---
title: "Operation Parksafe"
type: "pdf"
year: "2024"
canonical: "/projects/1165"
---

# Operation Parksafe 

# Table of Contents

- [Operation Parksafe](#operation-parksafe)
  - [Scanning:](#scanning)
  - [Analysis:](#analysis)
  - [Response:](#response)
  - [Assessment:](#assessment)
- [Application description](#application-description)
  - [Scanning:](#scanning)
- [Analysis:](#analysis)
- [Analysis  Problem Analysis Triangle](#analysis-problem-analysis-triangle)
- [Response:](#response)
  - [1) Explaining the law:](#1-explaining-the-law)
  - [2) Encouraging the public to be involved in problem solving:](#2-encouraging-the-public-to-be-involved-in-problem-solving)
- [Operation Park Safe](#operation-park-safe)
  - [Section 1](#section-1)
  - [3) Taking responsibility:](#3-taking-responsibility)
- [4) Problem solving principles:](#4-problem-solving-principles)
- [Assessment:](#assessment)
  - [Cost effectiveness:](#cost-effectiveness)
- [Word Count: 3949](#word-count-3949)
- [GLOSSARY:](#glossary)
- [JANUARY 2023](#january-2023)
  - [NEW LCV REGISTRATIONS](#new-lcv-registrations)
    - [BEST SELLERS](#best-sellers)
- [REPORTING DANGEROUS PARKING - FLOW CHART](#reporting-dangerous-parking-flow-chart)
- [REPORTING DANGEROUS PARKING - FLOW CHART](#reporting-dangerous-parking-flow-chart)

## Scanning:

The North West (NW) Sheffield neighbourhood team undertake an annual community survey to identify local priorities. In 2021 this resulted in the second highest priority voted by the public as "parking issues" after burglary. A review of traffic legislation revealed that the police are still the only agency that can act on many of these issues, and that decriminalisation of parking offences has made it more confusing for the public.

The team had previously completed SARA plans on dangerous parking, and we had identified that certain crime prevention techniques ("increase signage") were not effective, and so a new approach was needed.

## Analysis:

Analysis highlighted that the growth in ownership of private motor vehicles and reductions in public transport had resulted in streets that were overcrowded with parked vehicles, leading to an increase in people parking in a dangerous or anti-social manner.

The areas reporting parking as a major issue were most likely to be those with Victorian or terraced housing which were not designed to accommodate the number of parked cars that they currently host. However, as these streets are not subject to parking restrictions, there was insufficient enforcement of traffic legislation compounded by confusion as to which agency was responsible.

National accident statistics showed that Sheffield has a disproportionate amount of children killed or seriously injured in road accidents, almost double that of comparable cities.

## Response:

We created a web platform that allows members of the public to report traffic offences directly to the police and send in digital photographs. These photographs and reports are triaged by officers, and then used to prosecute those whose park vehicles in a dangerous or antisocial manner.
Behavioural nudges are used to reduce further offending, including the use of a specific website, and social media posts.

## Assessment:

Over 16 months, 876 reports were received from members of the public. The reports have been of such a quality that over 80 per cent of these reports result in enforcement action by the police. Offences have now been processed through the court system, proving the system is accepted by the judiciary. Analysis shows that after drivers face consequences for illegal parking they stop doing it.

Cost benefit analysis shows this online system is far more cost effective than reactive approaches. It is particularly effective at reducing the issue by increasing guardianship and risks to offenders. It is a low-cost method of reducing road danger with potential national applications.

# Application description 

## Scanning:

When surveyed in 2021, local residents in North West Sheffield voted "parking issues" as their second largest concern after burglary (Table 1). The importance of parking as an issue to the community came as somewhat of a surprise, but we had previously conducted work to reduce dangerous parking on two rural roads and had therefore conducted problem solving in this arena before.

Sheffield is the fourth largest city in England. The city doubled in size in the $19^{\text {th }}$ Century due to its famous steel industry. During this period, Sheffield accounted for 90 per cent of Britain's steel production - (approx. 50 per cent Europe's output). Much of the city's housing and many of its streets were designed and built during this historic expansion when the city built an extensive tram network ${ }^{1}$ designed to transport workers from their homes to the city's many factories.
![img-0.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-0.jpeg)

Figure 1: Map of Sheffield Trams 1933, this network no longer exists
Manufacturing in Sheffield was decimated during the 1980s, and few Steelworks remain - between 1974 and 2008 manufacturing in Sheffield declined by 74 per cent shedding 120,000 jobs (https://www.centreforcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/11-10-17 Sheffield Appendix.pdf) The electric tram network built to transport workers to factories and shopping was dismantled in the 1960s in favour of the motorised bus. The sell-off of government-subsidised public transport in Sheffield in the 1980s has also led to a steadily declining share of public transport as a means of travel. As a result, the city has become increasingly reliant on private motor vehicles.

[^0]
[^0]:    ${ }^{1}$ Items in bold are explained in the glossary where UK English and US English differ, or where UK policing needs further explanation.

![img-1.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-1.jpeg)

Figure 2: A waste collection-truck that was stuck due to obstructive parking on a terraced road, emergency vehicles are also often unable to access addresses on these streets due to poor parking

We identified those areas that were particularly concerned with parking issues corresponded with those with high-density row houses built between 1800-1940, where the roads were not designed for mass motor ownership. This means residents are only able to park on roads that were never intended to accommodate large numbers of private motor cars.

When scanning, we identified considerable confusion amongst the public as to who enforces parking offences, arising from the decriminalisation of some parking offences in the early 2000s which means that in most cases the police have no power to deal with vehicles parked in contravention of road signs. Council enforcement officers cannot deal with obstruction of the highway or dangerous position parking offences.

![img-2.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-2.jpeg)

Figure 3: Member of the public (Spider-man: top) tries to complain about dangerous parking. Left Spider-man (police) point at the council and say it's their responsibility due to decriminalised parking. Council enforcement (right Spider-man) points at the police saying there's nothing they can do about obstruction or endorsable offences. Nothing is done about the issue as all agencies try and shift the responsibility elsewhere.

During this scheme, we discovered that the police website directed people to contact the council and the council website told people to contact the police. The public were not being served, and road danger was not being reduced.

One of the issues we had experienced due to our earlier problem-solving plan was that antisocial behaviour is contagious. During the Covid epidemic we had identified that on sunny days, it only took one person to park in a dangerous position which then "gave permission" to others to park in the same manner, leading to large scale flouting of the law.
![img-3.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-3.jpeg)

Figure 4: "Increasing signage" was attempted on this road in 2020 as a joint approach between police and council, but wasn't effective in reducing road danger

The "broken windows" theory is extremely relevant here, and one of the issues we have found over the last two years of policing this area is that signage does not work due to a "herd mentality". We have had written responses to Notices of Intended Prosecution (NIP) saying "I thought because

other people parked here it was OK and the signs didn't apply". This is similar to the findings of that famous experiment, in that dangerous parking becomes a "signal crime" that encourages further offending in the area.

One of the reasons why the police lacked credibility with regards to solving this issue was due to inefficient and outdated processes. If a member of the public reported danger from a parked vehicle they might have to wait on the line for a $\mathbf{1 0 1}$ call to be answered or submit an online report, which are checked infrequently (see chart 1 in appendix).

A reality check revealed that when the report was received by the control room the public were often being incorrectly referred to the council for offences that only the police can prosecute (Spider-man diagram above). If the report was accepted, they could be waiting hours for an officer to attend. In which time the vehicle would have moved and the chance of intervention would be lost.

# Analysis: 

Over the last 20 years there has been a significant increase ( 32 per cent) in the number of motor vehicles kept in the United Kingdom (Table 2), with the types of motor vehicles becoming larger due to trends for SUV and more large goods vehicles being sold. In Sheffield the 33,000 additional cars registered in the past 10 years would, if parked without gaps on a single road stretch for 78 miles. The additional vans registered would occupy 31 miles of road space. (Table 3 and Table 4.) Over the same period, average vehicle size has also increased by as much as 44 per cent in some cases (see f).

Although there has been an increase in the number and size of vehicles, there has not been an increase in parking facilities. This has led to an increase in vehicles being parked in illegal locations which are either obstructive (on pavements) or dangerous (at junctions or blocking the entirety of the pavement).

![img-4.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-4.jpeg)

*Figure 5: A terraced Victorian Street and illegally parked vehicle*

![img-5.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-5.jpeg)

Figure 6: Photographs of same streets in the Crookes area from 1980 and 2023. On the first picture there are 53 cars parked on the road, in the second 133, an increase of 151 per cent

Table 7 shows the vastly differing rates that vulnerable road users are killed or injured compared to those in motor vehicles, and that while people in vehicles are killed or seriously injured less frequently due to airbags and other safety devices, these do not protect cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians.

One of the key issues is that vulnerable road users die and are seriously injured at higher rates than those in cars. One hypothesis for this is that parking vehicles in dangerous positions is more common as more vehicles are competing for the same amount of road space. This would appear to be borne out by national statistics ( Table 8 ) showing that the percentage of reported road traffic collisions (RTCs) involving parked cars has risen from 4.18 per cent in 2012 to 5.3 per cent in 2021. There has also been an increase in the percentage of RTCs involving parked light goods vehicles, which are frequently stored on the road due to the increase in self-employed workers.

Government statistics highlight that children in Sheffield were at high risk of being killed or seriously injured in comparison to cities of a similar size (Table 9 ). Sheffield's statistically high rate of children killed or seriously injured in RTCs was linked by community groups to issues such as dangerous parking. RTCs that are attended by the police result in a STATS19 report - in which a police officer can list factors they believe led to the collision. In 2021, according to national statistics, 10 had "stationary or parked vehicles" as a contributing factor to a fatal collision (one per cent). 463 collisions classified as "serious" showed the same causation (two per cent), and 1654 collisions in total attributed to the same cause (two per cent).

Parked vehicles can increase danger to children and wheelchair users by being in a position that masks them from traffic - such as near the zig zags of a pedestrian crossing. Parking in close proximity to a junction also increases danger as turning vehicles cannot see people crossing until it is too late.
![img-6.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-6.jpeg)

Figure 7: This BMW was parked in such a position as to force all pedestrians to walk in a dual carriageway increasing danger - especially to children, the visual impaired or wheelchair users

![img-7.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-7.jpeg)

Figure 8: This vehicle would make it impossible to see children waiting to cross the road - between a park and hospital

Valuable data in relation to the attitude of the public was obtained in the Future of Roads Policing study (2021) which states:

Numerous surveys indicate that the public in England and Wales do not consider it very likely that they will be caught by the police for breaking traffic laws. A recent survey by the AA of nearly 16,000 drivers (See Figure 4.4) indicates the public think the police are not very likely to catch drivers who were driving using a handheld mobile, driving carelessly, drug driving, driving a vehicle in a dangerous condition, not wearing a seatbelt or not stopping at a red traffic light. Drink driving, driving without insurance and speeding were the only offences which the public thought the police either had an even chance or were more likely than not to catch the offender (AA, 2021).

Halkon, Ruth and Muir, Rick (2022) The Future of Roads Policing Police Foundation accessed at <https://www.police-foundation.org.uk/2017/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/future of roads policing FINAL.pdf>

Another area these offences impact upon is public health and it has been found that if private vehicles are parked in such a way to obstruct the pavement or cause danger to road users, this creates a literal barrier to walking and cycling. To overcome this, local governments have recently increased infrastructure spending to improve green transport options. Without preventing illegal parking on this infrastructure however, this money will be wasted.

![img-8.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-8.jpeg)

Figure 9 above: A cycle-track and pavement is rendered inaccessible by illegally parked vehicles. Cycle paths are one of the key measures that reduce unnecessary car journeys. The pedestrian here is about to walk in the road to get around these vehicles.

If drivers do not believe there will be consequences for parking dangerously, routine activity theory suggests that offending will occur.

# Analysis  Problem Analysis Triangle 

![img-9.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-9.jpeg)

Cohen and Ferguson's routine activity theory identifies crime occurs when three elements converge: a "potential offender, a suitable target, and the absence of a capable guardian" (Bottoms and Wiles, 1997 Environmental Criminology Routledge: 320). In the case of road danger, the potential offender can be any driver, the suitable target being a parking place that endangers others, and capable guardians would be the police or parking enforcement.

National benchmarking took place, and we identified an initiative pioneered by PC Mark Hodson of West Midland Police called "Operation Park Safe". This scheme increased training of police officers to identify and appropriately prosecute road danger. The Sheffield version aimed to upskill officers with this training and introduce a web-portal empowering members of the public to become capable guardians and report dangerous and antisocial parking.

# Response: 

In June 2022, we launched Sheffield's trial "Operation Park Safe" [OPS].

It works in the following manner:

## 1) Explaining the law:

OPS has a public facing explanation of road traffic law. This makes it clear which offences are dealt with by the police and which can only be dealt with by local authority.

This guidance is published on the neighbourhood team website and pinned on Twitter for easy access. We also provide frequent social media updates to explain road safety and share messages from local authorities and regional road safety teams.

The importance of clear and concise messaging was also discussed at the local council quarterly meeting and parking services, councillors and community groups were involved throughout the design process.
![img-10.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-10.jpeg)

Figure 10: This QR code links to a publicly accessible document explaining parking offences

## 2) Encouraging the public to be involved in problem solving:

We identified members of the public could provide the exact same evidence a police officer would use to prosecute. If an officer attended a parking complaint, they would take a photograph using their smartphone, which is the exact same course of action that the member of the public could do without us travelling to the location.

To streamline this process, people in the trial area were encouraged to visit a website so they could learn how to best evidence illegal parking offences and advised if they are willing to attend court to provide evidence.

# Operation Park Safe 

Police operation to reduce dangerous and antisocial parking in the North West area of Sheffield

## Section 1

Section 1 - Court attendance

1. I am aware that by submitting this report may be required to attend court and agree to attend court if I am required to do so. I agree for my data to be used for a policing purpose, for the detection of crime and processing of offenders for road traffic offences. ${ }^{a}$

Yes I agree that I will attend court if required to do so
No I do not wish to attend court
2. What offence do you wish to report (select the most serious if multiple options apply) ${ }^{a}$

Dangerous parking - Vehicle parked at a traffic light or pedestrian crossing

Figure 11 Above: Screenshot of website https://forms.office.com/r/XESUXVb3LA

The website gives the public the opportunity to provide evidence of the offence directly to police, based on the same mechanism that is used for moving traffic offences via the Nextbase dashcam portal. Both platforms harness the "active citizens" in their area and ask them to give up some of their time to increase road safety. It takes on average nine minutes to submit a report, which is less time than it would take to go through the standard web portal.

## 3) Taking responsibility:

Offences reported to police come through to a central email address and all submissions include a statement, photograph of an offence, and sufficient details for the case to go to court if required.

Submissions are triaged to identify offences. If it is police-enforcable, Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) will review the photographs and statement to identify if it is a simple obstruction, or a more serious endorsable offence.

PCSOs have received enhanced training on roads policing legislation and the highway code to ensure they are able to recognise and deal with a host of different offences. Where the offence is minor, a parking advisory notice is issued. Where there is danger caused to the public, a Traffic Offence Report (TOR) is completed and the Central Ticket Office generate a Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP), as they would do for a TOR submitted by the Dashcam team.

Bespoke feedback is also given to reports that we will not prosecute to reduce further unnecessary submissions and signpost them to the local authority enforcement team.

# 4) Problem solving principles: 

The operation is designed to maximise the use of established techniques of crime prevention.
These techniques include the "Broken Windows" model of crime reduction as one issue identified through the policing of this area is the contagious nature of illegal parking. Therefore, failure to tackle these offences encourages further offending, as it becomes evident to the public that the rules are not upheld in certain areas.

| Increase the effort | Increase the risks | Reduce the rewards | Reduce prosecutions | Remove excuses |
| :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: |
| 1. Target handen  - Steering column tools and immobilisers  - Anti robbery screens  - Tamper proof packaging | 6. Extend guardianship  - Self-resolving people/men go out  - A response of staff, police agents or  - Anti-plantry carts and others  - "Cocoon" neighbourhood exploit | 11. Conceal targets  - Off-avoid parking  - Gender neutral phone directories  - Unmarked button rooms | 16. Reduce frustrations and  stress  - Offload spaces and polite service  - If potential seating  - Soothing music/mixed lights | 21. Set rules  - Reach agreements  - Measurement codes  - Home registration |
| 2. Control access to facilities  - Entry phones  - Electronic card access  - Reggage screening | 7. Assist natural surveillance  - Improved street lighting  - Defensible space design  - Support win/blestowers | 12. Remove targets  - Removable car radio  - Women's refuges  - The past cards for pay phones | 17. Avoid disputes  - Negative techniques for trial soccer  - Tensile property  - Firewall and safety | 22. Post instructions  - "No parking"  - "Private property"  - Distinguish carry-free" |
| 3. Screen exits  - Travel needed for end  - Export documents  - Electronic merchandise tags | 8. Reduce anonymity  - Set down IDs  - "Ideally my driving" decals  - School uniforms | 13. Identify property  - Property marking  - Vehicle licensing and parts marking  - Cable branding | 18. Reduce emotional arousal  - Controls on violent pornography  - Enforce good behaviour on soccer field  - Prohibit racial slurs | 23. Alert conscience  - Absence speed display boards  - Signs that the customs lab students  - "Shoplifting is stealing" |
| 4. Deflect offenders  - Street closures  - Separate bathrooms for women  - Disperse pubs | 9. Utilise place managers  - CDTV for double-class males  - Two clerks for convenience stores  - Reward vigilance | 14. Disrupt markets  - Monitor open shops  - Controls on classified ads  - License street vendors | 19. Neutralise peer pressure  - "Work drink and drink"  - "Do ok to say no"  - Disperse truck/emakers at school | 24. Assist compliance  - East library checkout  - Public bookstore  - Killer bins |
| 5. Control tools/weapons  - "Street" guns  - Steating all stolen cell phones  - Restrict spray paint sales to juveniles | 10. Strengthen formal  surveillance  - Red light cameras  - Burger alarms  - Security guards | 15. Divvy benefits  - 14. merchandise tags  - Traffic cleaning  - Speed bumps | 25. Discourage imitation  - Rapid repair of vandalism  - A copy in this  - Career details of modus operandi | 25. Control drugs and alcohol  - Breathlessness in pubs  - Server intervention  - Alcohol-free events |

To address this, we have utilised nine of the 25 techniques of situational crime prevention (illustrated in the above image), alongside behavioural analysis to make it clear that dangerous parking will not be tolerated in the policing area and create a downward trend in offending, increase road safety and the perception that police are taking action on what matters to the local public.

Further to these techniques, images like the one below are posted to our social media accounts to advertise that the police are issuing points and fines to those who park in a dangerous or antisocial manner. This has a powerful psychological effect because in addition to being fined, those who park in such a manner face the stigma of being shamed and having their misdeeds posted online for all to see.

A more detailed explanation of what drives this behaviour change is explained through the MINDSPACE framework https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/neuroscience/mindspaceframework:

See Table 10 for how Mindspace is relevant to OPS.

![img-11.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-11.jpeg)

Because PCSOs are now more aware of parking offences, they are also submitting more self-generated TORs. This means the public can see we are dealing with issues they care about and since launching OPS, there has been a substantial reduction in offences in Hunters Bar, where the left image was captured (both vehicles prosecuted for dangerous position).

# Assessment: 

In the initial 20 months of OPS, 1337 reports were made to police and we have found that evidence provided by members of the public is sufficient for a prosecution in approximately 83 per cent of cases. The types of offences are around 50 per cent obstruction ( $£ 30$ fine), but a third of reports provide evidence of "dangerous position" offences, which result in a $£ 100$ fine and 3-point driving licence endorsement (see Table 11).

This means we have prosecuted 1109 offences that would likely otherwise not have been detected based solely on evidence provided by the public.

## Cost effectiveness:

It takes on average nine minutes for a member of the public to report an offence, which is faster than the average time for taken to submit an online report through the generic portal. Each submission takes between five-15 minutes to process, which is less than the average travel time that would be incurred by a PCSO having to attend a location to reactively attend a parking complaint.

A cost benefit analysis shows this as an extremely effective use of taxpayer's money. The hourly cost for a PCSO is approx. $£ 22$, which means that each prosecution costs $£ 5.50$ in PCSO hourly costs but does not incur any further costs such as the fuel cost (and associated CO2 emissions) from travelling to reactively deal with a parking complaint.

The real efficiency saving is however likely to be even more, given that PCSOs mostly work double crewed, which means that deploying to a reactive parking complaint costs the organisation $£ 22^{2}$. By removing the control room from the workflow, each report received through Operation Park Safe saves police $£ 11.20$ in call handler/dispatcher costs.

[^0]
[^0]:    ${ }^{2} 2$ PCSOs, 30 minute minimum time to deal ( 15 minutes travel, 15 minutes assessment and process) $=1$ hour PCSO time per incident ( $£ 22$ ).

![img-12.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-12.jpeg)

The quality of the evidence submitted by the public is also often better than that which would be provided by officers. Officers would frequently write in statements that it would be impossible to get a pram past a parked car. The image (left) is an actual photo taken by a pedestrian who is unable to get her infant child in a pram past a parked car, and who submitted the report through the web portal.

Further to this, analysis of the scheme's efficacy can be conducted by looking at whether there has been a reduction in reports of dangerous or antisocial parking in different areas.

Table 12 shows the top 15 most complained about streets, which account for 43 per cent of all reports and shows a common pattern. This data also shows there was an initial surge of reporting as members of the public identify the issue and submit reports to the police. Not all the surges occurred in month one however, as there was a word-of-mouth effect and the scheme was taken up by active citizens in different areas at different times following waves of publicity.

The data also shows that after NIPs are served on offenders, the reports of dangerous parking reduce. This demonstrates that providing consequences to dangerous parking reduces the danger to all road users. If the scheme was ineffective at reducing dangerous/ antisocial parking offences you would expect to see a steady state of prosecutions being issued, or an increase over time, but this is demonstrably not the case.

Successful convictions are additionally publicised on social media to amplify the message that dangerous parking is not acceptable, which resulted in an increase in reports from another area as they become aware of the scheme (leading to a reduction in that area too).

![img-13.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-13.jpeg)

**Sheffield North West NPT** @SheffNW_NPT · Apr 26 ··· We often get asked how #OpParkSafe is going. Here's a roundup of some offences and the results from court. This was heard on 26/9/22. £398 in fines and 3 points endorsed on driving licence. Stopping on zig zags increases the danger to all road users. #EcclesailRoad

![img-14.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-14.jpeg)

By publicising the scheme using the hashtag #OpParkSafe, we have been approached by other forces to explain experiences and provide advice on how they might go about setting up their own versions. The operation is currently being assessed for use across the entirety of South Yorkshire – with website infrastructure and training under development.

Reducing the number of dangerously parked vehicles - like the one above - is likely to also reduce the number of RTCs. In 2021 there were 6855 parked vehicles involved in reportable RTCs and 749 Light Goods Vehicles. The "average for all severities" cost per collision is £112,243 meaning that the estimated prevention cost of these collisions was £853.5m. Not all parked vehicles will have been parked dangerously, but this figure highlights how the increase in percentage of collisions involving parked vehicles costs society.

The national cost of RTCs that attending officers attributed as being caused by parked vehicles can be estimated using home office statistics, which takes into account factors such as cost of attending, investigating and dealing with a RTC, in addition to hospitalisation costs. We take for granted that any vehicle that is parked in a manner that has contributed to an RTC was in a position that caused danger to other road users.

|  Severity of  collision | Number of  collisions  where "parked  vehicles" were  listed as a  causative factor | Cost per  collision  according to  HO stats | Cost to  police per  investigati  on | Overall  Police  Costs  2021 | Overall cost  to society  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  Fatal | 10 | 2342203 | $£ 21823$ | $£ 218230$ | $£ 23.4 \mathrm{~m}$  |
|  Serious injury | 463 | 270421 | $£ 2077$ | $£ 961651$ | $£ 124.2 \mathrm{~m}$  |
|  Minor injury | 1181 | 27320 | $£ 536$ | $£ 633016$ | $£ 32.26 \mathrm{~m}$  |
|  Total |  |  |  | $£ 1.81 \mathrm{~m}$ | $£ 180 \mathrm{~m}$  |

South Yorkshire as an area recorded 2065 of 120,809 recordable UK collisions in 2021 or 1.7 per cent. It can therefore be estimated that adoption of the scheme and the reduction of dangerously parked vehicles would result in $£ 3.1 \mathrm{~m}$ in benefit to society.

Finally, the launch of OPS resulted in a fall in the percentage of members of the public who stated that parking was one of their top three priorities. In 2021-22, 49 per cent of the public told us this was one of their highest priorities. This fell to 29 per cent in 2022-23. This is a predictable effect, caused by "increasing the risks" - five of the 25 techniques of situational crime prevention. The effect of "Increasing the risks", is a reduction in offending. A reduction of offending then reduces the amount of community concern as the offending behaviour becomes less prevalent.

Table 13 shows the increase in TORs issued by the North West neighbourhood team, with a clear peak at the start of OPS (July 22). As road safety remains one of our community's top three priorities, the increase in enforcement action can be clearly seen to have a mandate from the public.

![img-15.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-15.jpeg)

Figure 12: Illegal parking directly outside a school increases the chance of a child being hit by a car. These photos were provided by parents.
![img-16.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-16.jpeg)

The scheme has been especially effective in response to dangerous school parking. Parents and teachers have provided reports where drivers have endangered children by their behaviour. In the past this would result in requests for PCSOs to patrol near the school - which would result in no issues for one day due to visible capable guardians. However, the NW area of Sheffield includes 39

schools and only 11 deployable PCSOs, making it impossible to provide constant supervision of all school gate times.

An online survey was completed to assess the public response to the scheme -Table 14-15 - and demonstrates the strong public support for this type of enforcement.

Operation Park Safe allows for "the Martini Effect" based on their historic advertising strapline:
![img-17.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-17.jpeg)

By enabling and encouraging third party reporting, enforcement could take place at a breach of the rules at "anytime, anyplace, anywhere" - not just when lawenforcement officers are visible. The scheme has also been proven in court, is far more cost effective than conventional responses, and engages citizens by solving problems they care deeply about.

The scheme was shared with other forces at the UK's national problem solving conference, which has led to its adoption in two other force areas. It was also added to the College of Policing practice bank and shared nationally at Neighbourhood Policing Week in January 2024. Cheshire launched their version of the scheme in February 2024, and Derbyshire who have rebranded the scheme "Parking No" launched in April 24. Greater Manchester Police have begun work to adopt OPS, as have Warwickshire, and we have also provided guidance to Dorset Police. South Yorkshire Police has received enquiries from North Yorkshire, Norfolk, Surrey and a number of other local authorities with interest in the scheme, and the indication is that there is a national appetite to use the scheme to reduce road danger as part of a concerted joined up approach to "Vision Zero" and a safe systems approach to eliminating road deaths.

# Word Count: 3949

# GLOSSARY: 

101 call - In the UK there is a single non-emergency number for contacting the police, with 999 (the UK equivalent of 911) being reserved for emergencies. For non-emergency issues, the public are advised to call 101 which will connect them to their local police service.

NIP -Notice of intended prosecution. A legal document that is required to be sent to members of the public informing them of the intention to prosecute. This must be served within 14 days of the offence, and is a requirement in almost all traffic offences where the offender has not been personally spoken to by

OPS - Operation Park Safe
PCSO - Police Community Support Officer. Police staff with some limited powers of enforcement but who are primarily used for community engagement and neighbourhood patrols.

RTC - Road traffic collision.
Terraced road / terraced house - known in the US as "townhouses" or "row houses". Medium density housing in which a block of houses share boundary walls, with many houses in a single block. Wikipedia entry.

TOR - Traffic offence report. Instead of using citations or issuing tickets or paperwork at the side of the road, officers obtain details and offenders are sent fines and court summons through the mail system.

Tram- Trolleycar or streetcar system, light rail that run on the same roads as other vehicles.

![img-18.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-18.jpeg)

**Table 1: Top priorities for the community of NW Sheffield as voted for by the public in a questionnaire. (Local survey)**

|  Total (million) | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | Year  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | 25000 | Year  |

**Table 2: Number of registered motor vehicles in the UK, Home Office statistics.**

![img-19.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-19.jpeg)

**Table 3: Number of registered cars within the Sheffield area (extract from Home Office statistics)**

|  Vans and Goods Vehicles | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  Vans | 37,000 | 35,000 | 33,000 | 31,000 | 29,000 | 27,000 | 25,000 | 20,000 | 15,000 | 10,000 | 5,000  |

**Table 4: Number of vans and good vehicles registered within the Sheffield area over time.**

# JANUARY 2023

## NEW LCV REGISTRATIONS

**TOTAL: 22,098**

**25.8%**

|  PICKUP | 2,539  |
| --- | --- |
|  4X4s | 449  |
|  VANS <=2.0t | 439  |
|  Vans >2.0-2.5t | 3,133  |
|  Vans >2.5-3.5t | 15,538  |
|  Rigids >3.5-6.0t | 256  |

*Table 5: Data showing an increase in the sales of larger vehicles*

### BEST SELLERS

|  **OCTOBER 2023** |  | **YEAR-TO-DATE** |   |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  1 | Ford Puma | 4,824 | 1  |
|  2 | MINI | 3,779 | 2  |
|  3 | Vauxhall Corsa | 3,464 | 3  |
|  4 | Volkswagen Polo | 3,426 | 4  |
|  5 | BMW 1 Series | 3,424 | 5  |
|  6 | Kia Sportage | 3,422 | 6  |
|  7 | Peugeot 2008 | 3,145 | 7  |
|  8 | Audi A3 | 3,012 | 8  |
|  9 | Ford Kuga | 2,948 | 9  |
|  10 | Volvo XC40 | 2,577 | 10  |

|  **FEBRUARY 2023** |  | **FEBRUARY 10-TO-DATE** |   |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  1 | Ford Puma | 42,136 |   |
|  2 | MINI | 34,952 |   |
|  3 | Vauxhall Corsa | 33,641 |   |
|  4 | Volkswagen Polo | 31,575 |   |
|  5 | BMW 1 Series | 30,087 |   |
|  6 | Kia Sportage | 29,990 |   |
|  7 | Peugeot 2008 | 27,253 |   |
|  8 | Audi A3 | 26,249 |   |
|  9 | Ford Kuga | 25,473 |   |
|  10 | Volvo XC40 | 25,452 |   |

*Table 6: Best selling car models Oct 2022-2023 – of the top 10 year to date, only three vehicles are not SUV class. https://www.smmt.co.uk/2023/11/october-new-car-market-beats-pre-pandemic-levels-but-subdued-ev-growth-hinders-green-goals/*

![img-20.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-20.jpeg)

Figure 14: Vehicle size increases - the Vauxhall Corsa listed in Table 6 has also increased in size, from $3817 \mathrm{~mm} \times 1646 \mathrm{~mm} \times$ 1440mm (1430kg) to $4065 \times 1765 \mathrm{~mm} \times 1435 \mathrm{~mm}(1620 \mathrm{~kg})$ so an increase of 12.1 per cent in size and 11.7 per cent in weight over 20 years.

![img-21.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-21.jpeg)

Figure 15: Changes in vehicle sizes over time and competition for road space - see also the Guardian opinion Piece dated 22/1/2024 18.44 GMT last modified 23 Jan 2024 01.44GMT "The Guardian view on SUVs: the trend towards vast cars needs to be reversed" https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/22/the-guardian-view-on-suvs-the-trend-towards-vast-cars-needs-to-be-reversed

Figure 3.6 Fatality and casualty rates per billion miles by road user type in 2019
Source: DIT, 2020
![img-22.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-22.jpeg)

Table 7: (From Halkon, Ruth and Muir, Rick The Future of Roads Policing, Police Foundation 2022: page 11 accessed 1605 12/10/2023 at https://www.police-foundation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/future_of_roads_policing_FINAL.pdf
![img-23.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-23.jpeg)

Table 8: Percentage of road traffic collisions in which parked vehicles have been identified as a contributory factor. Home Office statistics.

![img-24.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-24.jpeg)

Table 9: Department for Transport statistics in relation to number of children killed or seriously injured on the roads per 10,000 population showing Sheffield as being disproportionately high.

|  MINDSPACE Framework | Pre-intervention | Post-Parksafe  |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  Messenger: We are heavily influenced by who is communicating information | There is no information – people see others parking and assume it is OK | Police messaging highlights that points and fines are being issued  |
|  Incentives: Our responses to incentives are shaped by predictable mental shortcuts such as the strong desire to avoid losses | People do not wish to "lose" time by walking further than they have to and park dangerously to be close to their destination | Desire not to be punished  |
|  Norms: We are heavily influenced by what others do | "Everybody does it". | Rule breakers are spotlighted, and online posts result in negative comments highlighting how unacceptable it is.  |
|  Defaults: We "go with the flow" of pre-set options | Parking anywhere – no consequences |   |
|  Salience: Our attention is drawn to novel things that seem relevant to us | - | Online posts show large fines issued to people parking badly – in my area!  |
|  Priming: Our actions are often influenced by subconscious cues | It's easiest to park here, no one will do anything |   |
|  Affect: Our actions can be powerfully shaped by our emotional associations |  | Posts and literature explain how this selfish action affects the most  |

|  |  | vulnerable in society and increases
chances of accident |
| :-- | :-- | :-- |
| Commitments: We seek to be  consistent with our public promises  and reciprocate actions |  |  |
| Ego: We act in ways that make us feel  better about ourselves | I managed to get parked nearby! | People who see wrongdoing can do  something about it, "Good Samaritan  effect". |

Table 10: MINDSPACE Framework and its application within Op Parksfafe
![img-25.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-25.jpeg)

Table 11: Proportion of offences identified from Parksafe referrals.

![img-26.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-26.jpeg)

Table 12: Top 15 locations for Op Parksafe referrals over time
![img-27.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-27.jpeg)

Table 13: Prosecutions for road traffic offences submitted by members of the NW Neighbourhood team over time.

6. To what extent would you agree or disagree with the following statements?

More Details

- Strongly agree $\square$ Agree $\square$ Neither agree nor disagree $\square$ Disagree $\square$ Strongly disagree

I found it easy to submit evidence

I would use the system again in the future

I believe the scheme has reduced the amount of parking issues in my area
![img-28.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-28.jpeg)

Table 14: Feedback from the public about Op Parksafe
9. Overall, how would you rate the scheme?

More Details
(7) Insights
8.57

Average Rating
![img-29.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-29.jpeg)

Table 15: Feedback from those who have used the scheme

10. Based on your understanding, would you be likely to submit evidence of parking offences if it were available in your area?
![img-30.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-30.jpeg)

Table 16: Strong support for rolling the scheme out in areas where it is not available

![img-31.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-31.jpeg)

Figure 16: 1980 photograph with vehicle counts per road

![img-32.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-32.jpeg)

*Figure 17: 2023 photograph with vehicle count per street (note those vehicles that are on streets not captured by original photo are not counted)*

|  Road name | Road Parked vehicles 1980 | 2023  |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  Conduit Road | 3 | 14  |
|  School Road | 5 | 8  |
|  Ramsey Road | 5 | 15  |
|  Spring View Road | 1 | 4  |
|  Spring House Road | 2 | 10  |
|  Leamington Street | 13 | 37  |
|  Mona Road | 4 | 16  |
|  Hands Road | 0 | 6  |
|  Commonside | 14 | 13  |
|  Ainsley Road | 2 | 8  |
|  Spring Hill | 2 | 2  |
|  Total | 51 | 133  |

![img-33.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-33.jpeg)

# REPORTING DANGEROUS PARKING - FLOW CHART

![img-34.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-34.jpeg)

# REPORTING DANGEROUS PARKING - FLOW CHART

![img-35.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/south_yorkshire_police_operation_parksafe_2024/img-35.jpeg)