Cllr Andrew Gant, Cabinet Member for Transport Management, and Paul Fermer, Director of Environment and Highways, have been invited to present an oral update on Parking Permits.
The Committee is asked to consider the report and raise any questions, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising therefrom.
Minutes:
Paul Fermer, Director of Environment and Highways, and Phil Whitfield, Head of Network Management, were invited to present an oral update on Parking Permits.
The Director of Environment and Highways provided an overview of Oxfordshire’s digital parking permits, stating that visitor permits have been in use since December 2024 under a contract with Unity5, which may be extended beyond May 2026. He noted technical issues such as system errors and slow performance, highlighting that these involved several components, for which the Council owned some responsibility, and not just Unity5. The Council was working with Unity5 to resolve these issues. The Head of Network Management added that the Council was prioritising solutions and ongoing improvements.
The Committee raised the following questions and concerns about the Parking Permit update:
· How could the parking permit system could be made simpler, given concerns about the complexity. The Director of Environment and Highways responded that the complexity related to how permits were issued, particularly the number of permits per batch and the complexity of the underlying scheme. He stated that this was a recent realisation and suggested that reviewing the scheme itself, not just the IT system, might help simplify the process.
The Head of Network Management commented that the system’s complexity was partly due to its adaptability to residents’ needs, which presented administrative challenges.
· The Committee discussed whether the parking permit system’s challenges impacted other market towns in addition to Oxford and the options available for individuals unable to use the online system. The Director of Environment and Highways explained that the same system operated countywide, suggesting that similar issues may occur elsewhere; however, Oxford had more schemes and therefore received additional attention. He clarified that non-digital alternatives are available, including phone support and assistance at libraries.
· Whether the number of Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) led to efficiency or complexity, and about issues with residents being unable to check if a parked car’s permit was valid for a specific CPZ. It was noted that the number of CPZs might have created complexity and inefficiency and officers recognised the difficulties residents faced when trying to verify permits online, especially since the system did not specify if a permit was valid for a specific CPZ. The Director of Environment and Highways acknowledged these concerns, explaining that the variety of permits was intended to address unique local situations, but this flexibility had resulted in a more complex system. He suggested that while simplification was possible, it would need to be balanced against the need for local flexibility.
· Members were concerned by the difficulties carers faced in obtaining permits, the issue of workers’ vans using two-hour parking spots by moving within the same zone, and the notice period required for not extending the parking permit system contract. It was highlighted that carers often struggled with the process, especially when different carers visited, and noted that workers on building projects tended to rotate their vans within the same parking zone, which did not deter long-term parking.
The Director of Environment and Highways acknowledged the challenges for carers and workers, stating that the process could be difficult for those with changing needs. He mentioned that lessons from the current system would inform future schemes, such as congestion charging, and that these concerns would be taken account of going forward.
The Head of Network management explained that contractor permits were available and could be purchased for a week, but currently, there was no option for shorter durations. It was acknowledged that this weekly permit system was not flexible for those needing only a few hours, and the cost would likely be passed on to the customer.
· There were concerns about the cost of the parking permit contract and the overall strategy. The Director of Environment and Highways explained that Oxfordshire County Council was contracted with Unity 5 for parking management software, with the contract running until May 2026 and the option to extend for up to two years. It was noted that Unity 5 was a mature provider in the market. The strategy involved reviewing whether to address current system issues with Unity 5 or to consider retendering for a new provider, balancing the need for system improvements with the flexibility required by local schemes.
· How many people had been fined for not having a visitor’s permit due to the complexity of the online system, and how many appeals had been made, as a measure of the system meeting the needs of residents. The Head of Network management stated that the Council reviewed appeals on their merits to determine if genuine difficulties with the system were involved, but specific numbers were not available at the meeting.
The Committee AGREED to the following actions:
The Committee highlighted the following as potential recommendations following the future paper:
The Committee took at break at 11:24 and returned at 11:34.