Professional Documents
Culture Documents
uk
ANNUAL REPORT
Index
OVERVIEW
Matthew Lock
Lead Member for Transport & Environment
East Sussex County Council
Market research amongst East Sussex residents found that parking was the most often cited
transport problem. Most of us have a “love-hate” relationship with parking. Urban myths abound
about hearses being ticketed and all parking attendants being on commission. Nobody likes to
pay to park, even less to receive a parking ticket and many of us expect an indulgent blind eye to
be turned if, occasionally, we park on a yellow line while we pop in to a shop for a few minutes.
On the other hand, we complain if we cannot find a convenient place to park close to the shop we
want to visit. If we are delayed in our car or if our bus doesn’t arrive because someone has
parked illegally (perhaps while they have popped into a shop for a few minutes!) we bemoan the
lack of enforcement. If an emergency vehicle could not get through we would be outraged. If we
and our neighbours cannot park close to our homes because most of the spaces are taken up by
commuters we expect something to be done. We may also recognise that, unless public
transport can run more reliably and walking and cycling can be made more attractive, we will
never get away from dependence on the private car.
1. 1 Balancing Freedoms
Parking controls and enforcement will always be a balance between restricting the freedom of
some in order to protect or enhance the freedom of others and that is a difficult balance to
achieve. We aim to introduce controls and to undertake enforcement sensitively and in the best
interest of those most directly affected – the motorist, the commercial driver and residents and
businesses in the streets concerned.
The effective control of parking is a crucial element of the County Council’s wider strategy to
improve transport and reduce damage to the environment as set out in our Local Transport
Plan 1 . Those areas in which parking controls have been introduced are already experiencing the
benefits.
In Lewes Town, the upward trend in traffic has actually been reversed and traffic has fallen to
pre-2001 levels (figure 1). Crucially, this has been achieved without deterring motorists from
visiting the town: in fact 12% more people are parking in town centre car parks than before. The
reduction in traffic levels is primarily because people no longer pointlessly drive around and
around looking for somewhere to park.
In Hastings (figure 2), the upward trend in traffic levels has been slowed and bus patronage has
increased by 18% over the last four years. Effective parking enforcement has been a decisive
factor.
380,000
370,000
Vehicle Kilometres
360,000
350,000
340,000
330,000
320,000
2002/03 2004/05 2006/07 2008/09 2010/11
1
http://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/roadsandtransport/localtransportplan/ltp2/downloadltp2.htm
3
620,000
Vehicle Kilometres
600,000
580,000
560,000
540,000
520,000
500,000
2002/03 2004/05 2006/07 2008/09 2010/11
All surplus income from parking on the highway is reinvested in local transport in the areas in
which the charges are levied. To date, in Hastings, Eastbourne and Lewes, a total of over £1.5
million has been invested in pedestrian crossings, support for bus services and maintenance of
real time bus information systems and a range of other improvements. Details are given in
Appendix B.
In East Sussex we aim to operate our parking schemes transparently and we were commended
by the independent National Parking Adjudication Service (now Traffic Penalty Tribunal) 2 as the
first authority in the country to publish an annual report.
With the exception of a few matters which we need to keep confidential for reasons of security, to
prevent fraud or abuse of the system or to ensure that contractors compete fairly, all information
about the schemes is publicly available, much of it in this annual report.
We have developed detailed rules to help us to apply the scheme fairly and consistently. These
cover the circumstances in which we issue tickets; the tolerances that we apply; whether we
observe a vehicle for a period before issuing a ticket and the factors that we take into account in
deciding whether to cancel a ticket.
We publish these policies 3 so that what we do is transparent and so that anyone can comment
on them. We recognise that there will inevitably be differences of opinion about the “rights and
2
“We have always suggested [that authorities publish an annual report] since it is clear that many councils are operating the
scheme satisfactorily and more openness would enable the public to see that this is the case.
I am therefore delighted to have a copy of an excellent annual report for 2005 from East Sussex County Council. That
local authority is to be much commended.” Chief Adjudicator’s foreword, NPAS annual report 2005
3
Policies can be seen on the ESCC website at
http://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/yourcouncil/about/committees/meetingpapers/cabinettransport/2008/31march.htm
4
wrongs” of individual cases. However, we want to build a general consensus about how the
controls should be applied and interpreted.
We have just launched our Parking Charter which sets out in plain English what motorists can
expect of us and what we expect of motorists.
In East Sussex, no civil enforcement officers receive commission. Nor do our contractors. We
pay them fixed fees for providing a service and all contractors are chosen after competitive
tendering to ensure that we get the best value for money. Neither contractors nor individual civil
enforcement officers have targets related to the number of tickets that they issue and they have
no incentive to issue more tickets.
Our rules build in a number of “tolerances”. We realise, for example, that people can sometimes
be a few minutes late getting back to their car so, unlike many authorities, we do not issue a
ticket to anyone who has paid to park until they are at least ten minutes overdue.
We would prefer not to issue any tickets and we publish leaflets (figure 3) to help people to
understand and comply with the rules. If we do issue a ticket, and the motorist challenges it, we
consider the matter in accordance with our policies and cancel any tickets that are found to have
been wrongly issued or if there were extenuating circumstances.
A detailed analysis of tickets issued in the Lewes scheme is given in this report. Summary
figures for all civil enforcement schemes outside London are published annually by the Traffic
Penalty Tribunal. This shows that the proportion of tickets taken to independent appeal in Lewes
is one of the lowest in the country.
Parking Charter
1.We will ensure that we mark streets and car parks with lines and
signs as clearly as possible to show where you can and cannot
park.
5. If you pay to park but overstay by less than ten minutes, we will
not issue a parking ticket (or, if we do, we will cancel it).
8. We expect you to buy enough time to cover your stay allowing for
the possibility of being delayed.
3.1 Vandalism
Criminal attacks against ticket machines in Lewes using powerful explosives resulted in the loss
of 44 machines and damage to many others. No other town in the country has experienced
anywhere near this level of damage. Not only did this pose a serious threat of injury but it
imposed additional costs on the scheme of some £300,000. Regrettably, this cost falls on law-
abiding residents and motorists in the form of additional charges.
Joint action with the Police and Crimestoppers involving improved security, surveillance and
publicity has dramatically reduced the level of attack. We hope that, with continuing vigilance
and community support, this lawlessness will not return.
East Sussex was one of the first authorities in the country to introduce differential parking permit
charges to encourage electric and LPG propelled vehicles. We have now extended
environmental incentives in Lewes by offering discounts to a wider range of low polluting
conventionally powered vehicles.
We have been approached by several groups who are interested in forming car clubs and have
asked whether parking space could be made available. Unfortunately, these clubs have yet
come to fruition but we are keen to encourage such initiatives or, indeed, any other community or
commercial initiatives where parking control could assist in improving mobility and reducing the
environmental impact of the private car.
We intend to review the way in which Civil Enforcement Officers are deployed in Lewes in order
to be satisfied that the right numbers of officers are patrolling in the right places at the right times.
The County Council, as a major employer, is leading by example in using parking controls and
charges to further environmental objectives and improve business efficiency. All staff at County
Hall pay to park and the surplus income from that car park is used to subsidise reduced public
transport fares. The parking arrangements also give priority to staff who car share and to
essential operational needs.
The Council is keen to encourage other businesses to develop similar initiatives in the
management of their parking.
4. THE FUTURE
We are committed to responding to public concerns about parking and to addressing the adverse
impact that uncontrolled parking can have on people’s lives, business efficiency and the
environment. The management of parking has a vital role to play in achieving wider transport
and environmental objectives and we will work with local communities to introduce effective,
efficient and appropriate parking controls and associated enforcement across East Sussex.
Parking controls are never universally popular and, indeed, are often widely unpopular at a
superficial level but those directly affected by the consequences of uncontrolled parking
7
recognise the benefits. Before introducing new parking controls, we consult widely with those
most directly affected and we listen to what they say.
It was following extensive consultation that civil parking enforcement was recently introduced in
Eastbourne together with new parking controls, including charging, in the town centre.
We have to operate and enforce parking schemes in accordance with national legislation. This
sometimes prevents us from doing things in the way that we would prefer. New legislation which
came into effect during 2008 has allowed us to adopt different levels of penalty charge for more
serious and less serious breaches and we welcome this.
No scheme of parking control will ever be perfect for everyone but the Council is committed to
transparency and to continual development, improvement and refinement in response to evolving
local needs.
It is planned that, in future years, our annual report will cover all civil parking enforcement
schemes in the County, allowing statistical comparison on a common basis. However, at
present, it relates only to the Lewes Scheme.
5.1 Background
Decriminalised (now Civil) Parking Enforcement was introduced across the whole of Lewes
District on 20 September 2004. This transferred responsibility for parking enforcement 4 from the
Police to the County Council.
At the same time, a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) was introduced in the centre of the town of
Lewes. This saw the introduction of on-street parking charges and permits for residents and
visitors and changes to the car park tariffs to make them consistent with charges on-street. No
changes were made, at that time, to parking controls on the ground outside Lewes town.
A comprehensive review of the CPZ in Lewes was undertaken during 2005 and 2006, once the
scheme had settled. In the light of consultation, the scheme was extended in late 2006 to include
parts of the Wallands and Winterbourne areas. A number of other changes were made, including
the removal or downgrading of some yellow lines to create more parking places and the changing
of the hours of control in the western part of the town from six days a week to five (Monday to
Friday).
Consultation about the possible introduction of controlled parking across Seaford town centre
found limited support. Proposals for much more localised controls are now under consideration
in Seaford and elsewhere in Lewes District.
The civil enforcement regime in Lewes District covers parking both on the street and in many
public car parks. Most public car parks in Lewes District are owned or leased or used under
4
Other than on Trunk Roads
8
licence by Lewes District Council. The County Council manages enforcement in those car parks 5
on behalf of the District Council. Enforcement is carried out by National Car Parks under a five
year contract (with optional extension for a further two years) with the County Council in close
liaison with Lewes District Council.
Charges are set by the County Council (or, in the case of most car parks, by Lewes District
Council). The number of Civil Enforcement Officers and their deployment is determined by the
Council as are the rules under which they work. All representations about Penalty Charge Notices
are considered by a Council officer.
All income from the scheme is retained by the Councils and NCP is paid a fee for the service
provided. The contract gives no incentive related to the issue of Penalty Charge Notices and
stipulates that NCP must not offer any such incentive to their staff.
The following statistical analysis of the operational and financial performance of the scheme
covers both on and off street (car park) parking.
Most car parks in Lewes District are the responsibility of Lewes District Council. During
2007/2008, LDC operated pay and display off street car parking at 18 surface car parks. The
Council also operated one season-ticket-only surface car park in Seaford and there are 19 other
off street surface car parks within the district which are free to park in. In addition to the surface
car parks the Council operates a pay upon exit multi storey car park at Newhaven. Details of
these car parks and the small number of off-street car parks operated by ESCC, their capacities
and the applicable charging bands are shown in Table A1.3.
In addition to car parks operated by the local authorities, a public car park is operated by NCP in
Eastgate Wharf, Lewes and there are car parks associated with railway stations, supermarkets
and at other locations.
There are 9 charging bands in operation in LDC surface car parks – 5 for Lewes and 2 each for
Seaford and Newhaven. A separate tariff applies in the Newhaven multi storey car park. Details
of the tariffs are shown in Table A1.4.
Analysis of the income and expenditure for the Lewes parking scheme is shown in Tables 1, 2, 3
& 4.
5.4.1 On street parking, ESCC car parks and all enforcement activities
As shown in Table 1, on street parking, ESCC car parks and all enforcement activities made an
operating deficit of £37,251 in 2007/08 and a cumulative operating deficit to the end of 2007/08 of
some £325,000. A substantial element of the deficit is attributable to additional costs and lost
revenue as a result of vandalism against ticket machines.
The total cost of that damage is estimated to be in excess of £300,000 although, because ticket
machines are leased, with payments made over the life of the lease, only part of that sum has so
far been reflected in the accounts. Even if there is no more vandalism, further charges against
the scheme will arise for the remainder of the lease period.
Charges were increased during 2007 to offset the cost of vandalism and, although the scheme
still showed an operational loss for 2007/08 as a whole, since the changes came into effect the
5
The Multi Storey car park in Newhaven Town Centre is operated separately.
9
scheme has been returning a small operating surplus for the part of the year since the charges
came into effect.
The cost of past vandalism should have “worked through” the system by 2009/10. Discounting
the current cost of vandalism from the main figures in Table 1 gives an indication of the likely
long term financial viability of the on street scheme (see Table 2). The underlying scheme is
financially viable but it will be many years before it covers its set up costs.
Income from PCNs (Figure 4) contributes approximately a third of the total on-street income but
this comes nowhere near to covering the costs of enforcement 6 . Contrary to popular belief,
enforcement in a small town and partially rural district is not, of itself, a money generating activity
(Figure 5). The enforcement, which is necessary to achieve a reasonable level of compliance, is
funded primarily from income from permits and pay & display.
PCNs
Permits
Enforcement, £421,000
6
Figures 4 & 5 are based on data for part of 2006/2007
10
5.4.2 Lewes District Council Car Parks
As shown in Table 3, the LDC surface car parks returned an operating surplus of £429,947 in
2007/08. The Newhaven multi-storey car park (which operates on a pay on exit basis and does
not come under the civil enforcement regime returned an operating deficit of £12,779 in 2007/08
(Table 4).
Detailed statistics about the operation of the scheme are given in Appendix A. An overview of
those statistics is given below.
Scale of Operation
Tables A1.1 to A1.4 give information about the scale of the Lewes operation and the charges. It
will be noted that the total number of permits (1,990) and the number of bays available to permit
holders (2,100) are closely matched.
Tables A2.1 to A2.5a give information about the numbers of permit and pay & display tickets
sold. The number of resident permits, having risen by 13% in 2006-07, following the extension of
the scheme, reduced slightly (4%) in 2007-08 (Table A2.1). The number of business permits
declined by 29% in 2007-08, possibly as a result of the phasing out of such permits being
allowed to park in the High Street (Table A2.2).
The number of pay & display tickets sold has remained almost constant at just over 1.3 million
per year (Table A2.3). The vast majority (1.25 million) are sold in Lewes Town. Of these, about
three quarters are in off-street car parks and one quarter on street (Table A2.4).
Although there are slight variations between different areas, the common theme in each town is
that the great majority of tickets are for short durations. Most people who park in the car parks
stay for a short period of time (Tables A2.5 & A2.5a and Figure 6). Overall, 80% of tickets were
for 2 hours or less and 46% were for 1 hour or less.
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
Percentage staying for less than
60.0%
Lewes Surface
Seaford Surface
50.0%
Newhaven Surface
Newhaven MSCP
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
30 mins 1 hour 2 hours 3 hours 4 hours 5 hours 6 hours 7 hours 8 hours 9 hours 10 hours
Duration Purchased
11
PCN Issue Processing Challenge and Appeal
The long term trend in the number of PCNs issued is shown in the table below and in Tables
A3.1 and A3.1a and in Figure 7.
There is no strongly cyclical pattern to the issue of PCNs over a year (figure 7). Following launch
of the scheme in September 2004, the number of PCNs issued gradually rose during 2005-6 and
the earlier part of 2007-08 before falling back. The rate of issue averaged over six months is now
the same as in February 2006 (Table A3.1a).
By far the most PCNs are issued in Lewes Town (Table A3.2) but the number issued there in
2007-08 was 9% lower than in the previous year (2% lower on street, 17% lower in car parks).
Although many fewer PCNs in total are issued in the Coastal Towns, the numbers increased by
50% in 2007-08.
The nature of the most common violations and the locations at which most PCN’s are issued
change very little from year to year (Table A3.3 & A3.4 and Figure 8).
Figure 7
Issue of PCNs
16,000
14,000
12,000
PCNs Issued
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
br r y
br r y
br r y
A uly
A uly
ne
ne
M y
M y
M y
ch
ch
ch
ay
ay
e er
e er
e er
il
em t
il
em t
20 cem e r
20 cem e r
20 cem e r
Ja er
Ja er
O er
Ja er
O er
O er
p t us
p t us
r
r
r
pr
pr
Fe ua
Fe ua
Fe ua
ua
ua
ua
N tob
N tob
N tob
D mb
D mb
D mb
M
b
b
b
b
Ju
Ju
ar
ar
ar
J
J
Se ug
Se ug
A
A
em
n
n
n
c
c
ov
ov
ov
pt
e
08
06
07
Se
05
20
Some 60% of PCN’s issued are paid at the discounted rate (Figure 9), 7% at the full rate and a
small number after the issue of a Charge Certificate and recourse to the Courts. Approximately
18% are cancelled and a further 1% are written off. A more detailed analysis in Tables A3.5 and
A3.6 shows that the proportion of PCNs challenged rose from 42.7% in 2005-06 to 53.4% in
2006-07 but fell back slightly to 50.2% in 2007-08.
12
Figure 8
2007/08
2006/07
Sites where most PCN’s were issued in Lewes
1 1 Friars Walk Car Park, Lewes
2 3 West Street Car Park, Lewes
3 2 High Street, Lewes (Zone B)
4 4 High Street, Lewes (Zone D)
5 5 Phoenix Causeway Car Park (East), Lewes
6 6 Westgate Car park, Lewes
7 8 County Hall West Campus, Lewes
8 7 Broad Street, Seaford
9 9 North Street Car Park, Lewes
10 10 Southover Road, Lewes
Figure 9
Written Off
1%
Cancelled
18%
The proportion of PCNs cancelled has fallen from 26% in 2006/7 to just under 18% in 2007/8.
In 2007-08, 38 PCNs were taken to independent adjudication. Although only 0.15% of PCN’s
issued, this was a substantial increase on previous years (8 in 2006/7 and 12 in 2005/6).
13
Lewes Scheme
Table 1: Expenditure and Income (£)
On street, ESCC Car Parks and All enforcement 7
Income:
Payments from other Local
139,362 225,837 383,477 408,109
Authorities
On-Street Charges 8 241,243 447,702 307,966 401,660
Off-street Charges 35,417 86,757 86,258 85,155
Penalty Charges 151,733 415,825 521,328 638,592
Permits In “On-Street” 14,260 208,951 263,633
Other In “On-Street” 52,057 41,053 69,921
TOTAL INCOME 567,755 1,242,438 1,549,033 1,867,070
Lewes Scheme
Table 2: Underlying Financial Position (Discounting Vandalism Costs)
7
(excludes ticket income and costs associated with Lewes District Council and other car parks)
8
For 2004/05 and part of 2005/06, “On street charges” also includes Permit and Other income
14
Table 3: Expenditure and Income (£)
Lewes District Council’s Surface Car Parks
Income:
Car park charges 631,839 821,578 814,827 820,130
Penalty charge notices 60,215 152,184 180,828 206,923
Other fees 2,268 2,548 2,780 4,300
Rents 8,244 4,473 11,099 9,184
Other income 21,016 6,185 7,061 3,374
TOTAL INCOME 723,582 986,968 1,016,595 1,043,911
Income:
Car park charges 65,906 63,793 62,330 65,481
Other fees 2,561 13,800 858 141
TOTAL INCOME 68,467 77,593 63,188 65,622
APPENDIX A
OPERATIONAL STATISTICS (LEWES)
Tables
1. Scale of Operation
A1.1 Scale of Operation: Whole District
A1.2 Scale of Operation: Lewes Town Controlled Parking Zone
A1.3 Capacity of Public Car Parks by Location
A1.4 Charging Structure
Newhaven (Note 5)
Rural Villages
Seaford
TOTAL 2,335 45
1. In some cases, individual bays are not marked and the number of
spaces is estimated.
2. Also private operators offer parking at the Railway Station, Tesco, at the rear of Waitrose and
in Cockshut Lane.
3. Also 3 coach spaces
4. Also 2 coach spaces
5. LDC also operates a 180 space multi-storey, pay on exit car park
in Newhaven.
6. Overnight lorry parking allowed
19
Table A1.4
Charging Structure
Charges in Seaford and Newhaven car parks have been the same
since April 2005
20
Charging zone
High Street Intermediate Outer
&
Commercial
Charge per unit £0.50 £0.30 £0.30 /
£1.50
Available in units of 15 minutes 30 minutes 60 minutes /
1 day
Maximum stay 2 hours Unlimited Unlimited
No return within 2 hours N/a N/a
Table A2.1
Resident Permits Issued by Month
Table A2.2
Business Permits Issued by Month
Table A2.3
Pay & Display Tickets Sold by Month
Table A2.4
Pay & Display Tickets Sold by Location
Falmer:
On-Street Nil Nil N/A Nil N/A
Car Parks Nil Nil N/A Nil N/A
Falmer TOTAL Nil Nil N/A Nil N/A
Coastal Towns:
On-Street Nil Nil N/A Nil N/A
Car Parks 62,490 67,700 8% 64,700 -4%
Coastal Towns TOTAL 62,490 67,700 8% 64,700 -4%
Other:
On-Street Nil Nil N/A Nil N/A
Car Parks Nil Nil N/A Nil N/A
Other TOTAL Nil Nil N/A Nil N/A
Table A2.5
Pattern of Car Park Use
Number of tickets issued in each town by duration
band, LDC car parks only
Table A2.5a
Pattern of Car Park Use
Percentage paying for ticket for time shown or less
Table A3.1
PCNs Issued by Month
Table A3.1a
PCNs Issue Trend (Six Month moving Total)
2005
September 9,932
October 10,129 2.0%
November 10,418 2.9%
December 10,978 5.4%
2006
January 11,538 5.1%
February 11,969 3.7%
March 12,220 2.1%
April 12,046 -1.4%
May 12,593 4.5%
June 12,714 1.0%
July 12,640 -0.6%
August 12,681 0.3%
September 12,596 -0.7% 26.8%
October 12,623 0.2% 24.6%
November 12,658 0.3% 21.5%
December 12,230 -3.4% 11.4%
2007
January 12,004 -1.8% 4.0%
February 11,852 -1.3% -1.0%
March 11,905 0.4% -2.6%
April 12,498 5.0% 3.8%
May 12,517 0.2% -0.6%
June 13,134 4.9% 3.3%
July 13,616 3.7% 7.7%
August 13,929 2.3% 9.8%
September 13,803 -0.9% 9.6%
October 13,372 -3.1% 5.9%
November 13,311 -0.5% 5.2%
December 13,060 -1.9% 6.8%
2008
January 12,680 -2.9% 5.6%
February 12,236 -3.5% 3.2%
March 11,965 -2.2% 0.5%
26
Table A3.2
PCNs Issued by Location
Falmer:
On-Street 86 132 53% 17 -87%
Car Parks
Falmer TOTAL 86 132 53% 17 -87%
Coastal Towns:
On-Street 3,530 3,201 -9% 4,801 50%
Car Parks 258 873 238% 1,341 54%
Coastal Towns TOTAL 3,788 4,074 8% 6,142 51%
Other:
On-Street 19 78 311% 466 497%
Car Parks 280 61 -78% 733 1102%
Other TOTAL 299 139 -54% 1,199 763%
Table A3.3
PCNs Issued by Main Site
Sites with 100 or more PCNs Issued
Table A3.4
PCNs Issued by Contravention
Table A3.5
PCNs Processed by Outcome
Paid:
At Discounted Rate (£30) 12,256 12,956 6% 15,317 18%
At Full Rate (£60) 1,206 1,588 32% 1,893 19%
After Charge Certificate (£90) 216 277 28% 276 0%
After Registration (£95) 38 262 589% 105 -60%
TOTAL Paid 13,716 15,083 10% 17,591 17%
Table A3.6
PCNs Challenged and Appealed by Outcome
Appealed to Independent
Adjudication 12 8 -33% 38 375%
(Appealed as % of Issued) 0.05% 0.03% -40% 0.15% 352%
Of which:
Dismissed (PCN Upheld) 4 3 -25% 7 133%
(Dismissed as % of Appealed) 33.3% 37.5% 13% 18.4% -51%
Withdrawn (PCN Cancelled) 5 4 -20% 20 400%
(Withdrawn as % of Appealed) 41.7% 50.0% 20% 52.6% 5%
Accepted (PCN Cancelled) 3 1 -67% 11 1000%
(Accepted as % of Appealed) 25.0% 12.5% -50% 28.9% 132%
31
APPENDIX B
ITEMS FUNDED FROM PARKING SURPLUS
of which
Hastings Silverhill-William Parker School
Schooldays1 April 06-2 July 06 4,891
Hastings Silverhill-William Parker School
Schooldays3 July 06-31
March 07 20,795
Hastings Pebsham-Helenswood Schools
Schooldays1 April 06-2 July 06 5,332
Hastings Silverhill-Helenswood Schools
Schooldays1 April 06-2 July 06 6,462
Hastings Silverhill-Helenswood Schools
Schooldays3 July 06-31
March 07 20,795
Hastings Silverhill-Helenswood Schools
Schooldays1 April 06-2 July 06 7,067
Hastings Silverhill-Helenswood Schools
Schooldays
3 July 06-31 March 07 20,795
Hastings Hastings-PettM-F daytime
1 April 06-28 Oct 06 24,365
Hastings Hastings-Ashford Way/Millward
Rd/Linton Rd/PettM-F daytime
29 Oct 06-31 March 07 17,571
TOTAL
HASTINGS 171,057 201,357 276,914 649,328
COUNTY
TOTAL 326,457 650,860 599,564 1,576,881
Highway
Infrastructure 104,050 52,697 36,720 193,467
Public
Transport
Infrastructure 0 12,000 27,000 39,000
Bus Services 17,820 366,473 319,444 703,737
General 204,587 219,690 216,400 640,677