We have trialled cashless pay & display machines

with Westminster Council and are in the process of introducing this facility in high tariff areas.

We have improved how we manage parking suspensions by introducing a new mobile patrol to

remove redundant suspensions and we now make every attempt to reduce the hours of the day

and days of the week for which a suspension is in place. We have introduced innovative e-alerts

to residents to inform them of forthcoming suspensions. Our Suspension Notices have been

altered a number of times following advice and ideas received from residents. In Parking, as well

as other fields, I firmly believe the Council does not have a monopoly on good ideas.

i



The Partnership Administration was clear in its policy agreement that we had to be fairer to

residents in relation to parking and the above changes demonstrate this. The fines for parking

and traffic contraventions set by London Councils on behalf of all London Boroughs have been

criticised for not being ‘proportionate’ to the infringement concerned. The Council has supported

the development of differential penalty charges for different contraventions and has listened to

what our residents and businesses have said about which parking and traffic contraventions they

regard as being ‘more’ or ‘less’ serious in influencing the new system of differential charges being

introduced by London Councils.

Being fairer about how our Parking Service is delivered does not mean that we will be softer on

enforcement. Persistent evaders who regularly flaunt parking and traffic regulations are still liable

to have their vehicles clamped or towed. The enforcement of parking and traffic regulations

enables traffic to flow more smoothly and improves road safety. I am delighted that in 2006 total

road casualty statistics in Camden fell below 1,000 for the first time.

We also want to make Camden a better place to do business in. We are continuing our rolling

programme of waiting and loading reviews of town centres and are making improvements to

parking facilities in Tottenham Court Road, Holborn and Fortess Road.

A lot has changed in Parking over the last year and I hope residents and businesses are feeling

the benefits. There is still work to be done, but this year’s achievements should mean there are

firm foundations to build on.

Cllr Mike GreeneExecutive Member for Environment

June 2007

ii



Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2.8 Changes to vehicle removals policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122.9 Harmonisation of parking policy by central London boroughs through the Partners

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

iii



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

iv



1 Introduction

1.1 Overview

1.1.1 This is Camden’s first Annual Parking and Enforcement Report . Two broad themes are

covered in the report:

• What’s New – this deals with changes in policy and enforcement practices (for

example, the ending of widespread clamping and reducing the extent of vehicle

removals) and new parking products and services that appeared over the last year.

• Reviews and Monitoring – this provides updates on parking related reviews that are

occurring and the results of relevant monitoring activity. Reference is also made to

parking and enforcement statistics, as well as financial information with comparative

data for previous years.

1.1.2 Camden’s parking and enforcement activity is described in detail in the Council’s interim

Parking and Enforcement Plan , which can be viewed and downloaded from the following

web page:

www.camden.gov.uk/pep

1.1.3 The interim Parking and Enforcement Plan and this document – the “Annual Report” are

companion documents. The former is the more comprehensive document and it is

intended that it will be revised every four or five years. The interim Parking and

Enforcement Plan not only covers the enforcement of parking regulations, but also that of

bus lanes and certain moving traffic contraventions (such as banned movements), which

are specified in Appendix 1. The purposes of regulations are indicated in the discussion

box below.

1.1.4 Technical terms and acronyms are explained in the glossary.

The purpose of parking and traffic regulation and why they are enforced

This annual report sets out some of the facts and figures of Camden’s parking and

enforcement activity but it is important also to bear in mind why the borough manages

parking in the first place. The various parking policy objectives are set out more fully in the

interim Parking and Enforcement Plan , but are also summarised here.

Demand for parking in Camden far outstrips the supply of kerbspace available and the

Council seeks to maintain an active balance between the different demands – from residents,their visitors, businesses and their deliveries and customers, access for disabled people, etc.

This also needs to be balanced with the duty on the Council to keep traffic moving, avoiding

unsafe and obstructive parking, and making sure there is good access for pedestrians,

cyclists, buses and vehicles of all sorts.

Alongside this is the aim of sustainability, restraining inessential traffic so that we achieve

efficient movements for essential vehicles (e.g. emergency services and deliveries). In a

crowded inner city we encourage people to move in the most efficient and sustainable ways

possible and to help achieve this we improve conditions for walking and cycling, including

making these movements safer, and improve the flow of public transport. In addition to theefficiency of our road network this has clear links to minimising the wider impacts of traffic

on poor air quality and on the contribution to climate change.

1



Parking conditions before and after Controlled Parking Zones ( CPZs) were introduced: Glenilla Road. Surveys

showed that after CPZ introduction the number of vehicles parked reduced and ease of parking was improved – see

the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan, section 8.4.

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

1.2 A note on the Council website

1.2.1 Up to date information about parking conditions in the borough is provided on the

Council website.

1.2.2 Motorists can search for places to park in particular streets or CPZs, with information

given on the types of bays available and the hours of parking control that apply:

www.camden.gov.uk/wheretopark

Other general information about parking bays in Camden can be found at:

www.camden.gov.uk/cpz1.2.3 A detailed map showing Camden’s CPZ structure is available in this report, and can be

downloaded from the Council website from the above weblink.

2



1.2.4 Drivers can look up current and planned parking bay suspensions in any street or CPZ in

the borough by visiting the following:

www.camden.gov.uk/parkingbaysuspensions

Details about the Council’s online email alerts for suspensions are given on:

www.camden.gov.uk/parkingalerts

1.2.5 Suspensions may arise for various reasons including, in particular, streetworks.

Streetworks can affect local traffic flows, for example if they involve temporary street

closures. Advance notification of streetworks is given on the Council website:

www.camden.gov.uk/streetworks

1.3 The purpose of this document

1.3.1 Following the election of the partnership administration in May 2006, several aspects of

Camden’s parking and enforcement policies have changed. A revised, final version of the

Council’s Parking and Enforcement Plan will be prepared and published in due course.

1.3.2 However, the Council’s parking and enforcement policies are subject to further changesand the services Camden provides in this area continue to be modified and/or expanded,

with new products coming on line (such as the new visitor permit schemes south of

Euston Road) and further information being made available on our website (such as

details of where to park).

1.3.3 To keep the local community and other interested parties abreast of these changes the

intention is that the Council will publish this parking and enforcement report each year.

1.3.4 The first Annual Report covers changes made in financial year 2006/7 and includes those

that will be made up until summer 2007, notably with the introduction of emission-based

parking permits (section 2.3).

1.3.5 The Council is committed to making its parking operation fairer. It is committed to being

transparent about its parking and enforcement activity for which it is accountable and

intends to publish the same core statistical and financial information each year: the

number of traffic and parking ‘tickets’ it issues, the income and expenditure on its

‘parking account’ and how the parking surplus is spent. The Council will also publish

other up to date information, such as the number of appeals made to the Council, and

comparative data with other London boroughs.

1.3.6 Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 consolidates the law regarding civilenforcement of parking, bus lane, moving traffic contraventions and other traffic

contraventions. Department for Transport guidance to local authorities on civil

enforcement has just been published (Traffic Management Act 2004 , Statutory Guidance

to Local Authorities on the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions , DfT, July 2007)

and requires that local authorities produce an annual report on their enforcement

activities. This guidance will come into force in April 2008. The indicative scope of

statistics to include under this guidance is similar to that given in this document.

However, we cannot be precise about the future statistical content of the second

Annual Report , though it is likely to be similar to that here. This is because London

boroughs are likely to work together and discuss the common content they are likely to

include in their Annual Reports .

3



1.3.7 This Annual Report has been produced in advance of a legal requirement to produce

such a report, and is likely to be one of the first of its kind in the country.

1.4 Listening to community views on parking

1.4.1 Parking matters are invariably contentious, with widely differing views often held within

the community. By listening to and taking account of these views, the Council aims to

make its parking policies and practices fairer.

1.4.2 General views about parking and enforcement have been the subject of two quite

separate investigations recently that have helped to identify subjects for further inquiry

and provide the support for change. Parking was the subject of an all-party Parking

Scrutiny Panel, which took evidence between November 2004 and April 2005 and

presented their report, Parking in Camden , to the Executive in July 2005.

1.4.3 In addition, the interim Parking Enforcement Plan was consulted on between January and

March 2006. Questions were posed to test local community views on issues that arose

through Parking Scrutiny and those that officers consider may improve the service to

better meet local needs. The consultation also invited respondents to make their own

comments. Questions were asked on views about the level of parking enforcement, about

clamping and removals, about which parking and traffic contraventions were regarded as

‘less’ or ‘more’ serious, whether residents with second or more cars per household or

larger cars should pay higher charges for residents’ parking permits and other issues.

The results of this consultation were presented to the Executive on 5th July 2006 1.

1.4.4 The Council also recently consulted on CPZ arrangements in the borough (section 2.11).

1Parking and Enforcement Plan (PEP) – Report on Consultation.

4



2 What’s new

2.1 Ending widespread clamping

2.1.1 Parking Scrutiny’s report recommended that clamping in Camden be studied.

Accordingly, compliance surveys were undertaken in March and April 2006 to establish

whether the visual deterrent of a clamped car in various locations throughout the borough

had an effect on the amount of non-compliant parking activity. Each site was observed

with and without a clamped vehicle present under test conditions. The surveys showedthat the number of non-compliant acts was greater when a clamped vehicle was present

though the total duration of stay of non-compliant vehicles was lower.

2.1.2 The interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation asked respondents for their views

on clamping. On balance respondents considered that there was ‘too much’ clamping

activity in Camden.

2.1.3 A report about clamping2 was presented to the Executive in July 2006. It recommended

that clamping should cease except for persistent evaders (with three or more repeatedly

unpaid and unchallenged parking tickets) and Blue Badge fraudsters. These

recommendations were accepted and widespread clamping ended on 6th September

2006. It was also decided that clamping could still be used as an enforcement action on

those parking in housing estates without a valid permit. (PCNs cannot be issued on these

roads, which are not public highways.)

2.2 The introduction of differential PCN charging

2.2.1 The level of charges imposed for contraventions stated on PCNs are set by London

Councils, which represents all 33 boroughs in London (including the Corporation of

London). The London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee (TEC) decides on

charge levels every four years. When charge levels are set by TEC, they must be agreedby the Mayor of London and ratified by the Secretary of State. PCN charges levels are set

to discourage contraventions. Various factors are taken into account when setting

charges, such as local traffic conditions, evidence about the effectiveness of charges and

inflation. The demand for road space and parking is more acute towards the centre of

London, and hence PCN charges are generally higher in Central and Inner London.

Except for a few boundary roads, PCN charges for Camden are in ‘Band A’, the highest

charge level, which reflects the borough’s central location.

2.2.2 PCN charge levels for parking and traffic contraventions have been criticised for not

being ‘proportionate’ to the contravention. For example, many consider that

contraventions such as driving the wrong way down a one-way street are more serious

and should attract a higher fine than, say, overstaying in a pay & display bay.

2.2.3 The Council has supported the development of differential penalty charges for different

contraventions, as the Council considers that this will lead to enforcement practices

perceived to be fairer and more proportionate to the seriousness of the regulations and

restrictions contravened. If enforcement is seen to be fairer, this will help improve the

repute of enforcement, and, in particular, should assist in improving compliance. The

Council considers that to be acceptable to the public, a system of differential charges

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

5



must be perceived to be reasonable. It must also be understandable by motorists in order

that compliance can be improved.

2.2.4 The results from the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation show that there is

support in Camden for higher penalty charges to apply to the following types of

contraventions showing how seriously they are regarded:

• Those liable to increase road danger.

• Those in the way or obstructing efficient bus operation.

• Those parking in disabled bays.

• Those liable to be obstructive to traffic movement, including cyclists and pedestrians,

and in other ways contributing towards congestion.

2.2.5 Last year London Councils consulted on behalf of itself and TfL on whether a system of

differential charges could be introduced for parking, bus lane and moving traffic

contraventions. Various options were put to the London boroughs. Research was also

undertaken on the public’s view of introducing differential charges for PCNs. Camden

responded to the consultation, using the results from the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation on local community views on what is a less or more

serious contravention.

2.2.6 Based on investigations undertaken by London Councils, TEC decided in December 2006

to introduce a two tier system of charges based on the charge levels shown in table 2.13:

The penalty for bus lane contraventions has been set at £120 regardless of locations (i.e.

bands). If PCNs are paid promptly within 14 days of the date of notice, the charge level is

reduced by half. Recipients of PCNs who contact the Council within 14 days of the notice

date can do so without prejudicing their ability to receive the reduced rate for a further

14 days.

Table 2.1: 2-tier charge levels for PCNs Charges (£)

Band A

‘Minor’ parking breaches 80

‘More serious’ parking contraventions and moving traffic contraventions 120

2.2.7 Differential PCNs were introduced by all London boroughs and TfL from 1st July 2007.

Prior to this date all PCNs in Band A were £100. Under the new two tier system the

charge for ‘minor’ parking breaches has decreased while the charge for more serious

contraventions has increased.

2.2.8 The only difference between the categories that TEC decided to put contraventions into

compared to Camden’s own consultation results is that contraventions of residents’

parking bays are treated as a serious contravention rather than as a ‘minor’ breach. While

this is disappointing Camden must enforce the system of differential charges that has

been agreed by the Mayor of London.

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

6



2.2.9 Further details about how the new system of differential charges works are given on the

Council website:

www.camden.gov.uk/pcnlevels

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

Council website:

www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/avoidparkingfine

Electronic permits for

residents and businesses

are attached to

windscreens for

inspection by Parking

Attendants. The PA

simply scans the permit

and checks details shown

on the hand-held DAP

computer are correct.

Vehicles in contravention are issued with Penalty

Charge Notices directly

from the DAP.

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

2.3.1 Camden Council wants to encourage residents to think about the way they get around

and the impact that this has on climate change and air quality. Consequently, Camden is

introducing a new system of charging for residents’ parking permit based on theemissions that cars produce4. The new system was introduced in August 2007. The

interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation results supported higher resident

permit charges for larger vehicles.

2.3.2 The charges have been set at levels directly proportional to the CO2 emissions that

vehicles produce. Charges are based on the ‘the polluter pays’ principle – the minority

whose cars are causing greater damage to the environment will be charged

proportionately more for their parking permits. We want to encourage residents to take

sustainable transport modes such as walking, cycling or public transport to help tackle

CO2 emissions, but when people do need to drive the new system will offer them an

incentive to switch to lower emission and electric cars if possible.

2.3.3 For vehicles registered on and after 1st March 2001, the Government introduced a

system of variable car tax (Vehicle Exercise Duty or VED) charges based on the level of

CO2 produced. Vehicles with higher amount of emissions – measured in grams of CO2

per kilometre (g/km) – pay higher VED charges; those with lower emissions pay lower

VED charges. The VED charges are placed in ‘bands’, the lowest being band ‘A’, the

highest band ‘G’. For ‘banded’ vehicles the g/km is given on the vehicle registration

document, the V5 log book. Sometimes the band letter (A to G) is also given. The new

system of charges for residents’ parking permits is based on VED bands.

4Following recommendations to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group on 23 January 2007 in the report Review of Charges for Larger and

Second Vehicles (CENV/2006/112).

7



2.3.4 For vehicles registered before 1st March 2001, which do not fit into DVLA bands,

residents’ parking permit charges are based on engine size, since in general larger

engines produce higher emissions.

2.3.5 The Council has developed four tariff levels for residents’ parking permit charges, as

shown below.

Table 2.2: Tariff levels for residents’ parking permit charges

Tariff charges (£)

Tariff 1 Tariff 2 Tariff 3 Tariff 4

Unbanded vehicles (registered before March 2001)

Engine size (cc) 0-1299 1300-1849 1850-2449 2450+

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

DVLA band (g/km) A, B, C

up to 150

D, E

151-185

F

186-224

G

225+

Annual (1) 70 85 105 145

Six months 37 45 56 77

Three months 20 25 30 42

One month 9 11 14 19

Note (1) This compares with the previous flat rate annual charge of £90. Other charges for shorter periods were

similar pro rata to those above.

2.3.6 The intention of the new system is that the owners of higher polluting vehicles will pay

more, and that owners of lower polluting vehicles will pay less – on the ‘polluter pays’

principle. Changing to the new system has been designed to be ‘revenue neutral’ and it isexpected that the Council will neither gain nor lose revenue beyond the cost of

introducing the new system. This assessment is based on a sample of permit

applications made in November 2006. Data will be collected on the resident permit

vehicle fleet as a basis for reviewing the charges in future. Permit charges were last

increased three years ago in April 2004. It is expected that the revenue from residents’

permits will be lower than that obtained three years ago when permit charges were last

changed, when account is taken of inflation over this period.

2.3.7 Based on the November 2006 fleet sample it is estimated that about 60% of residents

will pay less for their parking permits compared to the previous flat rate charge systemand that about 40% will pay more.

2.4 New arrangements and facilities for the owners of electric vehicles

2.4.1 A report5 set out the pros and cons of various policies designed to encourage electric

vehicles. The committee decided to introduce:

• Free annual residents’ parking permits for electric vehicles that use renewably sourced

electricity. (This was introduced in conjunction with emission-based charges for

residents’ parking permits, section 2.3. Camden’s groundbreaking study6 on the full life

5This was submitted to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group on 23 January 2007, Promoting Electric Vehicles (CENV/2007/01).6Life Cycle Assessment of Vehicle Fuels and Technologies , Final Report, January 2006. Written by Dr Ben Lane, Ecolane Transport Consultancy on

behalf of London Borough of Camden.

8



cycle impacts of private vehicles of various sizes and different fuelling showed that

electric vehicles using renewably sourced electricity had the lowest carbon footprint.

Take-up of these vehicles in place of conventionally fuelled vehicles would reduce

global CO2 emissions and improve local air quality conditions.)

• 25% of the Tariff 2 charge for electric vehicle owners that do not use electricity from

renewable sources. (This was introduced in conjunction with emission-based charges

for residents’ parking permits, section 2.3.)

• Free short-stay parking in pay & display bays north of Euston Road for residents with

electric vehicles (expected to be introduced later in 2007).

• Trials of a number of on-street re-charging points for electric vehicles.

2.4.2 These policies are being introduced in stages. For further details see the forthcoming

Electric Vehicle User Guide on the Council website. This guide will be available on the

Council website and will be updated as things develop.

2.4.3 A scheme is being developed that will enable Camden residents who own an electric

vehicle to park for free in pay & display bays up to the maximum time allowed in the bay.Maximum times vary across the borough, and if drivers stay beyond the maximum time

allowed they may be liable for a fine. This scheme will be open to residents only, and will

not apply to pay & display bays south of Euston Road. Applicants will be provided with a

permit to display on their windscreen when they park in a pay & display bay. To receive

the permit applicants will be required to show proof of residence and vehicle ownership.

The online Electric Vehicle User Guide will indicate the target date when this scheme will

be available.

2.4.4 The number of electric vehicles operating in Camden and in London remains relatively

low and a critical issue to the take up and expanded use of electric vehicles is theprovision of public charging points. The technology to facilitate on-street charging of

electric vehicles is being tried and tested: Camden is working in partnership with the City

of Westminster to investigate this through the Clear Zone Partnership. In December 2006

the City of Westminster installed charging points in two streets off the Strand, in

Wellington Street and Southampton Street in a pilot scheme.

2.4.5 Camden has been given funding from TfL in the current financial year (2007/8) to develop

recharging infrastructure in the Clear Zone area (south of Euston Road) and expand

facilities in this area. This will encourage the use of electric vehicles instead of petrol and

diesel vehicles. This will build on the research undertaken by the Clear Zone team inWestminster and raise awareness and provide a focus for the promotion of electrically

powered vehicles. It is proposed that these points would not be assigned to individuals or

companies but be available at a specially designated communal parking space for the

charging of electric vehicles.

2.4.6 In Camden it is proposed that to use on-street bays users will have to join Camden’s

‘electric vehicle club’ and will be charged for using the facilities involving a registration

fee.

2.4.7 Camden has several off-street electric charging points in the borough. ‘Newride’ was

developed in 2005 as a Clear Zone initiative, and is an off-street charging infrastructureand promotion programme designed to encourage people who live and work in the

borough to use electric vehicles (electric scooters, bikes and now cars) for their

9



commuting and leisure journeys. There are Newride charging points in Royal College

Street and two public car parks in Camden operated by NCP – at Drury Lane and Saffron

Hill. There are also charging facilities in numerous Council operated car parks in

Westminster and details about charging facilities in the whole of the Clear Zone area are

being put on the New Ride website:

www.newride.org.uk/

2.4.8 Camden also operates nine charging points in the Council’s public car park inBloomsbury Square; there were three points initially and increased demand for the

facilities led to a further 3 points, then 3 more. The electric charging is offered free of

charge, with reduced rate parking for electric vehicles being charged there.

2.4.9 Residents and businesses have been invited to suggest possible locations for on-street

charging facilities throughout the borough in the consultation about CPZ arrangements

(section 2.11).

2.5 The introduction of visitor permits south of Euston Road

2.5.1 Residents living north of Euston Road can apply for visitor permits that can be used inresidents’ bays in the older CPZs and in permit holder bays in the newer zones.

2.5.2 Residents living in zones south of Euston Road – CA-C (Holborn and Covent Garden),

CA-D (Kings Cross) and CA-E (Bloomsbury & Fitzrovia) – in the past have requested

similar arrangements for visitor permits, but historically, due to parking pressure in this

area, it has not been possible to introduce suitable schemes.

2.5.3 Following the introduction of congestion charging in February 2003 traffic levels reduced

sharply in this area. The Parking Scrutiny report recommended that it was timely to

reconsider visitor permit schemes south of Euston Road. The interim Parking and

Enforcement Plan consultation results showed support for visitor permit schemes in this

area. Accordingly, a partial parking occupancy survey was undertaken in May 2006 of

selected streets in this area. This followed a reallocation of some underused pay & display/

meter bays in zones CA-D and CA-E to residents’, disabled and motorcycle bays

between July 2005 and April 2006.

2.5.4 The results of the May 2006 parking occupancy survey were compared with a full parking

occupancy survey undertaken in March 2000. Based on the survey results a report7

recommended that a pilot visitor permit scheme be established as follows:

• In Zones CA-D and CA-E : 40 hours @ 50p per hour per quarter per adult resident.• In Zone CA-C : 20 hours @ 50p per hour per quarter per adult resident (the lesser

amount of hours was suggested on account of the relatively high levels of occupancy

still observed for this zone).

• That visitor permits are valid for use only in residents’ bays and a maximum hourly stay

of 4 hours will apply per visit (as is the case in the rest of the borough).

• That no all-day visitor permits be offered for the pilot scheme.

7The report went to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group on 19 September 2006 (Pilot Visitor Permit Scheme For Controlled Parking Zones

South Of Euston Road & Visitor Permits For The Housebound (CENV/2006/105)).

10



•

2.5.5 The Executive (Environment) Sub-Group agreed the recommendations. However, a

number of objections were made to the traffic management order for the scheme in CA-C

on account of the high levels of parking stress still present in the zone, in which

underused pay & display bays had not been reallocated. Following consultation with local

councillors it was recommended that the two schemes start from July 2007, and work

should commence on proposals to convert underused pay & display bays to additional

residents’ bays within a provisional completion date for this work of January 2008.

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

2.6.1 In the September 2006 ‘visitor permit’ report (section 2.5) consideration was also given to

enhancing the offer of visitor permits to disabled and elderly housebound people.

2.6.2 The quantity of visitor permits available per resident per quarter varies according to the

hours of controlled parking. In 2-hour zones residents are allowed up to a maximum of 30

hours per quarter; in other zones the maximum allocation is 120 hours. A third of the

allocation is charged at the rate of 50p per hour, the next third £1.00 and the final third at

£1.50. Disabled and elderly housebound people are charged a flat rate of 50p per hour

for their entire allocation.

2.6.3 The September 2006 report recommended that the quarterly allocation for housebound

residents is increased from 30 hours to 40 hours in 2-hour zones and from 120 hours to

150 hours in other zones. The increased allocation is available from 1st July 2007. This

enhanced allocation does not apply for the pilot visitor permit schemes south of Euston

Road.

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

new e-alert service

2.7.1 Respondents to the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan consultation raised concernsabout when suspensions commence and end.

2.7.2 Camden aims to provide resident permit holders advance notice of a suspension

although sometimes the normal notice period is not possible due to emergency works

that have to be undertaken by utility companies.

2.7.3 A report8 recommended the following (follow up actions are shown in italics):

• The introduction of a mobile patrol to monitor suspended parking bays, and release

them back into use more quickly. This mobile patrol commenced in October 2006.

• The introduction of e-mail alerts to inform recipients when bays are due to besuspended. This service started in April 2007. Drivers can register to be sent details of

parking bays in their street or CPZ that will be suspended in the next 14 days. The

‘e-alerts’ provide an extra reminder to park elsewhere, in addition to the bright yellow

suspension signs posted in the street nearby to the suspended bay. The e-alerts tell

motorists the street name, location, start and end date of the suspension, and why it is

happening. To sign up to this service, visit:

www.camden.gov.uk/parkingalerts

The Council considered whether e-alerts could also be sent via SMS-texting, but it was decided that this was not economically viable.

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

11



• The introduction of a new charging system for parking suspensions requested by utility

companies undertaking statutory works. This commenced in April 2007, with utility

companies being charged £10 per day per suspended bay. This is to encourage them to

complete their work as quickly and efficiently as possible, minimising frustrations for

residents when bays are suspended when work is not going on and to minimise

consequential traffic problems.

2.7.4 In addition to the above, the Council has increased its suspensions signage by including

suspension information on each time plate relating to a suspended bay.

2.7.5 The Council would like to impose an indemnity charge to ensure that when parking

places are suspended it is for works that actually take place. However at present local

traffic authorities do not have these powers.

2.8 Changes to vehicle removals policy

2.8.1 The Council has reduced the number of circumstances in which vehicle removals formerly

applied. From October 2006 vehicle removals no longer applied to the following situations

(although drivers are still liable for a PCN):

• If residents’, traders’, businesses’ or doctors’ parking permits expire the owner will get

a seven days’ grace period, during which time their car will not be towed away.

• Residents with a valid parking permit for one CPZ will not have their vehicle towed at

all if they park in another zone in a resident/permit holder bay as long as they are not

committ ing a further contravention that would make them liable for removal.

2.8.2 Further relaxation of the Council’s vehicle removals policy has been agreed9. From July

2007 we will not tow cars committing contraventions in a pay & display or residents’ bay

on the day the contravention occurs, although they will be liable to removal if still parked

in contravention on the following day. If vehicles are parked in an obstructive position

they will be liable for removal. It is expected that that this change will reduce removals by

a further 60% to that already made by the Council’s vehicle removals policy described in

the preceding paragraph.

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

Parking project

2.9.1 The Partners in Parking (PiP) project is a new approach to parking matters initiated by

central London boroughs and Transport for London. It has commenced work in two

areas.• Harmonising and updating parking technologies, services and practices across

councils and TfL.

• Making savings through grouped procurements.

2.9.2 The intention is that by working collaboratively local authorities can harmonise systems,

controls and practices and have greater buying power as a group. The aim to agree a

harmonised approach as far as possible should make it easier for drivers regarding

policies and practices for suspensions and loading/unloading, for example. Some central

London boroughs are wholly or partly exempt from the Blue Badge disable scheme

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

12



(see section 2.13), and by working together common arrangements have been agreed by

Camden, City of Westminster and the RB of Kensington and Chelsea to offer an extra

free hour in a meter or pay & display bay to Blue Badge holders who have made an initial

payment.

2.9.3 Increased buying power would secure larger volume discounts than any one council

could achieve by itself. To enable this, a legal entity for group procurement is required

and a report10 was agreed to endorse a London Councils’ approved Partnership

Agreement and set up a cross Council Partnership Board of elected Members to create

such an entity between City of Westminster (lead), Transport for London, LB Islington,

LB Camden, City of London, RB Kensington and Chelsea and LB Lambeth.

Camden’s pay & display ticket

machines are being converted to

allow payment by means other than

cash, including credit and debit cards.

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

2.10.1 Camden, City of Westminster and Lambeth took part in a PiP trial project in which pay &

display machines of three different suppliers offering credit/debit card acceptance weretested. 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.

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

2007.

13



2.10.3 Beyond the PiP trial, Camden also carried out trials on a fourth machine from its existing

supplier, who has proved to be robust and reliable over the years. This has resulted in a

current project of upgrading 55 machines in the high-tariff area south of Euston Road to

‘Chip and PIN’ and a further 11 new machines will be installed in Kentish Town that will

be networked so that occupancy, income levels and tracking fault information can be

monitored, and tariff charges and other conditions can be readily updated. In addition, it

is intended to procure a further 55 ‘Chip and PIN’ machines later in 2007/8 as part of a

ten year investment programme.

2.11 Consultation on CPZ arrangements in the borough

2.11.1 Between May and June 2007 the Council conducted a general consultation on controlled

parking zones (CPZs) to establish a programme of reviews where these are needed. A

questionnaire was sent to almost 1,100 groups throughout the borough. Councillors were

also consulted and the consultation was open to individuals and other interested parties.

General questions were posed about the size of zones, hours of control and days of

control. The consultation exercise also posed additional questions about making common

arrangements for some business permits, whether motorcycle bays should operate allday and canvassing views on where to locate electric vehicle charging bays.

2.11.2 There are nineteen controlled parking zones (CPZs) across the whole of the borough and

the hours of operation vary depending on local needs identified in their own consultation

exercises. Several zones have sub-areas, which have their own hours of control. A map

of Camden’s CPZ is given in this document.

2.11.3 In recent years Camden’s CPZs have tended to become more complex through the use

of sub-areas and buffer zones. This complexity was introduced to meet local

communities’ requirements. Although Camden’s zoning arrangements may appear

complicated they have been tailored to solve particular problems in the areas concerned,based on local people’s knowledge about parking conditions.

2.11.4 The consultation results will be presented to the Executive (Environment) Sub-Group in

November and a programme of CPZ reviews will be presented for approval. In areas

where reviews are required the Council will set up a Consultation Steering Group of

representatives from the local community to advise the Council on the problems in the

local area and to assist in the design of consultation documents, and then consult all

households and businesses involved. CPZ reviews are lengthy and costly activities to

undertaken, and it is anticipated that the programme of reviews may take place over

several financial years depending on the number of reviews required.

2.12 Review of the Council’s school run policy

2.12.1 The cross party School Run Scrutiny Panel of 2002 proposed a number of policies to

tackle the school run issue, which were adopted by the Council in July 2002. One of

these was the Parking Dispensation Scheme for schools, based on parking permits

issued by the Council. The number of permits issued was decreased by 20% each year

from 2004, with the intention of reaching zero by the end of summer term 2008. By this

time parents and schools were expected to have adjusted their travel behaviour to take

account of the elimination of permits.

14



2.12.2 Travel by car has reduced to schools with Travel Plans. Travel Plans aim to reduce car

travel and develop alternatives, so that schools become active players in seeking to

address the problems caused by school run traffic. Camden received the London

Transport Award for the ‘The Most Innovative Transport Project’ in 2006 for its work on

school travel. However, overall, traffic levels in the Hampstead/Belsize area have not

declined. This is partly due to the slow development of Travel Plans by some schools and

the increase in school rolls in this area.

2.12.3 The Council has been reviewing the Parking Dispensation Scheme since October 2006,

consulting with parents, residents, schools, children and other interested groups, the

results of which are summarised below.

2.12.4 The impact of policy : the consultation results and studies show:

• No perceived improvement in environmental conditions. This is consistent with

environmental information collected and the increase in school rolls up to 10%.

• The majority of parents are not made aware of the policy to discontinue with the

permits before joining their school.

• In 2006 and 2007 the majority of permits were issued to new starters, contrary to the

policy of phasing out over five years.

• Children’s preferred modes of travel are bicycle (24%) and walking (24%), followed

by car.

2.12.5 The views : the consultation results also show:

• A strong polarity of views on options between residents and parents.

• Support of parents and schools for prioritising young children, with lesser support by

residents without children and no support of residents associations.• Support by emergency services for current scheme and removing parking obstructions

impeding access to buildings.

2.12.6 The options : the table below shows the most preferred option for each group of

respondents.

2.12.7 The consultation results were considered in coming to a decision11, amongst other things,

that dispensation be reduced to 1,000 from September 2007 and then to 500 from

September 2008. The permits are to be limited to nursery and Key Stage 1 (under 7s)

children. The permits are to be issued at no charge and a transferable clock dial system

is to be used with separate cards for AM and PM. From September 2008 permits will

only be issued to schools with a DfES (Department for Education and Skills) compliant

Travel Plan.

11The 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.

15



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

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

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

Zero Zero Hold the Hold the

permits permits permits at permits at

from Sept from Sept the 40% the 20% No

2007 2008 level (1) level (1) response

Residents without children 48% 28% 13% 10% 1%

Residents with children 13% 8% 63% 16% 0%

Parents 2% 1% 53% 4% 40%

Schools 0% 8% 83% 8% 1%

Resident Associations 0% 95% 3% 2% 0%

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

2.13 Review of Blue Badge arrangements south of Euston Road

2.13.1 Many of the parking concessions offered by The National Disabled Persons’ Parking

Badge Scheme (Blue Badge) do not apply in central London, including part of Camden

south of Euston Road. This is due to congestion in Central London and the severe

pressures on both parking and space for traffic to keep moving. Central London’s special

exemption started in the 1970’s.

2.13.2 In each of the authorit ies where the exemption operates (Westminster, Kensington &

Chelsea, the City and part of Camden), local disabled parking schemes are in place thatoffer 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 usedpay & display bays. The number of Blue Badge parking spaces in zones CA-C and

CA-E (which covers most of the Green Badge area south of Euston Road) more than

16



doubled between March 2000 and May 2006, from 25 to 57, while in the Kings Cross

zone, CA-D (part of which is included in the Green Badge area), the number of Blue

Badge bays increased from 32 to 78 over this period. Further bays will be provided where

opportunities arise.

2.14 Training of Parking Services staff and the customer services review

2.14.1 Parking Services staff received training in disability equality awareness and had ‘Tone of

Voice’ training in 2006/7. The disability awareness training provided staff with anunderstanding of some of the key disability exclusion issues that limits or prevents

access to our services. The ‘Tone of Voice’ training was designed to ensure that all our

letters in response to customer representations relating to PCNs were more user-friendly

whilst maintaining the necessary legal and statutory requirements.

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

centres

2.15.1 The Council is conducting a rolling programme of waiting and loading reviews across

Camden’s town centres.

2.15.2 Restrictions on waiting and loading have developed historically, and may not reflect

existing requirements. When reviewing arrangements in these areas the opportunity is

taken to simplify arrangements as far as possible and to reduce street signage clutter.

At the completion of each project the Council intends to publish a guide to parking

and loading in these areas to show what facilities are available and help drivers avoid

receiving a PCN. In addition to showing waiting and loading facilities, the guides will

show where loading bays and pay & display bays are located.

2.15.3 The Council’s first such review of Kentish Town was completed in 2004/5 and the guidefor this area is available on the Council website:

www.camden.gov.uk/ktloadingplan

17



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

2.15.4 Arrangements in and around Tottenham Court Road were studied in 2005/6, and

proposals were consulted on in 2006/7. The scheme will be implemented in 2007 with a

guide produced.

2.15.5 Arrangements in and High Holborn/Holborn were studied in 2006/7, and proposals are

being consulted on and implemented in 2007/8. Waiting and loading arrangements were

also studied in Chalk Farm Road in 2006/7 as part of a wider project for the town centre

involving urban realm works. The minor changes to waiting and loading arrangements are

likely to undertaken in 2008/9. A scheme is being implemented in Fortess Road in

2007/8.

2.15.6 The maximum loading and unloading time for vehicles parked on yellow lines where it is

safe to do so is 20 minutes. In June 2007 London Councils recommended that the

London boroughs adopt a new maximum time of 40 minutes. It is anticipated that

Camden will introduce this longer time soon, probably in late 2007.

2.15.7 The Council is receptive to listening to other requests from businesses to make parkingarrangements easier, such as additional pay & display bays.

18



3. Statistics, Financial Information, Reviews and Monitoring

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

3.1.1 Table 3.1 gives details on the number of PCNs issued each year from 2000/1 to 2006/7

by different types of contraventions:

• Those relating to parking, enforced by Parking Attendants and by CCTV

• Bus lane contraventions• Moving traffic contraventions (defined in Appendix 1)

3.1.2 Table 3.1 shows that the number of parking contraventions reached a peak in 2004/5.

Since then compliance with parking regulations has improved and the number of PCNs

issued has fallen. The Council would like to see the level of compliance improve further

and the number of parking PCNs issued to continue downwards. The Council supports

the introduction of differential charging for PCNs (section 2.2), which should produce a

fairer system of parking enforcement and assist the further improvement of compliance

with parking regulations.

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

Financial year

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

Parking 421,151 446,212 463,944 448,085 434,646

Bus Lane 19,911 21,471 45,778 24,514 15,324

Moving Traffic ,0 ,0 52,091 106,479 109,186

Total – all PCNs 441,062 467,683 561,813 579,078 559,156

19





3.1.3 Camden introduced the enforcement of bus lanes using 10 CCTV cameras in October

2002. Although the number of cameras used to enforce bus lanes increased in following

years, the number of bus lane PCNs reached a high point in 2004/5 and has decreased

sharply thereafter, indicating that compliance with bus lane regulation has improved. The

role of CCTV enforcement in improving compliance is key. This is because the photographic

record of the infringement makes it less likely that people will contest that contraventions

took place. The PCN recovery rate – the % of PCNs that are paid – has risen in consequence.

Recognition by drivers that they have contravened and hence pay up is a powerfulincentive for them to follow traffic regulations in future; drivers are less inclined to ‘take a

chance’. This means that compliance with bus lanes has improved and that bus lanes

operate more efficiently and effectively in conveying passengers to their destinations.

Bus lane contraventions

have decreased

dramatically over the last

three years, indicating

that CCTV enforcement

has proved very effective.

3.1.4 Camden took up powers and started to enforce moving traffic contraventions (MTCs) in

June 2004. MTCs are enforced entirely through CCTV cameras. The CCTV Code of

Practice12 recognises that the cameras are used for a wide variety of purposes – including

traffic regulation (for bus lanes, MTCs and parking), community safety and town centre

management – and are used by the Police on request. Most CCTV cameras are located

in fixed positions, but in addition Camden currently has 5 mobile CCTV units.

The number of MTC PCNs has been growing annually, as have the number of cameras

deployed, but there is not a simple relationship between them since CCTV cameras are

used for a variety of purposes. The mobile units are used on a roving basis where

enforcement action is required, including enforcement of parking contraventions relating

to the school run.

There is evidence that compliance with MTCs has improved through CCTV enforcement

(section 6.3 of the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan ). However, there is a large churn

of drivers coming into the borough who may not be aware that these regulations are

being enforced (since not all authorities have taken up the powers to enforce MTCs).

We have observed less compliance in areas where there are no fixed cameras but are

enforced in rotation by the mobile units.

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

22



CCTV cameras are used

to enforce moving traffic

contraventions, such as

the banned right turn

into John Street from

Theobald’s Road, and bus

lanes (see the camera above

the bus lane on the right).

3.2 Photographic records of contraventions

3.2.1 Bus lanes and moving traffic contraventions are enforced using CCTV cameras (section

3.2). Additionally, we have used CCTV to record some on-street parking contraventions

since July 2003. In 2004/05, 20.9% of PCNs used photographic evidence using CCTV

cameras.

3.2.2 Since December 2005 our Parking Attendants have been taking photographic images of

on-street parking contraventions as a matter of course. Once a PCN has been printed the

Parking Attendant is able to take photographs using an integrated digital camera on the

handheld machine.

3.2.3 Photographs were introduced to portray the contravention that had occurred and show

the relevant signs and road markings that are in place. While accompanying photographs

are desirable, they are additional to the pocket book notes made at the time and were

introduced as an initiative to provide transparency. The notes are legally sufficient and wewill always rely on the accuracy of the notes made by the Parking Attendant.

3.2.4 Of the PCNs issued in 2005/06 31.1% included a photographic record of the

contravention, and the increase in this percentage from the previous years was due to the

use of digital camera by Parking Attendants. In 2006/07, the first full year for which

Parking Attendants had digital cameras, the percentage of PCNs with a photographic

record of the contravention increased to 93.9%.

3.2.5 Unfortunately, it is not always possible for Parking Attendants to take photographs when

issuing a PCN. For example, there are instances when the vehicle is driven away before

they can be taken.

23



3.3 PCN recovery rates

3.3.1 PCN recovery rate has improved substantially over the last two financial years. Since

payments are not received immediately, recovery rate increases over time – though can be

treated as actual after 18 months. Actual recovery for 2005/6 was 64%, and the

anticipated recovery rate for 2006/7 is 70%. A target recovery rate for 2007/8 is 70.5%.

3.3.2 There are two factors that helped to improve recovery rates in the later part of 2005/6 and

thereafter. In December 2005 all Parking Attendants were supplied with digital cameras;this provides proof of the contravention and reduces the likelihood of disputes with the

owner of the vehicle. In the same month the Council began using a new parking

management information system (ICPS). This automatically sends out the requisite notices

to owners and hence progresses cases more quickly. The system also alerts PAs (via their

hand held computers) to the presence of a persistent evader so that appropriate

enforcement action can be undertaken, possibly involving clamping.

3.3.3 In May 2006 the Council created a Recovery Rate team whose responsibility it is to look at

all aspects of PCN recovery. The introduction of the Recovery Rate team, in conjunction

with the facility in ICPS to alert back office staff to follow up unpaid PCNs, has greatlyimproved 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 removedvehicles is expected to fall sharply with the policy changes in 2007/8 (see section 2.8).

Table 3.2 Clamped and removed vehicles

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

Vehicles Clamped 32,234 29,554 26,070 26,453 8,113

Vehicles Removed 10,371 9,456 4,833 8,697 8,732

24



3.5 Financial statistics

3.5.1 Within the Council’s budgeting processes and procedures the Parking Account is a

‘memorandum account’, which is set up and collated into this account from the Council ’s

accounts. It is necessary to set up the Parking Account as a memorandum account, since

any surplus generated must be spent on certain allowable purposes specified by law and

to be accounted for separately in the Council’s accounts to show transparency in this

respect. The income and expenditure on the Parking Account is presented in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 Parking Account: income and expenditure

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

Income £,000 £,000 £,000 £,000 £,000

Parking meters/pay & display 11,070 10,971 11,047 11,822 12,045

Parking permits: residents 2,373 2,667 2,670 2,862 2,910

Parking permits: other 958 1,031 1,210 1,444 2,193

Clamping and removals 2,635 3,232 3,047 2,981 1,928

Penalty Charge Notices 12,061 20,617 23,467 20,178 24,522

Other income 162 15 287 91 253

Total income 29,259 38,533 41,728 39,378 43,851

Total expenditure 15,979 19,691 20,814 24,604 24,553

Surplus 13,280 18,842 20,914 14,774 19,298

3.5.2 The total expenditure stated in Table 3.3 relates to direct expenditure incurred in running

the services that generate the Parking Account income. The income categories relate to

the following:

• Parking meters/pay & display – income from parking meters and pay & display

machines.

• Parking permits: residents – income from parking permits issued to residents in the

London Borough of Camden.

• Parking permits: other – income from parking permits issued to businesses, doctors,

visitors, market traders, and miscellaneous permits in the London Borough of Camden.

• Clamping and removals – income from the penalty fees from clamping cars and theremoval of cars to the car pound and storage fees while at the pound.

• Penalty Charge Notices – income from parking tickets issued to drivers who commit

parking and moving traffic contraventions.

• Other income – this is a variety of income that falls outside the other Parking Account

categories, e.g. the grant from TfL for the Persistent Evader Scheme in 2004/5.

3.5.3 The Parking Account figures for 2006/7 are provisional in that they are from unaudited

accounts and may change as a result of the audit. This does not include all Parking

Service income and expenditure – only the on-street income and expenditure.

25



3.5.4 Although the level of permit and pay & display charges are set by Camden Council, the

level of Penalty Charge Notices, clamping, and removal fees are set externally – by

London Councils with the Mayor of London’s approval and ratified by the Secretary of

State (section 2.2). Table 3.4 shows the highest proportion of income is derived from

PCNs. The relatively high proportion of income from short term parking (now almost

entirely from pay & display bays) reflects the demand for these facilities given Camden’s

central London location.

3.5.5 Changes that have occurred to income levels over this period are due to several factors:

• Penalty charge, clamping and removal fees are changed every four years. There were

increased in 2003/4, hence the step increase in PCN income in that year. They have

changed again in 2007 (in July – section 2.2).

• The range of parking and traffic contraventions that the Council enforces has increased

over this period (section 3.2) so PCN numbers have increased to a peak level in

2004/5.

• Recovery rates for PCNs have improved in recent years (section 3.4). Even though the

total number of PCNs fell in 2006/7 (Table 3.1), the surplus rose in 2006/7 due to

improved recovery rates (section 3.3).

• At the end of each financial year there are a large number of PCNs that have been

issued but have not been paid. We make a prudent estimate of the income we expect

to receive in relation to these tickets and include the figure in the accounts for Parking

Services in the year in which the PCNs were issued. Accounts need to be closed three

months after the end of the financial year. If the amount actually collected is different to

that estimated then an adjustment is made in the subsequent financial year. Since

PCNs payments can occur later than after year close, then the accounts for PCN

revenues in the previous financial year are necessarily estimated. The recovery rate of

PCNs issued in 2003/4 was better than expected, so the adjustment was carried over

as PCN revenue in 2004/5. Hence the increase in PCN revenue in 2004/5 is partly due

to the better than expected revenue from PCNs issued in 2003/4. Similarly a ‘ jump’

appears in the PCN revenues for 2006/7 as a consequence of the very strong recovery

rate observed for PCNs issued in 2005/6 (section 3.3).

3.5.6 Table 3.4 shows how the parking surplus identified in Table 3.3 is spent. The Council has

discretion on how to spend any surplus that may arise, within the allowable uses set by

law. What are deemed to be allowable uses have changed over time as new Acts of

Parliament have been passed, hence the relatively recent inclusion of categories of spend

‘highways maintenance’ and ‘home to school transport’. Under current legislation the

application of any surplus is limited to meeting the cost of providing and maintaining

parking facilities, highways improvement schemes, highway maintenance, public

passenger transport services and certain other categories (as explained in Annex C of the

interim Parking and Enforcement Plan ). Any amount not so used may be carried forward

in a parking reserve account to the next financial year.

26



Table 3.4 Application of Surplus

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

£,000 £,000 £,000 £,000 £,000

Off-street parking 600 881 954 821 663

Highways and traffic

improvement, and highways 6,144 8,810 10,144 7,243 7,378

maintenanceConcessionary fares (Freedom

Pass) and Taxicard scheme5,562 5,898 6,169 6,710 7,195

Transport Planning costs 974 1,280 1,538 1,433

Home to School transport 1,973 2,109 2,629

Total expenditure from

parking surplus 13,280 18,842 20,914 14,774 19,298

3.5.7 Table 3.4 only presents the relevant expenditure in each category up to the amount of the

surplus for each year. The surplus only makes a contribution to these budget heads, the

rest of which comes from other sources. Explanations of allowable relevant expenditure

for these categories are as follows:

• Off-street parking – This relates to staff and running costs at the car parks Camden

manages at Bloomsbury Square, Brunswick Square, and Henderson Court. This

excludes income and includes staff salaries (both temporary and permanent), rent,

rates, and telecoms.

• Highway and traffic improvement, and highways maintenance – This relates to the

highway and traffic improvement expenditure, the debt charge and contributes towards

maintaining Camden’s public highway. It covers items such as contractor and client

project management costs for covering the highway partnering contract, the public

lighting contract, gully cleaning contract, gully repairs and maintenance, traffic

management and control and contribution to improvements such as pedestrian

crossings, cycling facilities and upgrades to the walking environment.

• Concessionary fares (Freedom Pass) and Taxicard scheme.

• Transport Planning costs – This relates to transport planning activities such as theproject management of road safety projects, urban realm improvements, town centre

improvements, preparation of the plans and strategies such as the Walking Plan ,

Cycling Plan , Streetscape Design Manual , School Travel Planning, Travel Plans, and

other such activities facilitating the implementation of the Mayor of London’s Transport

Strategy .

• Home to School transport – This relates to the home to school transportation

expenditure under the Special Educational Needs service for certain statemented

pupils (see the Glossary for definition of this term), and certain pupils of the primary

pupil referral unit.

27



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

3.6.1 Parking and traffic regulations are in place to satisfy a variety of requirements. Roadspace

for traffic movements and kerbspace for parking are in intense demand in Camden given

the borough’s central London location. Regulations are in place to help balance demand

between different road users and over different times of the day. Further details about

balancing demand are given in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan .

3.6.2 Balancing demand is relatively more important on main roads. For example, the kerbsidelane on a given stretch of road in the ‘rush hour’ might operate as a bus lane, while

between the peaks might have pay & display and loading bays along it. In the evening on

the same stretch there might be no parking controls. On local roads, where the main

parking activity relates to that for residents and their visitors, balancing demand between

different users is generally less of an issue.

3.6.3 Parked vehicles obstructing bus lanes or at bus stops reduces bus efficiency and has

traffic flow consequences. Poorly parked vehicles might obstruct traffic flow, which can

have serious consequences on main roads, or might increase road safety risks.

3.6.4 Figure 3.1 shows the road classification used for Camden’s network management duty.

Transport for London is responsible for certain main roads in London – the ‘red route’

network, also known as the TLRN. All other public roads in Camden are the responsibility

of Camden Council. ‘A’ roads that are not part of the TLRN have been classified as

London’s ‘Strategic Road Network’. The figure shows other major roads in Camden and

district roads (the local distributors). All other roads controlled by Camden Council –

70% of them by road length – are local roads.

3.6.5 Table 3.5 shows the percentage of PCNs issued on different types of roads in the

borough. 57% of PCNs are issued on local roads – which is less than the percentage of

local roads (70%). This reflects the fact that enforcement activity is concentrated on

major roads where there is a strong need to keep traffic moving and balance competing

demand for kerbspace.

3.6.6 Local roads south of Euston Road also have relatively high volumes of PCNs/km,

reflecting the very special nature of these roads in the context of London as a whole,

which are in Central London and comprise part of the Central London Activity Zone.

Nationally significant land uses and buildings are located in this area or adjacent to it –

such as the British Museum, Bloomsbury, Fitzrovia, part of the West End and Covent

Garden, Kings Cross Station, Euston Station, University of London, Hatton Garden and

the City fringe and legal areas around Holborn. Very many businesses are located here.

The demand to balance the use of roadspace and kerbspace is high. As well as having

critical functions in terms of moving traffic it is also a place of great importance to

London and to the nation.

3.6.7 As explained in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan , the Council also responds to

requests from the local community to enforce parking controls in specific local areas as

issues arise. This means that where enforcement activity takes place is liable to vary from

year to year.

28



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

Key

3.6.8 The enforcement of moving traffic contraventions (MTCs) is strongly related to road

safety. As the table shows, a high percentage of PCNs for MTCs occurs on local roads.

There are specific locations on certain local roads where there is a history of poor

compliance with traffic regulations that need to be adhered to, which relate to road safety

issues. For example, in Boswell Street a left turn into Theobalds’ Road is enforced, since

right turns would conflict with the Holborn gyratory.

3.6.9 Excluding the very local nature of MTCs, the table shows that the number PCNs per km

is highest on major roads, with higher ratios occurring for roads higher up the borough ’s

road hierarchy.

29



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

Local Local

roads – roads – Total

south of north of Number

Major District Euston Euston of PCNs

roads (%) roads (%) Road (%) Road (%) Total (%) issued

PCNs issued by ParkingAttendants ‘on-street’

22.3 11.2 25.8 40.7 100.0 379,615

Parking PCNs observed

by CCTV89.2 2.2 2.4 6.2 100.0 55,031

Bus Lane PCNs (CCTV) 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 15,324

Moving traffic

contraventions PCNs 42.4 1.1 34.3 22.3 100.0 109,186

(CCTV)

All PCNs 34.9 8.0 24.4 32.6 100.0 559,156

Total

Road lengths, public

roads (km)48.0 34.3 37.0 158.9 278.3

Road lengths, public

roads (%)17.3 12.3 13.3 57.1 100.0

PCNs/km (excluding MTC) 3,103 1,271 2,680 995 1,617

Note: SRN PCNs includes some 800 PCNs issued on the TLRN on certain pay & display and residents’ bays originally

established by Camden and for which the Council can enforce.

3.7 Changing levels of demand for kerbside parking in the borough

3.7.1 The demand for kerbspace in Camden is variable and can be very high in certain areas.

Parking controls in general attempt to strike a balance between conflicting demands for

parking. An indicator of parking pressures in a CPZ is the ratio of the number of resident

and business permits (annual equivalents) to the bays that these permit holders may use.

3.7.2 The Table 3.6 gives the ratios of permits to bays for all CPZs in Camden, firstly for

September 2005 – as published in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan – and as at

January 2007. The large reduction of the ratio for zone CA-E arose from the reallocation

of pay & display bays in this zone to residents’ bays (see section 2.5).

3.7.3 As discussed in Camden’s Local Implementation Plan, Camden’s population and the

number of cars owned by residents in the borough is steadily increasing. This means that

the ration of permits to bay is likely to increase over time, since new kerbspace cannot be

created for parking. While there are variations in these ratios betweens zones due to local

factors, the overall pattern over all zones is that the ratio is increasing, as shown at thebottom of the table.

30



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

Controlled Parking Zone September 2005 January 2007

CA-B Belsize 1.13 1.17

CA-C Holborn and Covent Garden 1.35 1.44

CA-D Kings Cross 1.18 1.17

CA-E Bloomsbury and Fitzrovia 1.48 1.08

CA-F Camden Town 1.13 1.16

CA-G Somers Town 0.98 1.07

CA-H Hampstead 1.23 1.22

CA-J Primrose Hill 0.86 0.85

CA-K Kilburn Priory 1.12 1.07

CA-L West Kentish Town 0.60 0.65

CA-M East Kentish Town 0.91 0.94

CA-N Camden Square 0.84 0.83

CA-P Fortune Green and West End 0.99 1.02CA-Q Kilburn 0.91 0.89

CA-R Swiss Cottage 1.19 1.20

CA-S Redington and Frognal 0.66 0.67

CA-U Highgate 0.74 0.73

CA-V North End 0.77 0.69

CA-X Elm Village 1.77 1.71

ALL ZONES 0.99 1.00

Note: The high ratio for Elm Village is due to very particular circumstances: some off-street parking is available to residents but this is not enough for their parking needs. Residents in this zone find it convenient to purchase

sufficient permits to arrange their parking needs flexibly within households with respect to the private and public

spaces available.

3.8 Camden residents’ vehicle fleet composition

3.8.1 To assist in developing an emission-based charging system for resident’s parking permits

(section 2.3) and tariff’s appropriate to the composition of Camden’s fleet, data was

collected in November 2006 on vehicles associated with resident permit applicationsthroughout the borough.

3.8.2 A total of 2,204 vehicle details were obtained, with an almost 50/50 split of vehicles

registered before March 2001 (‘unbanded’) and those registered on or after March 2001

for which VED banding applies (‘banded’). The average engine size of unbanded vehicles

(1775cc) was smaller than that of banded (1905cc). As older unbanded vehicles are

traded in for newer banded vehicles – and treating this data as typical of the entire

Camden residents’ vehicle fleet – the sample survey indicates that the average vehicle

size in Camden in terms of engine size may well be increasing, which would put more

pressure on available kerbspace to park (section 3.7).3.8.3 The sample below gives the results of the November 2006 sample survey in terms of the

percentage of the vehicle fleet corresponding to the new tariff structure.

31



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

Tariff 1 Tariff 2 Tariff 3 Tariff 4

Unbanded vehicles (registered before March 2001)

Engine size (cc) 0-1299 1300-1849 1850-2449 2450+

% of permits (based on sample survey) 20.0 43.2 25.3 11.4

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

DVLA band

(g/km)

A, B, C

up to 150

D, E

151-185

F

186-224

G

225+

% of permits (based on sample survey) 20.0 36.4 24.7 18.9

3.9 Statistics on appeals and related information

3.9.1 The Table 3.8 gives the results of parking appeals considered by London’s independent

adjudicators, the Parking And Traffic Appeals Service, PATAS, and the data is derivedwholly from PATAS’s own statistics drawn from reports on its website. Recent data is

given up to the latest information available – for 2005/6.

3.9.2 The number of ‘appeals allowed’ are those cases found against the Council. The number

of ‘appeals refused’ are those cases found against the appellant.

3.9.3 The table shows the percentage of appeals found against the Council for parking

contraventions has generally fallen over this period. In 2005/6, for instance, Camden had

the 9th lowest ‘% appeals allowed’ of the 34 authorities in London (all 33 London

boroughs and TfL) and had a lower figure for this statistic (at 40.1%) than the average for

London authorities (55.6%). The statistics also show that the percentage of cases going

to appeal relative to the number of PCNs issued is less than the London average. The

relatively low number of cases going to appeal in Camden reflects the Council’s success

in resolving matters at an early stage when representations are made to the Council

about tickets issued.

3.9.4 Camden generally is also towards the top of the ‘league’ table in terms of its rank for bus

lane and moving traffic contraventions. Note that, as shown in the table, the number of

authorities enforcing bus lane and moving traffic contraventions has increased over time,

so Camden’s rank should be looked at from that perspective.

32



Table 3.8 PATAS Statistics for Camden and London Authorities

% of PCNs

going to

Of cases going to appeal, % allowed appeal in

Average Rank in London

In London

Camden authorities Number Out of...

Parking 2003/4 740 1,054 41.2 58.9 3 33 0.40 (1)

2004/5 530 969 35.4 60.8 6 34 0.32 1.13

2005/6 731 1,092 40.1 55.6 9 34 0.41 1.00

Bus Lane 2003/4 58 107 35.2 42.4 2 12 0.77 (1)

2004/5 36 90 28.6 43.2 2 20 0.28 0.54

2005/6 48 54 47.1 40.5 15 25 0.42 0.45

Moving 2004/5 41 36 53.2 54.7 1 5 0.15 0.23

Traffic 2005/6 145 167 46.5 55.6 3 10 0.29 0.22

Y e a r

A p p e a l s

a l l o w e d

A p p e a l s

r e

f u s e d

C a m d e n

L o n d o n

Source of data: PATAS

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

3.10 Performance statistics relating to Camden’s enforcement contracts,

Environment Locals and Parking Attendants’ safety3.10.1 The Council operates two parking enforcement contracts, for north and south of Euston

Road, and uses the following Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to monitor the

performance of its parking enforcement contracts:

• KPI 1, Staff retention – the contractor has to ensure that the majority of parking

enforcement staff has more than six months experience. It is expected that more than

75% will have more than six months experience through the contractor’s staff retention

scheme.

• KPI 2, Staff training and Training Plan progress – the staff training package has to

include a minimum of two weeks classroom based and four weeks on the job training

for each Parking Attendant. This should cover technical issues on the Road Traffic Act

1991, customer care and dealing with confrontational situations.

• KPI 3, Daily deployment levels – minimum daily deployment levels of Parking Attendants

and supervisory staff are set to ensure that parking compliance is achieved across the

borough.

• KPI 4, Complaints upheld against Parking Attendants – this indicator measures the

number of complaints about Parking Attendant behaviour that are upheld in the

complainants’ favour.

33



• KPI 5, Reduction in Parking Attendant errors – the contractor has to ensure that

measurable Parking Attendant errors are kept to low levels, with targets for the number

of errors as a proportion of PCNs issued set to reduce over the period of the contract.

• KPI 6, Penalty Charge Notice Achievement Level – the contractor is expected to reach

certain levels of PCNs correctly served in any period based on ongoing practical

experience of the operating environment. The contractor cannot introduce an incentive

scheme that is only related to this level. The Council is negotiating to remove KPI 6 as

a contractual requirement.

3.10.2 The current enforcement contracts started in 2005/6 and Table 3.9 gives the expected

and actual KPIs for the last two financial years.

Table 3.9 KPIs for Camden’s parking enforcement contracts

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

PARKING ENFORCEMENT

Actual

Expected 2005/6 2006/7NORTH

KPI 1: Staff retention More than 75% 70% 82%

KPI 2: Training Plan progress 100% 100% 100%

KPI 3: Daily deployment 92% 98% 96%

KPI 4: Complaints upheld against PAs per annum Less than 240 2 0

KPI 5: Parking Attendant errors 2005/6


Less than 5%

Less than 4%

2.4%

2.0%

KPI 6: PCN achievement 2005/6

KPI 6: level 2006/7

281,704

242,361

245,781

244,704

SOUTH

KPI 1: Staff retention More than 75% 66% 83%

KPI 2: Training Plan progress 100% 100% 100%

KPI 3: Daily Deployment 92% 101% 98%

KPI 4: Complaints upheld against PAs per annum Less than 240 0 2



Less than 5%

Less than 4%

1.9%

2.1%

KPI 6: PCN achievement 2005/6

KPI 6: level 2006/7

168,780

132,176

140,353

132,219

3.10.3 Camden also collects KPIs for its Environment Locals – those directly operated by

Parking Services (St Pancras Way, Hampstead and Holborn, which closed in 2006/7) and

under contract in Kilburn.

34



Table 3.10 KPIs for Camden’s Environment Locals

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Actual

ENVIRONMENT LOCALS Expected 2005/6 2006/7

KPI 1: Opening/closing hours 100% 100% 100%

KPI 2: Number of complaints upheld per annum Less than 60 0 2

KPI 3: Cash handling accuracy 98% 100% 100%

KPI 4: Errors in administration of permits

and other productsLess than 1% 0% 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 2006/7

Code Reds 89 111

Code Yellows 65 33

3.10.5 Camden has entered into a ‘Partnership Plus’ agreement with the Police and its parking

enforcement contractor. The aims of this agreement include the reporting and

investigating of allegations of assaults on enforcement staff, the sharing of

information/intelligence relating to preventing crime, disorder and similar incidents, how

support may be provided to deal with civil and local emergency events and training

relating to these issues. All acts of abuse or assault on enforcement staff are

unacceptable and Camden treats them with the utmost seriousness; the ‘Partnership

Plus’ agreement underscores our commitment to dealing with them.

35



3.11 Traffic flow data

3.11.1 Managing the road network in London is challenging given that there is a finite supply of

roadspace and kerbspace. Demand for the use of this space – for moving traffic, for

servicing and for parking – considerably exceeds capacity in many parts of London,

especially in the inner areas.

3.11.2 Camden, situated as it is in the centre of London, experiences some of the worst

congestion in Britain. Parking and enforcement policies offer important and effectivemeans of managing demand: the extent, location and cost of parking have major

implications for traffic levels, traffic congestion, the efficiency of public transport services

and the health of the local economy. Parking controls should therefore be seen as a

component of wider demand management techniques that restrain traffic.

3.11.3 The introduction of CPZs resulted in a reduction of traffic as our parking beat surveys

demonstrate, Table 3.12.

Table 3.12 The results of parking beat surveys

Reduction in parked vehicles

(%)

Zone Daytime Evening

CPZs with ‘standard control hours’

8.30am-6.00pm or longer

CA-J Primrose Hill 45 33

CA-L West Kentish Town (Outer) 60 43

CA-M East Kentish Town 45 27

CA-N Camden Square 57 29CA-P (a)/(b) Fortune Green 27 24

CA-Q Kilburn 38 40

CA-R Swiss Cottage 31 33

Average 43 33

CPZs with 2-hour controls

CA-P (c) Fortune Green 40 28

CA-L West Kentish Town (Inner) 47 41

CA-S Redington/Frognal 58 34

CA-U Highgate 32 18

Average 44 30

3.11.4 Further details about the relationship between restraining traffic, parking policies and

other Council policies are dealt with in the interim Parking and Enforcement Plan ,

Camden’s Local Implementation Pla n and the Network Management Plan , which may be

found on the Council website:

www.camden.gov.uk/parkingplan

www.camden.gov.uk/lip

www.camden.gov.uk/nmp

36



3.11.5 Changes in road traffic flows are monitored by determining the change in volume and

type of traffic passing across a screen lines. There are four screenlines in Camden – three

assess changes in north-south radial traffic through the borough and one catches east-

west orbital traffic across the borough.

3.11.6 The results of the latest counts in 2006 are given in the Table 3.13. Data has been

collected from 1996 onwards, though data is presented here from 2001, which is the

baseline for our motorised traffic reduction target of 15% by 2011.

3.11.7 In summary:

• Cycling grew strongly by 15% between 2005 and 2006, and by 95% between 2001

and 2006.

• The trend is that car traffic continues to fall. Even though it increased in 2005, between

2005 and 2006 it fell by 2.9%. Over the whole period 1996-2006 it fell by 31%, with a

fall of 19% from the 2001 baseline.

• Traffic levels for buses, motorcycles, taxis and light goods vehicle flows have

increased.• Overall, motorised traffic (i.e. excluding cycles) grew by 1.7% between 2005 and 2006,

but otherwise fell by 7% between 2001 and 2006 – largely due to the fall in car traffic.

There was a low in 2004 and slight rises since.

Table 3.13 Traffic flow data

6hr count totals over Calendar Year % Change

2001 to

2006

% Change

2005 to

2006

all screenlines 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Cycle 12,070 12,652 13,974 16,525 20,416 23,496 94.7 15.1

Motorcycle 18,026 17,742 17,484 17,231 18,129 19,710 9.3 8.7

Taxi 27,081 28,441 30,800 30,654 31,954 35,577 31.4 11.3

Light goods vehicle 40,563 38,530 37,718 37,515 38,776 40,219 – 0.8 3.7

Medium goods vehicle 12,737 12,150 11,653 10,969 10,281 10,561 – 17.1 2.7

Heavy goods vehicle 1,688 1,426 1,602 1,660 1,865 2,409 42.7 29.2

Bus and other PSVs 5,611 6,220 7,060 7,494 8,820 9,394 67.4 6.5

Car 159,577 145,539 134,344 129,349 132,672 128,869 – 19.2 – 2.9

Total flow 277,353 262,700 254,635 251,397 262,913 270,235 – 2.6 2.8

Motorised vehicles 265,283 250,048 240,661 234,872 242,497 246,739 – 7.0 1.7

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

Notes: Motorised vehicles exclude cycles.

37



3.12 Road Safety

3.12.1 Camden enforces its parking and traffic regulations vigorously in an even-handed way so

as to improve compliance with regulations, which in turn has a general beneficial impact

on road safety. Badly parked cars, for example on street corners, can pose safety

hazards, while enforcing bus lanes has the effect of reducing conflicts between buses

and other road traffic. Enforcing moving traffic contraventions has obvious road safety

benefits, and these can be very localised in nature – such as enforcing one ways

(section 3.2). Under the new system of differential penalty charges, moving traffic

contraventions involve the higher penalty charge rate as an explicit address to safety

concerns (section 2.2). Further details about the relationship between road safety

and enforcing parking and traffic regulations are given in the interim Parking and

Enforcement Plan .

3.12.2 Camden continues to adopt a wide ranging approach to casualty reduction in the

borough involving education, training and publicity programmes, engineering measures

and the full use of our enforcement powers. Further details are given in Camden’s Local

Implementation Plan and in particular the Road Safety Plan .

3.12.3 Overall, total casualties in 2006 – the latest year available – were down (by 16% on

2005) for the fifth year in succession. For the first time, in 2006 the total number of

casualties – slight casualties and killed or seriously injured casualties (KSIs) – fell

below 1,000.

Table 3.14 Road casualty statistics

% annualchange 2005

Casualty type 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 to 2006

KSI total 232 192 148 131 123 – 6

Slight total 1,172 1,078 1,026 905 748 – 17

TOTAL – all casualties 1,404 1,270 1,174 1,036 871 –16

Casualty totals for target groups

KSI children 17 18 9 11 8 – 27

KSI pedestrians 91 86 61 58 57 – 2

KSI cyclists 28 23 20 19 16 – 16

KSI motorcyclists 49 36 37 33 29 – 12

3.12.4 Camden had already met most of the Mayor’s original 2010 casualty reduction targets by

2004. Tougher targets were introduced in 2004 and are set out below. Camden remains

on course to meet all the new 2010 targets. There were reductions in every category for

2006 compared with 2005, with the target for killed or seriously injured casualties (KSIs)

now met. For the fourth year running there were no child fatalities and we have now met

38



the new 60% child KSI casualties’ target. Despite a continued fall in motorcycle

casualties this group remains the most difficult to influence in London, although we are

making steady progress towards this target. Reductions in cycle and pedestrian

casualties were achieved against a background of rising numbers of both on

Camden’s streets.

Table 3.15 Road casualty targets

Baseline New Target for 2010 2006 casualties

(1994/98 % reduction Casualty (% change from

Casualty type average) required numbers baseline)

KSI total 250 50 125 123 ( – 51)

Slight casualties 1,431 25 1,073 748 ( – 48)

Casualty totals for target groups

KSI children 25 60 10 8 ( – 68)

KSI pedestrians 104 50 52 57 ( – 45)KSI cyclists 31 50 15 16 ( – 48)

KSI motorcyclists 41 40 25 29 ( – 29)

3.13 Air Quality

3.13.1 Air pollution is an important environmental issue in Camden. Despite the reduction in

motorised traffic in the borough over the last decade (section 3.11) the Council’s

monitoring of air quality has shown that Camden has exceeded the Government’s

health based air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter for

the last seven years. This is because Camden cannot be isolated from the

wider pollution effects of being situated in the centre of one of Europe’s largest

conurbations and the broader influence of levels of pollution originating elsewhere in

Britain and Europe. Poor air quality is also a serious issue for Camden’s neighbouring

authorities.

3.13.2 Having said this, road traffic is the dominant source of nitrogen oxides (33%) and

particulate matter emissions (53%). Road transport is responsible for 85% of carbon

dioxide emissions in the borough, with cars contributing the largest proportion of

emissions. Carbon dioxide is a green house gas responsible for global warming and

driving climate change, and it is intended that the Council’s emission-based charging

policy for residents’ permits (section 2.3) and its policy of encouraging the use of electric

vehicles (section 2.4) will help address this issue, in conjunction with other measures to

encourage a mode shift to public transport, walking and cycling (as discussed in

Camden’s Local Implementation Plan ).

3.13.3 Fuel efficiency and vehicle size are important characteristics that influence exhaust

emissions. Measures to encourage people to use more fuel efficient and smaller vehicles

will benefit both air quality and climate change.

39



3.13.4 It should be highlighted that diesel vehicles produce lower carbon dioxide emissions than

vehicles fuelled by petrol. However, diesel vehicles give rise to higher emissions of

nitrogen oxides and particulate matter.

3.13.5 Further details about air quality monitoring can be found in the Council’s Air Quality and

Action Plan Progress Report 2007 .

40



CC

Glossary

This glossary provides:

• The full title to common acronyms used through the document.

• Definitions of technical terms used.

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

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

Enforcement Report .

Bands (for PCNs) PCN levels for Camden are in Band A – the highest band – except for a

few boundary roads that are in the next lowest level, Band B, which

generally applies in Outer London. The interim Parking and Enforcement

Plan specifies which roads are in Band B.

CCTV ‘Closed Circuit Television’: relates to the camera and associatedtechnology that may be used for surveillance and enforcement purposes.

Charge Certificate

CPZ Controlled Parking Zone. All public highways in Camden are covered by

CPZs in which parking is regulated within certain controlled hours. The

hours of control vary between CPZs, and in some CPZs there are sub

areas with their own hours of control. The hours and days of control in

CPZs and sub-areas have been developed to meet local communityneeds following detailed consultation.

Contravention This refers to a breach of parking, bus lane and certain moving traffic

regulations. This was formerly referred to as an ‘offence’ when regulations

were enforced by the Police. All London traffic authorities – the London

boroughs, the City of London and Transport for London (TfL) – have taken

up enforcement powers for parking and bus lanes. Not all London traffic

authorities have taken up enforcement of certain moving traffic

contraventions (see Appendix 1), though an increasing number of

authorities are doing so. Other traffic offences, such as speeding anddangerous driving, are still enforced by the Police.

Decriminalisation This is the process whereby local authorities take up enforcement powers

from the Police. Camden has taken up powers to enforce parking, bus

lanes and certain moving traffic contraventions (such as banned moves).

EN Enforcement Notice

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

parking controls and decriminalised traffic contraventions (enforcement of

bus lanes and of moving traffic offences).

41



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

London Authority Act 1999.

KPI Key Performance indicator

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

London Councils This body represents the interests of local government in London,comprising nominated representatives, with a small specialist staff. It is

responsible for the parking adjudication service, and administration of the

London lorry ban.

MTCs Moving Traffic Contraventions

NTO Notice to Owner

PATAS Parking And Traffic Appeals Service

PA Parking Attendant

PCN Penalty Charge Notice

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

regarding parking matters – see section 2.9.

Recovery rate The percentage of PCNs issued that have been paid. Non payment of

PCNs may arise due to those receiving the PCN or as a consequence of

the Council not being able to obtain the keeper details from the DVLA

(Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency).

Statemented pupils This relates to pupils with special education needs, whose needs are

assessed by the Council and described in a ‘statement’ describing the

special help they should receive.

TEC London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee (formerly

ALG TEC).

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

London is responsible for.

TLRN Transport for London Road Network – This is the ‘GLA Road’ network as

defined and brought into being by the Greater London Authority Act 1999.

TMO Traffic Management Order. TMO is used as a generic term in this report to

cover any traffic management or traffic regulation orders that are used to

designate parking and traffic controls.

42



Traffic authority This has the same meaning as in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 .

‘Local traffic authority’ (“LTA”) means a traffic authority other than the

Secretary of State or the National Assembly for Wales – i.e. the

appropriate level of ‘local government’ that pertains to a particular area.

In London each of the 33 London Boroughs (including the Corporation of

London) is the LTA for borough roads. TfL is the LTA for the TLRN.

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

43



Appendix 1: Moving Traffic Contraventions

The Council has taken up powers to enforce the following moving traffic contraventions that are

clearly indicated by road signs and lines.

44



P u b l i s h e d O c t o b e r 2 0 0 7

C G S 2 1 5 5 6

D e s i g n a n d p r i n t b y C a m e r o n G r a p h i c S e r v i c e s

Street Policy Parking Services

Culture and Environment Directorate Culture and Environment Directorate

London Borough of Camden London Borough of Camden

Argyle Street 100 St Pancras Way

London WC1H 8EQ London NW1 9NF

Documents

LB Camden Oct 2007