Guidance for local transport
Guidance on second edition Local Transport Plans
247. The second edition of Department for Transport
guidance on drafting Local Transport Plans (LTPs) is a missed
opportunity to raise the profile of parking. We heard that the
criteria for parking strategies in the LTPs has been weakened
since the first round of LTPs.
For example, the new guidance refers only to having parking policies
to promote traffic management and reduce congestion, but it does
not set out any prescriptive criteria. This reflects a general
move towards flexibility for local authorities in setting their
own priorities and identifying their own solutions.
248. The Department explained that the guidance for
the second round LTPs had been changed in light of increased transport
planning experience in authorities, and contained a new focus
on four key policy priorities. The Department stressed to us that
parking "is very much a local issue".
This may be so in essence, but our report has already set out
major flaws in the parking regime country-wide that can only be
tackled through vigorous action by central Government.
Mayor of London's guidance on parking strategies
249. The Department for Transport's somewhat arms
length approach provides a stark contrast to that embodied in
the guidance issued by the Mayor of London.
250. The London boroughs must submit Local Implementation
Plans which reflect fully the objectives of the over-arching London
Transport Strategy. The guidance on Local Implementation Plans
is prescriptive in setting out what should be included in a 'Parking
and Enforcement Plan'.
There are two and a half pages containing the criteria which boroughs
must fulfil. The guidance requires a review of signage at all
locations, a review of parking and loading restrictions to "help
reinforce London's road hierarchy and ensure that they reflect
changing policy priorities", and co-ordination between boroughs
to complement traffic management measures.
251. On London's strategic road network, Transport
for London (TfL) has taken a strategic approach to deciding which
locations would benefit from extra enforcement. An 'enforcement
demand matrix' was constructed to identify which locations on
the network require higher levels of enforcement. TfL explained:
"The matrix is based on TfL's analysis on priority areas
including traffic congestion hotspots and roads where bus services
are impeded by illegal parking."
Local authorities should concentrate enforcement activity on
congestion hotspots, bus routes, and locations where offences
increase road risk. Transport for London achieves this through
an 'enforcement demand matrix'. We recommend other authorities
examine this approach.
GOOD PRACTICE GUIDANCE ON PARKING
252. The Institution of Highways and Transportation
has developed 'good practice guidance' on parking policies.
It recommends that all local authorities should develop a
parking strategy that meets the following criteria:
- consistent with national and
regional guidance and objectives
- well rooted in relevant local policies and contributes
to wider community objectives, both transport and non-transport
- reflects and contributes to the vision of the
area; responds to local issues and public concerns with clear
- takes account and complements related strategies
such as economic regeneration, crime prevention, streetscape enhancement,
- consistent and technically robust
- based upon sound consultation and wide stakeholder
involvement; has strong political and local support
- has a realistic implementation timetable; includes
a business plan that enables parking costs to be covered by revenues;
- includes a framework to monitor performance and
These seem to us to be a sound basis on which to
plan a successful parking regime.
253. We recommend to all local authorities, and
in particular to those considering the introduction of a civil
enforcement scheme, the use of the Institution of Highways and
Transportation's 'best practice guidelines'. These can be used
either to develop parking strategies for inclusion in local authorities'
Local Transport Plans, or as 'stand alone' parking strategies.
254. We are concerned that present guidance from
the Department for Transport on Local Transport Plans has effectively
down-graded the priority of parking schemes. Future Local Transport
Plan guidance from central Government should make it clear there
is a need for detailed parking plans. It is not enough
for the Department for Transport to rely on general statements.
255. The Plans should include testing performance
indicators for parking which focus on actual compliance and high
quality administration of parking enforcement, as recommended
earlier in this report. It is not appropriate, given the creaking
and inconsistent parking arrangements to be found throughout the
country, that the Department appears to be slackening its grip
instead of demanding higher standards, enhanced consistency, and
more uniformity in this area.
194 The Department of Transport Local Authority Circular
1/95: Guidance on decriminalised parking enforcement outside London,
page 7, para 3.2 Back
Q142, Ev 47 Back
Ev 44, Q17 Back
Ev 47 Back
Ev 47 Back
Ev 145 Back
Under the Transport Act 2000 local authorities have the power
to introduce a levy on parking at the workplace. Back
Department for Transport White Paper 'The Future of Transport'
(July 2004). The Fund is forecast to grow from £290 million
in 2008/09 to over £2 billion by 2014/15. Back
Q145, Q171 - Q174 Back
Ev 133 Back
Ev 133 Back
Ev 108 Back
Transport for London LIP Guidance 2004 Appendix E Local Authority
parking and enforcement plans, pages 131-133. Back
Ev 163 Back
The Institution of Highways and Transportation (2005) 'Parking
Strategies and Management'. Back