James Barlow

At the recent Cabinet meeting of the City of Bristol, long-time campaigner Bernard Cooke of KeepParkingFree.org made a public forum statement opposing Bristol's Residents Parking Scheme (blogged here). Here's a video of his statement: (Supporting documents here Pgs 17-19)

A very concise lists of the twelve key arguments against the CPZ is available from the campaign website. The key one:

1. There would be absolutely no guarantee of finding a space. Your street may lose a few ‘commuters’ during the day but, if there are not enough spaces for residents now, there wouldn’t be enough with a residents’ parking scheme either.

Mr Cooke and his compatriats are veterans of numerous battles against the council on this subject, but I hadn't realised quite how many until I started looking through the archives.

Controlled Parking Zone Attempt #1 (1999-2000)

Back in September 1999, the CPZ Action Group hosted a streetside meeting to highlight the impact of a Controlled Parking Zone of traders Whiteladies Road. The guests of honour at that event were Bristol City Council's transport committee chief Helen Holland and then Member of Parliament Valerie Davey (Lab). Interestingly, the proposed charges for the CPZ back then were between £60 and £100 a year for residents' permits and 350 for businesses, as opposed to £40 a pop on the current plan.

Later that same year, the Evening Post reported that a local councillor had ruled out holding a referendum to gauge the public's views on the proposed controlled parking zone. See if you can guess who?

Councillor Helen Holland chair of the planning, transport and development committee, was asked whether she would agree to a local referendum to see whether the scheme would be welcomed by the affected communities of Hotwells, Cotham, Clifton and Kingsdown.

But she replied that a referendum would be a blunt instrument. She said: "A referendum is a useful tool when the issue involved is straightforward and lends itself to a simple 'yes/no' answer. However, a CPZ is not a straightforward matter."

An opinion poll did take place, however, and the overwhelming majority of Bristol wards voted against the proposals. Apart from one:

Planning leader Councillor Helen Holland said: "The results of the first consultation showed a clear majority of residents in the High Kingsdown and Lower Kingsdown areas want a CPZ.

"In these areas that were so positive about the tangible benefits this will bring to their lives, the next stage is to work with people to refine the scheme so it is sensitive to local circumstances.

"Where there was a clear majority against - as we promised - we have listened and acted. [T] hose proposals have been dropped."

Son of CPZ - The Kingsdown Controlled Parking Zone (2001-02)

Early in 2001, another CPZ consultation was organised. The Evening Post reported:

Cabinet Councillor Helen Holland decided to go ahead with consultations yesterday - despite controversy surrounding the scheme.

Once the draft proposals are published, people will have six weeks to put forward their comments.

A final decision will not be taken until the results of the consultation are brought back before Councillor Holland, the executive member in charge of the council's Environment, Transport and Leisure Department.

She said: "I don't think there is anyone that doesn't accept that something needs to be done about the parking problems in Kingsdown.

"If we were to carry on until we had 100 per cent support, we would have to wait a very long time - in the meantime, the parking problems would continue.

"If we were to stop at this stage, it would just lead to a great deal more uncertainty."

Around this time, I first recall hearing the name "Bernard Cooke", when I read a letter he sent to the Evening Post (July 19th, 2002). I managed to find the text via LexisNexis:

FORMER council leader George Micklewright hit the nail on the head when he complained (Insight, July 3) about Bristol City Council's consultation failings.

Two years ago the council consulted on its plan for a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) in an enlarged Kingsdown area, stretching from Whiteladies Road across to Stokes Croft.

Forty-five per cent of respondents said "No", 10 per cent said "Yes", and the remainder made other comments.

The result? The council said that 55 per cent of people had either supported the plan, or not objected to it, so it should proceed to the next stage.

They certainly deserve a prize for something!

For six weeks from September 2 this year the council is to carry out "statutory consultation" on the scheme, with a view to it starting on April 1, 2003.

Now, there are a lot of students and other university people in Kingsdown, and the council says it wants to include them in its consultation. But the university year only starts on September 30 and there will be few students and staff who have time in the first two weeks of term to think about paying to park in six months' time.

Despite this, Executive Member Helen Holland has categorically refused to alter the timetable. Could it be she thinks students and other university folk might not wish to pay to park outside their homes?

In addition, if a CPZ were introduced in Kingsdown the knock-on effect would be felt in Clifton, Cotham, Redland, Montpelier and St Pauls. Yet people here are not being consulted about the plans.

Again, could it be that Councillor Holland is worried they might say "No"?

Councillor Holland has even refused to publish the results of the forthcoming consultation, in direct contravention of the council's own consultation strategy, presumably just in case the result doesn't go her way.

Consultation failure, George? You bet!

B Cooke, Kensington Place, Clifton.

CPZ REDUX (2006)

Around 2006, the Liberal Democrats decided that a CPZ was worth a punt. From the Feb 17th Evening Post:

A CITY councillor is calling for a controversial parking scheme to be resurrected in Kingsdown - more than three years after it was abandoned following a residents' revolt.

Mark Wright, whose Cabot ward includes Kingsdown, says he believes the parking problem in the area has become so bad that lives are at risk.

The Liberal Democrat councillor has renewed his campaign to bring in a controlled parking zone (CPZ) for the area - in which parking is restricted to permit-holding residents only - after the Evening Post highlighted problems that firefighters had tackling a blaze in Somerset Street on Tuesday.

[...] The most recent attempt by the city council to introduce a CPZ in Kingsdown was dropped in 2002 after consultations showed most residents opposed the idea.

But last October the city council's ruling Lib Dem cabinet said the idea was one of several options being considered as part of a city-wide overhaul of parking policy.

[...] Bernard Cooke, a transport campaigner who opposed a previous scheme to create residents parking in Kingsdown, said the council only wanted to introduce CPZs to raise money and believes it is wrong to suggest it is an issue of saving lives.

Mr Cooke, of Clifton, said: "If people are parking and causing an obstruction, that is an offence and they do not need any more rules to deal with that. I see the introduction of a CPZ as an entirely separate issue. It is not the right way to deal with the problem."

CPZ - The Next Generation (2007-08)

Which brings us up to the present day. I first noticed Cabinet proposals relating to Controlled Parking Zones, specifically this document: EXPANSION OF THE CENTRAL CONTROLLED PARKING ZONES AND INTRODUCTION OF RESIDENTS PARKING ZONES, at the November 15th 2007 Cabinet meeting.

Here's Councillor Mark Bradshaw introducing the proposals:

The decision made at that Cabinet meeting was as follows:

Declarations of Interest :

Cllr Judith Price declared a personal interest relating to the fact that a member of her family is employed by the City Council as a parking attendant.

(e) Decision :
1. That approval be given to introduce an inner and outer ring of residents parking zones in accordance with figure 1 and appendix 6 of the report (subject to the consultation below).
2. That a strategic project management approach (the Bristol Residents Parking Project) be adopted to the comprehensive implementation of residents parking zones within the inner and outer rings over the next 4 years, subject to the necessary forward funding being approved.
3. That an informal consultation exercise be undertaken, involving the Citizens Panel and the areas potentially affected, upon the operational principles set out in appendix 6 of the report, and to establish those areas where the greatest support for residents parking zones exists for possible early adoption, bearing in mind the Council's overall responsibilities as traffic authority for its area.
4. That consultation on the intention to extend the existing central controlled parking zones, as shown coloured dark yellow in figure 1 of the report, should proceed, and that the operational hours of the existing central controlled parking zones be extended to cover 24 hours per day and 7 days per week to reflect the growth of the 24 hour economy.

Several Public Forum responses were made, including Cllr Dennis Brown (LD), Joshua Hart of the "Car Free" Blog, and Richard Eddy, Leader of the Conservative Group.

What next?

Based on past form, the CPZ will keep getting pushed by Helen Holland and company, despite headlines in the newspaper like "Hundreds sign up to oppose Bristol parking zone plan". But they're not going to get an easy fight.

The contentious issue of charging Bristolians for on-street parking has been enough to drag the mysterious Bristol Blogger out of retirement. And with good reason: £40 quid a year per vehicle plus the hassle of having to arrange permits for visitors and tradesmen, and no guarantee that you'll be giving permission by the council to park a second car. If this were declared as an increase in council tax, it would be equivalent to a minimum of 3% on every Band D household.

As a local car owner, I don't like this policy, both because I'm already paying more tax than I want to, and because I don't believe that stringent council-led ticketing and control is the right way to solve the problem (although is it a problem? see below). My preference would be a wholesale mutualisation of non-trunk roads, to let individual home owners form friendly associations to manage their street, their approach to parking control and how much to spend on up-keep. Wearing my small business hat, I'm already investigating the purchase price of high-density, small-footprint urban parking structures, which could be a potential area of growth regardless of how we choose to respond to parking.

The trouble is that if just one area of the city did decide to go down the route of Parking Control, then the knock on effect would be to increase parking in neighbouring areas. This results in a city-wide version of The Prisoner's Dilemma.

Two suspects are arrested by the police. The police have insufficient evidence for a conviction, and, having separated both prisoners, visit each of them to offer the same deal. If one testifies ("defects") for the prosecution against the other and the other remains silent, the betrayer goes free and the silent accomplice receives the full 10-year sentence.

If both remain silent, both prisoners are sentenced to only six months in jail for a minor charge. If each betrays the other, each receives a five-year sentence. Each prisoner must choose to betray the other or to remain silent. Each one is assured that the other would not know about the betrayal before the end of the investigation. How should the prisoners act?

If all areas of the city vote against Parking controls, then everybody get's a good result. But if only one area votes in favour whilst their neighbours take the opposing view, then that dissenting area will displace cars into the neighbouring areas. Therefore even those who are against the scheme have an incentive to vote in favour.

Redefining the problem

If we define the problem to be "too many cars on the road", the general consensus amongst drivers seems to be that the solution is better public transportation systems for other drivers. But very few people have any desire to make the "modal shift" themselves.

But if one defines the problem as excess demand at peak times - outside the rush hour, there's plenty of roadspace and traffic moves freely - then perhaps we should try to do a bit more to incentivise road use outside peak times. How about something simple, which requires no capital investment, no new staff, no consultations, no free "Our City" newsletters, no focus groups and no extra money from car drivers or council tax payers: Let's switch traffic lights to flashing amber outside busy hours. This would improve traffic flow on major roads and might persuade commuters to change their daily pattern. Simple, cheap and easy to test.

Who Watches the Watchman?

In late news, the council are running a further consultation on "the possible introduction of state-of-the-art safety measures aimed at reducing dangerous driving and protecting lives in two areas of the city."

Bristol City Council is proposing the introduction of comprehensive Watchman Safety Schemes at Long Cross in Kings Weston - between the junctions with Kings Weston Rd and Stile Acres - and at Whiteladies Road in Clifton, between the junctions with Lower Redland Road and West Park.

Both roads have relatively high accident rates. There were 63 reported accidents on Whiteladies Road in total between January 2005 and December last year - with two people killed and nine seriously injured. At Long Cross there were 27 reported accidents during the same period, with six people being seriously injured. Speed was an issue in a large number of the accidents at both locations.

If the new Watchman schemes get the go ahead, safety cameras would be installed in both directions on the two roads. They would be switched on around the clock and would record the number plates of any vehicles breaking the speed limit. Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS) would also be installed in advance of the cameras to warn motorists where they are exceeding the speed limit - and there would be clear signs to advise road users when they are entering the zones.

Fines would not be issued instantly, as with most other speed cameras, but police would be able to follow up any driving above the speed limit captured on film and consider prosecution.

A similar scheme has been in operation at Allison Road, Brislington for the past year and over that time traffic speeds have dramatically decreased and no new personal injury accidents have been recorded.

I wonder whether the Allison Road scheme will continue to deliver such benefits? The key phrase for consideration is "Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc", with extra credit for a study of "Regression toward the Mean".

I've posted a few comments on Council plans for closing Care Homes and a new Museum of Bristol, both discussed at the last Cabinet meeting. Two agenda item that I haven't covered relate to Car Parking in the city.

The first agenda item was a report discussing plans for the central Controlled Parking Zone in the centre of Bristol. (PARKING STRATEGY - NEXT STEPS). This is not a London-style camera controlled affair, but rather a legislative hook for parking legislation. Some of the specific measures to be introduced form part of the report submitted as the second agenda item. (BRISTOL LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK -STATEMENTOF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT)

The goal underlying both of these reports is to "encouraging modal shift by commuters from car to
public transport, park and ride, or other options". Encouragement in this context meaning more fines, controls and interference by transport planners. And the prirmary "involvement" of the community will be when they open their wallets.

The key outcomes of these policies are:

1. Park & Ride fares will increase
2. Tariffs at Council Parking structures will increase
3. Single Yellow Lines will be turned into Parking Bays
4. Parking on Sundays and Bank Holidays will no longer be free

The second report relates to the introduction of Resident's parling zones in two rings around the centre of Bristol. Yes, it's the return of the Kingsdown Controlled Parking Zone. And this time, it's got a big brother: the Bristol Residents Parking Project. Have a look at a full map of the effected area here. More information to follow, but the key question to ask is: How much will local residents be charged for participation in this scheme if it goes ahead? Specifically, how much will you have to pay over and above your council tax for a parking permit?