Safer Parking – Not Quite

Some time ago we had a  major problem in the UK – too many cars were being stolen or broken into in car parks, often in buildings that were poorly designed and poorly looked after and simply acted as a crime magnet. The Police and the government took an initiative to promote car parks that were designed to inhibit crime and criminal behaviour, better lighting, no dark corners and so on. The Police launched an initiative called “Secured by Design” which was basically a design template for a safe car park. The intention was good but the scheme had a fatal flaw. No matter how little crime there was in a car park, if it didn’t comply with the design template it couldn’t join the scheme. The entry level was too high and not surprisingly numbers in the scheme were small.

Some time ago the British Parking Association took over the running of this scheme and decided, with the Police’s agreement, to redesign the scheme. The old prescriptive design led assessment was replaced with a new evaluation based on a risk assessment.  If there was no crime and nothing which suggested that there was a risk of crime then the car park could get an award.  Regular re-assessments ensured that if circumstances changed; then the status of the site could be reconsidered. This addressed the issues surrounding car crime but over the last few years it has become increasingly obvious that this is not the only crime in car parks. 

Car parks have started to fall down and although none have been in the Safer Parking Scheme it seems increasingly irrational to award a car park the Safer Parking appellation when customers and their cars could be at risk from crumbling structures, leaking water or inadequate fire protection. A recent check in a city which shall remain nameless showed missing test records for safety equipment, no fire evacuation plans, and crumbling asbestos in public areas.  In some of the car parks the leaks were so bad that areas were cordoned off and cars had lime scale deposits from leaking water. All of the car parks had Safer Parking Awards and yet in a real sense none of them were safe and some of the shortcomings could result in criminal prosecutions.  The scheme is in urgent need of a re-think and I hope that the BPA will understand the problem before it’s too late.

Peter Guest

 

Comments

[Asphalt Paving]

Indeed, a lot of crimes have taken place in parking lots. Carnapping, kidnapping, robbery, holdups, even murder. It's sad. So hopefully something gets done to ensure the safety of parking lots.

[Kelvin Reynolds, Director of Operations and Technical Services, BPA]

“I read with interest Peter Guest's article “Safer Parking – Not Quite” and whilst I wouldn’t want to detract from the importance of ensuring that all parking structures are properly maintained I do take issue with some of his comments. It is important to remember that the Safer Parking Scheme, known as "Park Mark®” is a crime reduction initiative; it does not measure or assess structural safety. There is a motoring analogy here: all motorists are required to undertake a driving test which demonstrates their competence to drive safely; this does not mean that they will always do so or that they will maintain any vehicles that they drive. Even having an MOT certificate for the vehicle does not guarantee that it is routinely inspected and serviced. It simply means that at the time of the test it met the required criteria.

Park Mark® can be awarded to any car park in the UK which meets the relevant criteria and delivers low levels of crime. This is a very important difference between the current scheme (Park Mark®) and the original Secured by Design scheme (Secured Car Parks) which measured inputs rather than outcomes. Motorists can be confident that a car park with Park Mark® really does deliver low levels of crime! The importance of maintaining the structure, if it is a building, is raised by the BPA Development Managers in an effort to promote best practice, but structural assessments are not part of the scheme.

The BPA is fully aware of its responsibilities in encouraging car park owners and operators to ensure that all parking structures are properly designed, built and maintained. We have established a Structures and Asset Management Special Interest Group (SAM SIG) of which Peter is the Secretary, and this group is continuing to raise the profile of best practice in the maintenance of parking structures. It has produced Parking Practice Notes on the subject and information leaflets which are distributed to all Park Mark® award holders; this information is freely available to all BPA members on our website too. SAM SIG has also undertaken a significant survey of car park operators in the UK to get a better understanding of the knowledge in the industry about what is commonly known as lifecare planning for parking structures and these findings will be published shortly in Parking News. Encouragingly there is a significant understanding of what lifecare planning is. The task is to encourage it to be adopted routinely by everyone.

Structural safety and integrity in car parks is paramount. The BPA knows this and through SAM SIG intends to continue to raise awareness and promote best practice. The BPA will also work with other more competent institutions, Civil and Structural Engineers for example, to this end.

The Safer Parking Scheme, (Park Mark®) will continue to recognise and reward those operators whose car parks deliver low levels of crime”.

[parking lot striping]

It doesn't deserve a rethink. It should not have been implemented in the first place.