Private parking charges first principles assessment

The principal aim of charging for private parking is to reduce car traffic and so congestion levels, specifically within city centres. This will in turn reduce noise and air pollution, and encourage other forms of transport and the more efficient use of the private car (via company car sharing schemes).

A secondary aim of charging might be to generate revenues to improve current transport infrastructures and services within the charging area. Or for a private company it might be to save money by reducing land take costs.

Demand impacts will relate directly to the type of charging scheme implemented. Most changes will decrease the popularity and convenience of car travel and encourage the use of other methods of transport such as the use of public transport, cycling, walking or the use of initiatives such as car sharing schemes. This will contribute to transport policies that are aimed at reducing car use and congestion and in turn reducing noise and air pollution and making the urban transport infrastructure safer.

Responses and situations

Response	Reduction in road traffic	Expected in situations
	-	Departure times changed if form of transport changed i.e. commuters set off in time to use public transport/ car sharing etc.
	/	Route to remain the same unless position of parking space changed i.e. forced to use on street parking or the company relocates
	/	If parking space moves or the firm relocates.
		The introduction of car-sharing schemes and changes in working practises, e.g. tele-working will help to reduce the number of vehicle trips.
		Use of public transport or car sharing
		Possibly if public transport fully adopted as a means of commuting.
	-	Unlikely to occur.

	= Weakest possible response,		= strongest possible positive response
	= Weakest possible negative response,		= strongest possible negative response

= No response

Short and long run demand responses

Demand responses

Response		1^st year	2-4 years	5 years	10+ years
		-	-	-	-
		/	/	/	/
	Change job location	/	/	/	/
	Compress working week
-	Trip chain
-	Work from home
-	Shop from home
	Public transport

		-	-	-	-

	= Weakest possible response,		= strongest possible positive response
	= Weakest possible negative response,		= strongest possible negative response

= No response

Supply impacts

The introduction of private parking charges itself will not impact directly upon the supply of private parking, however indirectly it would be expected that some companies may reduce the number of parking spaces in response to any WPL that might be implemented.

Financing requirements

Administrative costs are likely to be low, with enforcement costs slightly higher.

Expected impact on key policy objectives

When considering how companies and individuals will react to the implementation of these scheme two main factors must be considered. Who will pay, will the company accept the charge or will the charges be passed on to the individual employees and if the company does pay how will the charging affect the firm and the firm's policy on workplace parking?

In a recent study only 15% of firms questioned said they would pass the charges on to the employee, whilst a larger number said they would consider reducing the number of private parking spaces they owned. Both of these actions would impact upon an employee's driving behaviour and they might decide to find parking spaces elsewhere, to share a car into work, to work at home or to travel into work via public transport. The hope of local authorities are that employees will chose the last three options in order to help them achieve their transport policy policies of reducing city centre congestion and pollution. Charging employees for parking at work may also make it harder for companies to retain employees.

If a company decided to absorb all the additional parking charges then it would experience an increase in operating costs and a reduction in company profitability. In the medium to long term companies may well consider relocating to areas where no WPLs are in place to improve both profitability and driver retention.

Objective	Scale of contribution	Comment
		By reducing congestion in the inner city and discouraging non-essential travel into the city centre.
	/	By reducing Congestion of inner city streets, however the scheme may encourage on street parking around the workplace.
		By reducing noise and air pollution by the reduction in congestion and city centre travel. . Increasing use of public transport
		By encouraging the use of public transport and the funnelling of funds back into public transport therefore improving transport infrastructure
		By reducing the number of privately owned vehicles entering the city centre
		It will increase operating costs for business who are charged and do not pass it on to employees. However the improvement in efficiency will assist in counteracting these costs.
		Money generated by the scheme to be put back into improving the transport infrastructure. Scheme is cost efficient way of generating revenues.

	= Weakest possible positive contribution,		= strongest possible positive contribution
	= Weakest possible negative contribution		= strongest possible negative contribution

= No contribution

Expected impact on problems

Contribution to alleviation of key problems

Problem	Scale of contribution	Comment
Congestion-related delay		Should result in a reduction in trips to the CBD and so a reduction in traffic levels and congestion along arteries leading towards the CBD.
Congestion-related unreliability		Reduction in traffic levels, particularly during the am and pm peak will help improve reliability
Community severance	-	Not likely to have a significant impact on this.
Visual intrusion	-	Not likely to have a significant impact on this.
Lack of amenity	-	Not likely to have a significant impact on this.
Global warming		A reduction in traffic-related CO₂ emissions will reduce this impact.
Local air pollution		A reduction in traffic will assist in reducing emissions of NO_x, particulates and other local pollutants
Noise		By reducing traffic volumes
Reduction of green space		By reducing pressure for new road building and city expansion
Damage to environmentally sensitive sites		By reducing traffic volumes
Poor accessibility for those without a car and those with mobility impairments	-	Not likely to have a significant impact on this.
Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular social or geographic groups		It may disadvantage those car owners on low incomes.
Number, severity and risk of accidents		By reducing traffic volumes
Suppression of the potential for economic activity in the area		WPL may deter firms from locating in areas were they are located and may also persuade firms to relocate.

	= Weakest possible positive contribution,		= strongest possible positive contribution
	= Weakest possible negative contribution		= strongest possible negative contribution

= No contribution

Expected winners and losers

The main winners of charging for private parking spaces would be the council who will have a newly generated source of revenue, the community as a whole who would benefit from a reduction of congestion and pollution and public transport operators as car commuters look for alternative ways of getting to work.

The main losers would be the companies and individuals who are inconvenienced by the scheme and have to pay the levies.

Winners and losers

Group	Winners / losers	Comment
Large scale freight and commercial traffic	-	Unlikely to benefit greatly but may experience some benefit during the am/pm peaks.
Small businesses	/	If exempt from charges small businesses likely to benefit because of an improvement in their competitive position. If not exempt from charges then will see an increase in costs and possible staff retention problems.
High income car-users		Will tend to benefit if charges are not passed on and a reduction in congestion takes place around the peaks.
People with a low income	/	If charges are passed on then car users on low income will see an increase in the costs from travelling to work. If the charges are not passed on then experience reduction in journey times.
People with poor access to public transport	/	If charges are passed on then people who are dependent upon the car will have no viable alternative to their cars and will incur significant costs. If charges are not passed on then these people experience a reduction in journey times.
All existing public transport users		If charges are passed on and congestion is reduced this will improve the reliability of existing public transport, especially during the peaks.
People living adjacent to the area targeted	/	If charges are pass on then residents might experience a reduction in traffic or/and an increase in on-street parking.
People making high value, important journeys		These journeys may still be made as solo drivers, but reduced congestion will result in valuable time savings, especially during the peaks.
The average car user	/	If charges are passed on then car users will see an increase in travel costs. If charges are not passed on then car users are likely to see a reduction in congestion.

Barriers to implementation

Scale of barriers

Barrier	Scale	Comment
Legal	-	Recent government legislation (see above) means there are no obvious legal barriers to the policies implementation in the UK.
Finance	x	The WPL scheme and charges for ownership of private parking spaces can be implemented at fairly low costs, whilst the scheme itself will generate revenue that can cover its costs.
Political	xx	The charging of companies for parking is likely to stimulate some complaints and lobbying.
Feasibility	x	Very feasible to implement.

= minimal barrier,

= most significant barrier

Text edited at the Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT