REGENERATION AND PROPERTY COMMITTEE 26 January, This report is open to the public.

Transcription

1 REGENERATION AND PROPERTY COMMITTEE 26 January, 2017 Subject: Report on car park Automatic Number Plate Recognition Trial Director/Head of Service: Douglas Rattray, Head of Safer Neighbourhoods Decision Issues: These matters are within the authority of the Committee. Classification: CCC Ward(s): Summary: This report is open to the public. All On 24 February, 2016, Regeneration and Property Committee considered a report entitled A new approach to transport and enhancing the public realm. This included notification of a package of improvements one of which concerned the use of automatic number plate recognition with barriers for a trial period in three car parks for 6 months. Following the trial a report giving analysis and appraisal would be presented to the Regeneration and Property Committee to decide on the future of the initiative. To Resolve: i. To note and agree that the trial of ANPR managed car parks has demonstrated the effectiveness and popularity of the project on the basis of the positive feedback on customer experience. ii. iii. iv. To agree that the project should be rolled out to all car parks over a period of time subject to the tender and budget. To agree the retention of the trial system in the Pound Lane, William Street and Middle Wall car parks, pending the roll out of the new project across all car parks. To approve the tender specification at appendix 5 for submission to suitably qualified suppliers to enable the roll out of the project. v. To delegate authority for the selection of a supplier following the tender to the Chief

2 Executive in consultation with the chairman of the committee. vi. vii. To delegate authority to decide the method and timing of implementation of the rollout to the Chief Executive in consultation with the Chairman. Should the implementation of the roll-out exceed the sum set aside in the Council's budget any expenditure above that sum is to be approved by the Policy and Resources Committee. Next stage in process: Initiate the tender, simultaneously conduct a customer insight exercise and appoint a supplier. SUPPORTING INFORMATION 1. Introduction The Council leadership in deciding on a new approach to the future of transport in the district, wished to explore the viability and potential for implementing new technology for car parking management as a means of improving customer experience. These issues were researched and developed and later presented in a paper to Regeneration and Property Committee titled, A New Approach to Transport and Enhancing the Public Realm which included the following highlights in respect of ANPR. We are also keen to see significant improvements to the way in which customers can access and use our car parks. The trial of barriers, supported by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) at Castle Street has proved a success. It allows users to leave their car for as long as they wish, paying for the time consumed on exit. It also gives us much greater ability to move to easier and online payment methods, as well as advanced booking. We are therefore proposing that we; Roll out barriers/anpr to three further car parks at Pound Lane, Canterbury: Middle Wall, Whitstable: and William Street at Herne Bay to further test the methods Assuming success, to roll out barriers/anpr at all other car parks in the District where it is physically possible to do so. Introduce payment systems which are as flexible and accessible as possible Generally upgrade to state of the art technology to achieve this. It was agreed that ANPR would be trialled for a 6 month period commencing on 18 April, 2016 in three car parks, Pound Lane, Middle Wall and William Street. Castle Street, Canterbury already operated through ANPR, was upgraded to include the online payment provision. The trial was concluded on 16 October, 2016 and analysis and evaluation has been prepared to report back to the Regeneration and Property Committee to decide whether to expand the modernisation of car parks further on the basis of introducing a mixed technology solution as appropriate for each car park. 2. Detail

3 The System in Operation It was expedient in order to get the project up and running to use our current parking equipment provider Parkeon to fit and service the equipment. Civil works, camera fitting and testing took place in spring 2016 along with a publicity drive for a launch date on 18 April, While seeking to assess the efficiency of the project we need to take into account that ANPR technology with barriers is not in common use in open air council car parks and there was no tried and tested product on the market offering the full range of payment options that we have made available. Some degree of trial and error type empirical learning was to be anticipated given what is involved in order to make the system work, taking into account the relatively short planning period between inception and launch, the complexities behind ensuring the component parts integrated and the general state of technological development in this field. Some of the technology being used was new and bespoke to our requirement, some adapted and some untried. The project was costed but we have found that revenue costs due to maintenance, card charges and staffing were greater than anticipated before the commencement of the trial. In order to enhance the customer experience it was decided to proceed with a ticketless approach and make payment available by on-line registration with automatic payment taken three times monthly, a smart phone APP, Whoosh (Since withdrawn), contactless and Apple pay, chip and pin credit and debit cards and coins. Communications aspects were to concentrate significantly on developing on-line registration and to switch customers away from using coins. The Minipark system on which our set up is based is widely used. The payment terminal and barriers are installed on the majority of Parkeon s Minipark sites. The camera is a new model and our system is the first which has incorporated On Line Payment and Whoosh. When a vehicle is driven towards a barrier it activates the induction loop embedded on the road which sends a signal to the ANPR camera which takes a number of pictures. The camera then sends a signal to the barrier commanding it to open. The vehicle is then driven into the car park and parked. When the vehicle leaves, it is the same principal with the addition that the exit camera checks to see if payment has been made. If there is a fault, engineers can interrogate the cameras remotely, they can look at the quality of the picture, adjust it and look at log files. They then determine whether an engineer visit is required. This is from Parkeon s data centre based in Bristol. If there is a new version of software, the upgrading process is continuous, this can be downloaded. They then contact their partners in Italy or France and ask for remote assistance. The same applies in respect of the barriers. They can set up and interrogate locally but during warranty period, they inform the supplier and ask for support. As new software upgrades become available, they are installed. Benchmarking customer sampling took place before the trial commenced and after launch, staff were put in all three car parks between 8am and 5pm and up to 11pm at Pound Lane to advertise the new system and to assist motorists to get used to it and a large communications drive was undertaken to let customers know of the system and to encourage online registration. Experiences at each of the three trial car parks revealed common issues and some individual to the nature of the car park. The most sensitive one early on was found at Pound Lane car park with the rush to exit when customers left the Marlowe Theatre. To help deal with this, we installed two extra payment machines. While at the beginning of the project we

4 had complaints around this as motorists got used to the system, these have subsided almost to zero. Other minor improvements have been made along the way with new surface marking and signage and running live connections to machines previously relying on 3g signals. There were settling in problems regarding the cameras. We discovered that the angles at which they were set or the degree of light pertaining due to the weather could affect the cameras ability to recognise registration numbers accurately. If a number plate is not recognised, the barrier will not lift. William Street turned out to be problematic in that it has been out of action for large periods of time during the trial. Firstly this was due to alterations being made to the car park regarding telecoms and secondly when a large vehicle crashed into the main electricity supply box taking out the power for the car park for several weeks. The introduction of free parking till 10am at Middle Wall and 2 hours free at William Street affected customer practice. One of the main issues at Middle Wall concerned the age demographic of users who preferred to pay by coin and the turnover of day visitors who are unlikely to register online. In respect of the payment machines, the on screen customer journey was configured for our project, some aspects being outside our control such as the Payment Card Industry Data Regulations which governs the use of wording. The contactless payment is a relatively new development and proved popular with customers. Adjustments to the software were made during the trial with new instructions for customers being loaded on the machines for contactless payment to make it clearer. The supplier continues to work on this to make improvements such as clearer instructions and alternative ways of dealing with receipts. These small things will improve the user experience although it should be factored in that all payment methods for parking attract some degree of negativity being seen by some as a grudge payment. The Results In assessing how the project has worked, data gathered during the trial period has been analysed and in the case of finance compared with the same period the year before. Some points should be noted. The tariffs have gone up, parking between 8 and 10am at Middle Wall, Whitstable is now free and the first two hours of parking at William Street is free until 31 March, So the best car park for making accurate comparisons with the year before is Pound Lane. Customer Satisfaction The approach taken was to conduct random surveys of car park users in Pound Lane, Middle Wall and William Street, a survey of ANPR pilot account holders, a survey of our E- panel and feedback from comments, complaints and compliments. An analysis of the feedback is shown at Appendix 1. The following main points should be noted. Of 388 responses in Pound Lane 62% said their parking experience had improved and very much improved, 28% said no change and 4% thought it was worse Of 113 responses in Middle Wall 62% said their parking experience had improved and very much improved, 27% said no change and 10% thought it was worse Of 375 responses in William Street 74% said their parking experience had improved or very much improved, 18% said no change and 5% said it was worse Of the combined 876 responses to the general question, Is it better than before? 89% said yes and 11% said no or made no reply

5 On the E-Panel and Online Account Holder survey, 1045 respondents gave 1752 responses. Of these 810 said the system was more convenient, 437 said it was quicker, 408 said it was easier, 43 said it was slower, more difficult or less convenient while 54 made no comment 33 official complaints were recorded. 16 related to queuing at machines, 7 to access and free parking matters, 10 to machine and barrier faults Communications The approach taken was based on three key objectives. These were to create an identity for ticketless car parks, to raise the awareness of ticketless parking within the district and neighbouring towns and to encourage customers to set up an online account by changing buying behaviour. An analysis of the communications campaign is shown at Appendix 2. The following main points should be noted. Following our customer survey in December 2015 where 84% of shoppers indicated they would not choose a different payment and prefer to pay by cash. We have seen a major shift in customer payment methods from cash to card and online. 5,250 registered users paying online. That s 27,825 transactions and 40,065 movements. Excellent coverage and engagement online via the social media channels and newsletters 25k impressions on Twitter and 21k reach on Facebook Web stats show the customer journey online is easy to navigate to register and gain information with 12k page views on the /ticketless web page. Excellent support and coverage by local media and our partners. Online payments increased following the installation of the floor graphics. Incentives such as free theatre or swim tickets did not really impact the online registrations. Customer Contact While the customer survey shows a high level of satisfaction, there is a need to interact with them when difficulties are experienced. During the pilot calls have been made through the Contact Centre by mobile phone and to the Central Control Room at Military Road through the intercom provided at each of the car parks. Details showing the nature of these issues are shown at Appendix 3. While a number of matters raised during the pilot have been remedied there is a need to service a regular customer demand when issues arise through customer error or system issues which prevent vehicular access to or egress from the car parks. The following main points should be noted. The ANPR VRM recognition rate is good - Pound Lane 98.99% Middle Wall 95.87% William Street % on average. There are 2500 intercom calls per month to the Central Control Room. A smaller number of mobile calls are made to Contact Centre Of the 2500 calls, 50% relate to Pound Lane, 27% to William Street and 23% to Middle Wall. This reflects Pound Lane as a busier car park than Middle Wall and the 2 hour free period at William Street meaning that we would anticipate less problems in respect of making payment Of the 2500 calls, 20% were driver advice, 18% Paid VRM not recognised, 14% post grace leavers car park full, 14% correct VRM not taken, 13% VRM not recognised barring entry, 13% not paid, 8% no response

6 The ANPR car parks were unable to accommodate free parking for disabled badge holders. Finding a technical solution to this will form part of the tender specification Technical changes will have to be made in respect of the intercom where there is only one line into the Control Room for the intercom at the exit barriers but 4 car parks so only one conversation can take place at a time Issues with people changing vehicle details registered for online billing but not selecting all car parks online. Customers unaware of the need to do this. Communication and support for customer information should be a key element to any future expansion. Several initial issues have been dealt with and as the system has bedded in, less call are being made by mobile to the Contact Centre and most calls are being made through the intercom Finance This is a financial breakdown on car park payments across all three car parks over the trial period and for Pound Lane alone. See Appendix 4. The following points should be noted. The total project cost including capital and revenue for equipment, staffing and communications was 326,981 ( 262,147 capital and 64,834 revenue). In making direct comparisons of the pilot information with the same period the year before, the Pound Lane site provides the better comparator as there have been no other changes. Middle Wall now allows free parking till 10am and during this year there has been two hours free parking at William Street. When the tariff rise is taken into account figures at Pound Lane show that the income level is almost equal to that of the same period last year. There are costs which would be incurred in terms of servicing the system which had not formed part of the pilot project. These include charges made by third parties such as bank card processors and ongoing maintenance of equipment which would need to be considered should further development be recommended. Initially there was displacement from Pound Lane to St Radigunds but as people got used to the system the numbers parking in Pound Lane and St Radigunds respectively returned to normal. It should also be noted that during the early part of the pilot project, many vehicles were let into and out of the car park free of charge because of system bedding in problems. Pre-trial, means of payment, amalgamated across the three car parks was 86% cash, 11% card and 3% App. By the end of the trial period means of payment has shifted to 60% cash, 18% chip and pin, 11% Contactless and 10% online When considering Pound Lane car park individually the shift is noticeably greater with 84% cash, 8% card and 8% App which shifted by the end of the trial period to means of payment of 45% cash, 16% chip and pin, 23% contactless and 16% online Future Car park management through ANPR is a relatively new concept in parking and is not in widespread use in the public sector in the UK though it is likely to play an increasingly large part in the future of parking management systems. During the six months of the project we have learned a lot and adjusted things through observation and experience. We have sought to overcome difficulties and minimise the need for human intervention although we will

7 always require an element of this. We have observed that as the public got used to the system and we made adjustments, many issues that had been problematic were ironed out. We have also identified that ongoing revenue costs on any project expansion are likely to be greater than was anticipated before the trial started. The project has been a success against its stated aim of improving customer satisfaction in car parks and a large number of those surveyed consider the system an improvement. Further work needs to be done in respect of gaining customer insight to include people who have not used the ANPR car parks as to their views. These are likely to be varied, based on whether individuals have used the new system and their requirement for and usage of car parks. We wish to examine how we can improve the car parks based on a combination of what the customer wants, likely customer behaviour and what is suitable and appropriate for each car park. The best way to do this will be by publishing a soft market tender to suppliers asking for multi-optional solutions following survey of our car parks. We would wish to receive bids which offered a mixture of ANPR and barriers, ANPR without barriers and payment machines allowing for chip and pin and contactless. This would be customised according to the characteristics of individual car parks including layout and usage. Through this we will establish the potential for further development and if the case is made, will build up a proposition for improvement which meets the budget available and minimises ongoing revenue costs. It is proposed that any future changes will be phased in incrementally using a mix of solutions as per the options provided by the most suitable bidder. Tender Specification A draft tender specification has been drawn up giving details of the Council s requirements of prospective suppliers outlying the various considerations including details of process, functional requirements, means of operation and evaluation criteria. See Appendix Relevant Council Policy/Strategies/Budgetary Documents 4. Consultation planned or undertaken See Appendix 2. Further customer insight work to be carried out 5. Options available with reasons for suitability There are three options concerning the future of this project covered at Options Stage 1. These are set out below with pros and cons for each one. Options stage 2 provides for choices on which contractual approach should we take should Option Stage 1 3 be chosen. Options Stage 1 Option 1 Restore car parks to pay and display Pros No further investment Simple pay and display system No monitoring staff required

8 No increased maintenance cost Blue badge issue resolved Cons Enforcement required including back office No ticketless Backlash from customers who perceived improvement Reputational damage if seen to be against principles of original proposal Loss of investment in trial equipment Option 2 Retain system with no expansion Pros Settled and accepted by customers Manageable with minimal further expenditure Would give more time to bed in and become established Allows us to retain and develop online payment Improved data access Cons Transaction charge to be added Not maximising potential Not responding to customer demand Option 3 Submit a soft market testing tender to assess the potential of making further improvements across our car parks using a mix of technologies. Simultaneously we will conduct further research on customer requirements so that any development is fully informed by local need. If the case is made following this and financially viable, we will phase changes in incrementally using the options provided by the chosen bidder. Pros Maximise coverage and customer access to the system Expanding the system will attract on-line users Implementation of solutions to suit customer requirement and specific features of car park Improved customer satisfaction Consistency for customers Enforcement requirement for off street and admin back up reduced Cons Investment cost Increased revenue costs for monitoring staff Development costs for control room Increased maintenance costs Increased card collection costs Options Stage 2 where Option 1-3 has been chosen

9 Option (a) Use of a contractual framework to appoint a contractor Using a framework agreement is a fast way of dealing with an invitation to tender. There is a framework for parking management solutions which provides a group of pre-selected leading providers. This will be a shorter process than a full tender where we will conduct a mini competition namely choosing a framework provider off the list of pre-selected providers under the terms and conditions of the framework after tendering to some or all of the companies on it. Option (b) Go out to a full OJEU tender Depending on whether an open or restricted process would be chosen could take between 5 and 9 months and would involve a considerable amount of officers time for drafting of the documentation and evaluation of tenders received. 6. Reasons for supporting option recommended, with risk assessment Option 3 (a) is recommended. This will allow us to test the market to assess the potential of taking a flexible and incremental approach to the modernisation of our car park estate should the technical, financial and customer requirement case be made. We anticipate that several more of our larger and busier car parks are suitable for the camera and barrier system while some may be suited to a combination of cameras and pay and display for example and some pay and display only. We will take a studied approach to this development based on the options provided by the preferred supplier after full survey of 25 car parks. Once the future direction is set, we will move ahead on the basis of a scheduled implementation to selected car parks over time. In this way we will achieve a cost effective solution to the maximisation of the benefits to be achieved thereby attaining best value for the customer. 7. Implications (a) Financial Implications - Currently the budget assumes the following: the additional revenue costs associated with introducing ANPR would be 65,000 a year with one-off revenue costs of 50,000; and the capital costs of introducing ANPR would be 1,330,000. The pilot operation of ANPR has provided further information on the costs that could be incurred if the scheme were rolled out across all car parks. The income raised and expenditure incurred in the pilot are set out in Appendix 4. The proposals in this report are subject to the revenue and capital costs of any extension being within the budgets set out above. Further approval would be sought for proposals that would increase expenditure above those amounts. (b) (c) Legal Implications- None Equalities- Impact Assessment completed and published Other implications (d) remit. Staffing Any additional staffing will be considered within the budgetary

10 (e) Property Portfolio There a need to maintain the sum number of parking bays within the new system. (f) Environmental Sustainability/Biodiversity - None (g) Planning/Building Regulations This will be considered during any improvement implementation depending on the civil engineering works required. (h) (i) (j) Human Rights issues - None Crime and Disorder - None Safeguarding Children - None 8. Conclusions Customer surveys show that the ANPR managed car parks pilot impacted successfully on its stated aim of improving customer experience. It is considered that the system as it stands should be retained and that a soft market tender should be submitted to suppliers with a view to establishing the potential for modernisation across our car parks using a mix of technologies and to implement this. Contact Officer: Douglas Rattray Job Title: Head of Safer Neighbourhoods Telephone: Appendices 1 Customer Survey 2 Communications 3 Customer Contact 4 Finance 5 Tender Specification