Agenda item

ES20326

Attending to present the report was the LBB Head of Shared Parking Services and Russell Peacock from APCOA. The report was presented to the Committee to provide an update regarding the performance of the Parking Services Contract with APCOA.

The Chairman was sad to note the abuse incurred by Civil Enforcement Officers and asked that his appreciation for their work be conveyed to them. A Member pointed out that the way the KPIs were noted in the report was not as clear as those in the idverde report, and asked if this could be noted for the future. The Head of Shared Parking Services acknowledged this, but explained that APCOA had 90 different KPIs. The Member also referred to the situation regarding litter and fly-tipping in car parks and said that a faster turnover in dealing with this issue was required. It was noted that the car parks were only inspected once a week, and she suggested that inspections should be more frequent.

It was noted that APCOA had their own mobile service and a Member asked that as this was the case, why APCOA contracted out work to RingGo. Mr Peacock responded that the RingGo App probably worked better with local authority car parks. The Member said that having duplicate Apps could be confusing for the public and suggested that APCOA consider selling their mobile service to RingGo. The Member was pleased to note that the percentage number of CEO errors had decreased. It was further noted that the number of PCNs issued for contravening bus lanes had fallen due to increased compliance. The other matter raised was the issue of APCOA car washes that were licensed to operate, but at the same time had not received planning permission. The Head of Shared Parking Services explained that when the APCOA car washes were first installed, planning permission was not required. If there was an APCOA car wash that was refused retrospective planning permission, then that car wash would unfortunately have to close. 

A Member drew attention to parking problems in Beckenham High Street, particularly with respect to the night time economy. The possibility of undertaking a parking ‘blitz’ by Enforcement Officers (outside of normal working hours) was mentioned. It was noted that this could be actioned, but would require extra resource. Members noted that APCOA conducted an anti-idling campaign in certain boroughs, along with air quality monitoring activities with live data feedback. The Head of Shared Parking Services responded that some anti-idling work was already being undertaken by Enforcement Officers outside of Bromley schools. In these cases, warnings were given rather than PCNs, so the activity was not generating any income for the Council. It was suggested that the Portfolio Holder could discuss the matter of air quality monitoring activities with APCOA.

It was noted that the cost of a camera in a car park would be between £30k and £35k plus the cost of installation and maintenance. A Member suggested the use of ‘Parking Friends’ which was dismissed as being inappropriate by the Portfolio Holder.

RESOLVED that the report be noted and that the Committee note in particular the ongoing work where APCOA had brought forward initiatives to improve facilities for motorists, as well as generating an income for the Council.

(Post Meeting Note).

It had been noted in the main body of the report that Apcoa inspected car parks on a weekly basis. It was pointed out at the January meeting, that as far as the inspection of car parks in Chislehurst was concerned, there were three car parks. One of these was inspected weekly, the other two were inspected on a three weekly basis.