PCN for parking on a single yellow without signage

[banjo67xxx]

Hi,

 

I parked on High St, Camberley on a single yellow line. Before I left the vehicle I searched the street for signs to indicate the hours of restriction but there were none. On the next section of street I saw a sign which said "Waiting limited to 30 minutes". I returned to the vehicle in less than 30 minutes and found I was given a PCN for "parking in a restricted street during prescribed hours"

 

I have filed an appeal and complained to Surrey Heath Council, and on the phone they claim that the High St is in a "restricted zone". I have checked Google Streetview and there is no signage on High St to say that it is a restricted zone, nor on Portesbury Way, Pembroke Broadway, and St George's Rd.

 

Knoll Road is a fast flowing traffic route with no shops and double yellow lines down both sides, and it only has a single "restricted zone" sign very very close to another larger sign which is a whole half a mile away from the end of the High St where I parked. There is no 2nd sign on the other side or in the centre island of Knoll Rd. Knoll Rd is not part of the one-way system that the High St belongs to and any reasonable person could not expect Knoll Rd to be part of the same zone as High St. Also any reasonable person would not look on Knoll Rd for parking restrictions as it is quite clearly just another main road en route to the shopping district.

 

Do "restricted zone" signs need to be on both sides of the entrance to the zone, and is there any requirement for repeaters, and do the streets have to be of the similar character?

 

Have I got reasonable grounds to claim that the signage was inadequate?

 

TIA Banjo.

[green_and_mean]

My google streetview shows Knoll road as having 2 signs??

 

Logically if you think about it why would they have 30 minute free bays if the yellow lines were unrestricted?

[banjo67xxx]

Thanks for looking. So where is the 2nd sign?

 

Now I look at it on streetview I see that there are 3 types of markings.

 

As the Knoll Rd signage is so far away on a different style of road, isn't there a requirement for a repeater?

[green_and_mean]

A repeater would invalidate the zone, the second sign is about 15m past the one on the left.

[banjo67xxx]

A repeater would invalidate the zone, the second sign is about 15m past the one on the left.

 

Thanks, I see it now. - Surely the signs must be close to opposite each other to be valid?

[green_and_mean]

Thanks, I see it now. - Surely the signs must be close to opposite each other to be valid?

 

No they show the start of the zone, the start may be in a different place each side.

[banjo67xxx]

Wow! This is a huge CPZ

h t t p : / / w w w.surreyheath.gov.uk/transport/carparking/controlledparking.htm

 

Its nearly 1.2 miles from east-west and encompasses residentail and shopping districts.

 

If you say repeaters would invalidate the CPZ, then surely for a CPZ this big there should be some legally acceptable signage to remind people that they are still inside a vast CPZ?

[sgtbush]

single yellow lines do not need signage, unless their are excemptions from the "set" norm yellow lines. i think the statute is no parking 8am-6pm

[banjo67xxx]

single yellow lines do not need signage, unless their are excemptions from the "set" norm yellow lines. i think the statute is no parking 8am-6pm

I have been told on another forum that yellow lines do need signage unless they are in a CPZ.

 

What I have been pointed to is the following DFT guidelines which state in appendix D5 that CPZs shouldn't be larger than a dozen streets, and appendix D6 that the signage should not be too close to other signage and traffic junctions so as it make it difficult to perceive.

h t t p s : / / w w w.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/212559/parkingenforcepolicy.pdf

 

I did find this section in the Highway Code, however as no-one backed me up on this point, I'm not sure if the link is out of date. However it is searchable on direct.gov and it does say repeaters are required on each side of every street in a CPZ

h t t p : / / w w w.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/@motor/documents/digitalasset/dg_191927.pdf

 

My first appeal on the basis of no signage was rejected because its a CPZ, so now I'll wait for an NTO before raising a second appeal on the basis that the CPZ is too large and that the entry to Knoll Rd from the A30 is a very busy intersection with pedestrian crossings and 5 highway signs. I expect them to reject it because they want to keep the money, so I'm prepared to take it to PATAS.

 

BTW - When using Google Streetview to check the signage, you will need to position your viewpoint so that you are looking from the Google Car that was on the A30. The images from the Google Car that recorded Knoll Rd are out of date.

[banjo67xxx]

Solution: Council refused me my day in "court" (PATAS) and agreed not to contest the matter after I wrote this letter

 

At the time of parking I was unaware that I was doing so during the  operational hours of a no waiting restriction. I do not recall seeing  any traffic sign that conveyed this. I have since learned that the  location is within a controlled parking zone (CPZ). When replying to  this appeal, it will be helpful if the council confirms all those roads  where the relevant CPZ entry signage has been placed and when the  signage was last inspected and confirmed to be fully present and  correct.

I understand that a no waiting restriction is regulated  by order made pursuant to the RTRA 1984 and consequently a council has a  statutory duty under regulation 18 of the Local Authorities' Traffic  Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 to place traffic  signs that adequately convey the effect of such an order. Where CPZ’s  are used then adequacy can reasonably be measured against what the DfT  recommends in their publication “Operational Guidance to Local  Authorities: Parking Policy & Enforcement”. Annex D in this  publication is helpfully titled “Appraising the adequacy of traffic  signs, plating and road markings” and paragraphs D5 and D6 provide  guidance on adequacy for CPZ’s;

D5 The Secretary of State's view  is that motorists cannot reasonably be expected to read, understand and  remember the parking restrictions at the entrance to a Controlled  Parking Zone that covers an area of more than a dozen streets

D6  Unless unavoidable, they should not be close to junctions on busy roads,  where motorists are likely to be concentrating on direction signs,  traffic lights and other directional 
manoeuvring

I’m informed  that the CPZ I unwittingly parked within covers more streets than what  the Secretary of State considers reasonable to enable a CPZ entry sign  to remain adequate and therefore I believe I am justified in claiming  the operational period of the no waiting restriction was not adequately  conveyed by traffic signs to satisfy regulations and the standard  expected by the Secretary of State.

I entered the CPZ by turning  right from the A30 onto Knoll Rd which is a busy intersection with a  pedestrian crossing. As I had not been to Camberley High St for some  time I was not only concentrating on the right turn manoeuvre and the  pedestrian crossing, but also looking for direction signs to drive down a  highway which I incorrectly believed to be where Knoll Walk pedestrian  zone is located. Being that my concentration was quite rightly on the  pedestrian crossing I was unable to give my full attention to all 5  highway signs that are within a few feet of the crossing, and so failed  to notice the CPZ signs. Furthermore, as I was not intending to park  until I reached the shopping streets a further 0.5 mile away, I was not  expecting to need to look for signs relating to parking restrictions  until I reached the shopping zone.

It would be arrogant of the  council to disagree considering the publication explicitly expresses the  view of Government and was specifically produced to help councils  understand what is and is not considered adequate. Had the no waiting  restriction been adequately conveyed then I as a law abiding citizen  would not have parked where it is prohibited.