Data Label: PUBLIC ENVIRONMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND SCRUTINY PANEL REVIEW OF TRAFFIC WARDEN PROVISION AND POTENTIAL FOR DECRIMINALISED PARKING ENFORCEMENT REPORT BY HEAD OF OPERATIONAL SERVICES A. PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to inform the panel of the Police Scotland review of traffic wardens and discuss options for managing on-street parking in West Lothian. B. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the panel: 1. Notes the work already undertaken on parking management; and 2. Endorses the recommended option of monitoring and review with regular 6- monthly reports to the Environment PDSP. 3. Notes that the timescale for introducing Decriminalised Parking Enforcement is of the order of three years from a decision to proceed. C. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS I. Council Values Focusing on our customer needs; and Working in partnership II. Policy and Legal Policy: Need to develop policy on parking enforcement Legal: Development of business case and application to Scottish Ministers to take up decriminalised parking enforcement powers under the Road Traffic Act 1991. III. Implications for Scheme of Delegations Adoption of decriminalised parking to Officers enforcement would require scheme of delegation to be altered accordingly. IV. Impact on performance and None performance indicators V. Relevance to Single Outcome Effective parking enforcement contributes 1 Agreement to outcomes 10 – We live in well- designed, sustainable places where we are able to access the services we need and 12 - We value and enjoy our built and natural environment and protect it and enhance it for future generations. VI. Resources (Financial, Staffing and Financial: Decriminalised parking Property) enforcement would require considerable up-front financial investment of the order of £500,000. The detailed business case would indicate whether this could be recouped over time through charges and fines. Development of the parking strategy and detailed business case and is estimated to cost £50,000. Staffing: Decriminalised parking enforcement would require establishment of a parking team to either directly enforce or manage a contractor for enforcement. Property: None VII. Consideration at PDSP/Executive Decriminalised parking enforcement Committee required would require consideration at Environment PDSP and Council Executive at various stages of the process. VII. Details of consultations None D. TERMS OF REPORT D.1 Background As noted at the meeting of West Lothian Council on 14 January 2014, Police Scotland recently ceased its traffic warden service throughout Scotland. At the meeting, the Council instructed that: 1. The Chief Executive to write to the Cabinet Secretary to request a delay to the removal of the Traffic Warden Service until the Council has had the opportunity to fully investigate the practicalities of implementing a DPE in West Lothian, and, 2. Officers to bring forward a paper detailing options on parking management within our towns and villages to the Environment PDSP at the earlier opportunity. The Chief Executive subsequently wrote to the Cabinet Secretary and the response will be reported to the next full council meeting on 1 April. This report deals with the instruction to bring forward a paper on parking management options. 2 Traffic Wardens The Police Scotland decision means that there will be no dedicated resource for routine enforcement of parking restrictions and the Police will only take action where parking is considered to be ‘dangerous or causes significant obstruction’. This is a significant change for West Lothian and is expected to have considerable impact on town centre locations. Up until November 2013 there were four wardens operating in West Lothian, one is funded by Land Securities for a two year period, due to end in June 2014, and covers the Livingston town centre. The other wardens covered the other areas in West Lothian, although the areas covered can vary: one warden covered Whitburn, Uphall and Broxburn, one warden covered Bathgate, Armadale and West Calder and one warden was dedicated to Linlithgow. The hours of operation ranged from 08:45 to 17:15 with wardens working every third Saturday. Officers have sought details from Police Scotland on the number of fixed penalty tickets issued by the police and traffic wardens. The information provided indicates that around 3,000 parking fixed penalties were issued per annum. There has been a slight increase in each of the last three years. The removal of the routine enforcement provided by traffic wardens is expected to lead to increased complaints about parking, increased levels of congestion in town centres, negative impacts on air quality in these areas, potential increases in road traffic accidents all of which would increase pressure on the council to seek decriminalised parking enforcement powers. D.2 Decriminalised Parking Enforcement Currently in West Lothian, on-street parking infringements are criminal offences enforced by the police under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The council has no powers to enforce such restrictions on-street. The Road Traffic Act 1991 introduced the concept of ‘decriminalised parking enforcement’ (DPE) whereby a local roads authority could apply to central government to designate areas as ‘Special Parking Areas’. In these areas, which usually comprise the entire local authority area, parking infringements are no longer criminal offences but are enforced by the local authority through a civil court procedure. Enforcement can either be parking attendants employed directly by the council or by a contractor working on behalf of the council. Fine revenue in DPE areas goes to the local authority rather than HM Treasury. Once a local authority has taken DPE powers, the decision is irreversible so the local authority has to be sure that the financial case for DPE is sound before making an application. 3 There is a considerable amount of work required in preparing an application for DPE including: x a full review of parking policies and implementation; x a full review of exemptions and waivers; x revision of all traffic regulation orders to reflect DPE; x review of all signs and markings and rectification of all defects to ensure that they are in ‘a good state of repair’; x a robust business case showing detailed expenditure and income forecasts for the first year of operation; x details of the plans for provision of parking attendants including provision for training; x details of the documentation, payment facilities and independent adjudication facilities associated with the scheme; and x details of vehicle removal procedures. The DPE concept has potential advantages for local authorities who are able to direct enforcement in accordance with locally set priorities. However, there is a financial case to be met to ensure that schemes are self-financing. Income from fines and charges needs to balance the costs of operating the scheme and ideally would make a surplus to allow the initial capital costs to be recouped. In some areas, mainly London and other large cities, DPE has raised a considerable financial surplus but the legislation requires that this money is ring-fenced for transport related expenditure. Recent court judgements have clarified that charges and fines cannot be set for revenue generation – the purpose of parking enforcement is to maintain traffic flow, access to premises and road safety. In many areas, particularly in Scotland, it has proven much more difficult to run schemes without considerable subsidy, normally from off-street parking accounts (a ring-fenced account established from parking charges and used solely for roads and transportation work). A recent example from Inverclyde Council which illustrates the scale of the costs and the potential funding shortfall is described in Appendix 1. Outline DPE Income and Cost Estimates Using information gleaned from other authority business cases, best practice guidance and the number of parking tickets issued in West Lothian in recent years, officers have developed outline income and cost estimates. These are shown in Appendix 2. It should be noted that there are considerable assumptions and unknowns in this and it would require considerable refinement and development before officers would be confident to commend it as a sound case. In particular, the adopted parking strategy would directly influence the level of enforcement and in turn the number of tickets issued. Only through the development of a comprehensive parking strategy could this be fully assessed. 4 However, the figures indicate that it is unlikely that DPE would be self-financing from fine income alone. The annual operating shortfall is currently estimated to be of the order of £30,000 to £80,000. Ongoing work There is currently an ongoing project to digitise all existing waiting and parking traffic regulation orders and compile into a geographic information system. This project will provide immediate operational benefits but will also provide the base information on existing restrictions and enable easier review of traffic orders should DPE be pursued in the future. It is expected that the project will be complete by the end of 2014. Options for Parking Management Option 1 – Monitor, review and develop outline DPE business case The council has the option of relying on Police Scotland to provide targeted enforcement to maintain traffic flow and road safety, whilst monitoring the ongoing impact. This option has the benefit of having minimal cost for the council and provides an opportunity