Guide to security

Personal Security at Public Transport Interchange A Good Practice Guide to Security Aspects of Design & Operation Personal Security at Public Transport Interchange 1 2 3 4 4.1 4.2 5 6 Introduction Personal Security Target Standards (Centro) Walking Around the Interchange (Centro) Car Parks Case Studies Nexus Manchester NCP Lighting (GMPTE) Advice on Essential Planning for Inauguration of CCTV Systems (METRO) ?-? ?-? ?-? Contents ?-? ?-? ?-? ?-? 7 Congestion/Managing Passenger Flow Case Studies 7.1 SPT Subway 7 .2 Manchester Piccadilly ?-? ?-? This guide has been produced by PTEGs Safety & Security Task Group. It fulfils the remit in the PTEG Business Plan to produce a best practice guide to security at interchanges. Purpose and Audience The purpose of this guide is to document and share good practice in building security for passengers and staff into the design and operation of public transport interchanges. The guide is not intended as a comprehensive manual covering every aspect of security at interchanges. Instead, it draws together practical examples of the experience of individual PTEs. It is hoped that the guide will prove useful to staff working for PTEs who are involved in the design and operation of interchanges. However, the contents should also prove useful to a wider audience of planners, designers and operators of interchange facilities outside PTEs. The opportunity has been taken to incorporate, where appropriate, good practice advice and guidance from other bodies as adopted by PTEs. Where possible, this has been acknowledged. It is hoped that any unintentional plagiarism of good practice from other sources will be accepted as a compliment. 1. Introduction The seven Passenger Transport Executives come together to form PTEG. PTEG aims to influence the national public transport agenda by raising the profile of public transport with the government and others by further contributing to the national debate on how best to improve services. PTEG Aims • To influence and shape government policy in relation to transport. • Obtain increased funding to improve the public transport services. • Work with bus operators at a national level to improve the reliability, punctuality and quality of bus services. There are six Passenger Transport Executives (PTEs) in England, covering the metropolitan areas of Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Tyne & Wear, South Yorkshire, West Midlands and West Yorkshire. There is one PTE in Scotland, covering the Strathclyde area. The six English PTEs serve a population of 11.1m (22.5% of England’s population). Strathclyde PTE serves a population of 2.2 million (42% of Scotland’s population). Background Virtually every public journey includes time spent walking to and from and waiting to board a vehicle. This element can be a significant proportion of the total journey time and is generally a much larger proportion than for a journey made by private car. Research shows that the walking and waiting time within any journey gives rise to greater fears about personal security than the element of time spent in the vehicle. It is therefore very important that these concerns are addressed if greater use of public transport is to be encouraged and in particular if modal transfer from car trips, with their inherently greater opportunity for door to door in vehicle travel, is to be achieved. While waiting and an element of walking will sometimes take place on the premises of public transport providers, it is important to address every part of the journey including, for example, lighting on pedestrian routes to interchange points and at bus stops. It also has to be recognised that much of our public transport infrastructure was designed and built during times when the issues about public security were very different. Good practice in design and operation of personal security features therefore has to relate to incorporation within existing facilities as much as it does to designing new facilities. Contents Chapter 2 provides guidance and checklists for the design of various features of small, medium and large interchange points and includes checklists relating to design, operation and information. Chapter 3 considers the wider environment around interchange points and incorporates further checklists on walking routes. Chapter 4 looks at security issues associated with park and ride based on case studies in Tyne & Wear and Greater Manchester. Chapter 5 considers the contribution of adequate lighting standards to personal security. Chapter 6 provides advice on planning and installation of CCTV. Finally, Chapter 7 considers issues of congestion management based on case studies in Strathclyde and Greater Manchester. 2. Personal Security Target Standards Crime and fear of crime is a known deterrent to the use of public transport. Through research we know that passengers cite the waiting for public transport as the most likely time for them to feel unease rather than the actual on board element of the ‘whole journey’. Uncertainty about when the next service is due, how much it costs and where the next bus or train goes from can act as a deterrent and cause a feeling of vulnerability. In addition to the following general guidance for design and maintenance, we have included elements of the then Department of Transport, Environment and Regions checklist for providing security for the waiting element of the journey. (DETR 2000 - women and public transport checklist). Small Interchanges • Roving staff presence • All graffiti removed in 24 hours • Help button or a telephone help point (including button at level easily accessible by wheelchair users) • ‘Secure by Design’ standards met • Staff presence • All graffiti removed in 24 hours • Help button or a telephone help point ( including button at level easily accessible by wheelchair users) • Staff presence / CCTV • ‘Secure by Design’ standards met Large Interchanges • Staff presence • All graffiti removed in 24 hours • Help button or a telephone help point ( including button at level easily accessible by wheelchair users) • Staff presence / CCTV • ‘Secure by Design’ standards met Medium Interchanges Information Yes/No Any public address systems are in full working order, and are regularly used by trained staff to inform passengers about services. Audible and visual information systems are provided. Information about delays is given as soon as possible. Information on fares is easily available. Information on fares is available in alternative formats to meet the needs of those with disabilities. Information on routes is easily available. Information on routes is available in alternative formats to meet the needs of those with disabilities. Information is displayed in vandal proof form. Information displayed conforms to DPTAC guidance (legibility of timetables.) Signage includes information about toilets and telephones and uses international symbols. Signage includes specific information on disabled persons’ toilets in the vicinity. Where there are safe and accessible pedestrian routes from the interchange these are clearly signed. Entrances and exits accessible by those with disabilities are clearly signed. There is a local map and directional signs at all interchanges. Design An access consultant has been involved at the design stage to ensure any potential problems can be addressed before bricks and mortar are in place. There are adequate shelters and seating at the interchange. Through informal surveillance passengers can expect to both see and be seen by passers by, road users etc. and all parts of the bus station will be well lit to encourage a feeling of security and to assist people with visual impairments. Artificial illumination may be necessary in some parts of some bus stations in daylight hours. Lifts are provided where vertical circulation routes are not accessible. Unstaffed interchanges or remote areas of large interchanges have accessible, clearly signed help points or other emergency communication facilities for passengers. Doors are not too heavy to open. There is a working and accessible public telephone nearby. Public telephones and help points are at a suitable level to allow access for wheelchair users. Tunnels are well lit and have mirrors at blind corners. The station / interchange has visible and publicised CCTV in working order covering all public areas. Yes/No Operation Control and management of the Bus Station will ensure that the environment is clean and well maintained, affording reassurance to passengers that the area is well managed. Bus station inspections should be made (weekly?) to ensure that any potential threat to personal safety is identified and resolved. Toilets are checked and cleaned frequently to deter misuse and maintain cleanliness and should not be isolated. Checking and cleaning of toilets includes disabled persons’ toilets which are often isolated from other areas and can easily be forgotten. Waiting areas are checked regularly to deter misuse and check for litter and damage. Crime Prevention Surveys are conducted periodically at all existing bus stations by an appropriate Police Architectural Liaison Officer in order to monitor and review design features affecting personal security and inform any plans for improvement. The landscape management programme will ensure that landscape features do not become targets for vandalism or provide cover for potential criminal activity. Yes/No The above checklists follow the guidance provided by the DETR Women and Transport Checklist Bibliography & Acknowledgements Inclusive Mobility A Guide to Best Practice on Access to Pedestrian and Public Transport Infrastructure, DFT, November 2002. Available from www.mobilityunit.dft.gov.uk/inclusive/index.htm Guidance on the Use of Tactile Paving Surfaces, DETR, 1998 BS 8300 - Design of buildings and their approaches to meet the needs of disabled people Code of Practice, British Standards Institute, October 2001 Legibility of Timetable Books and Leaflets A Code of Good Practice, DPTAC February 1996 3. Walking Around the Interchange Research has shown that across the U.K. the portions of any journey on public transport that give rise to the worst fears for personal safety are walking to and from boarding and alighting points and waiting at those points. Changing between different transport types, for example bus to rail, car to bus or bus to bus is carried out at interchanges. The definition of “interchange” can encompass both those which are formally constructed facilities and the informal locations where passengers habitually transfer between modes but where no direct facility is built. Identifying the informal as well as the formal interchange points is important in promoting a safe and secure public transport network that contributes towards the reduction in car use. An interchange is also a place to enter the public transport network as well as transfer between modes. In respect of both formal and informal interchange points the following checklist of the good practice guide is intended to help to avoid an interchange becoming an “island” haven, safe and secure, but which no-one can access other than by entering on public transport and leaving the same way. Access for those with disabilities is acknowledged as a specific requirement. Measures taken to ensure that this is possible will also help others, such as older people, parents with prams etc. The checklist covers the environment in which an interchange exists, how it is accessed and how it can be integrated in to that environment. The wider environment It can often be the case that interchanges evolve rather than are located as part of an objective assessment of the location. Long-established travel patterns can rightly result in the interchange following the passengers, irrespective of the location, with informal interchanges being formalised over time. There is a strong case, and a statutory requirement in the case of local authorities in England and Wales, to consider prevention of crime in the wider journey chain that leads passengers to the interchange. The establishment of partnerships with businesses and residents in that journey chain leading to an interchange, possibly through the statutory Crime & Disorder Reduction Partnerships, is an essential first step in promoting personal security for passengers. Where interchange points are built in partnership with local authorities, they should be considering crime and disorder reduction as part of their statutory responsibilities in any event. The imposition of crime reduction measures on developers is arguably a part of the requirements of planning regulations. PTEs may find that partnerships with private companies will be subject to crime reduction requirements imposed by local authorities. Walking Routes Is the location in an area of human activity, as busy places can often be self-policing? Are the principal walking routes to the interchange known? Do potential passengers use the routes that are built for them rather than informal short-cuts in places that could be dangerous e.g. alleyways or past unused garages that are deserted at night? Does the pattern of human activity in the vicinity change after rush-hour so creating an `island` once again? Do potential points of conflict exist in the locality– clubs and pubs, off-licenses where young people congregate? Are there access routes through residential streets, where overhanging foliage could obscure lighting? Are access routes free from overhanging vegetation or other obstructions so that they are easily navigable by visually impaired pedestrians ? Is the interchange built adjacent to a shopping centre that closes at night, forcing passengers to skirt the centre through quiet/dark/ obstructed routes at night-time? Does the exterior of your interchange create dark areas or recesses in which potential attackers could hide? Have the planners visited the immediate vicinity after dark to see how the interchange appears to users other than in daylight? Is the lighting on the main approach routes adequate – not necessarily restricted to bright lights, remembering that too harsh a light can create frightening shadows or contrasts that make it difficult to see who else is around ? The use of yellow lights can also unnerve pedestrians with their eerie glow and poor illumination of footways. Lighting should conform to the good practice guidance issued in Inclusive Mobility. If pathways in the immediate vicinity have high level lighting columns, are those columns creating shadows by their height and should a lower height be preferable to illuminate the pathway and adjacent land? Are the access routes designed to be pleasing and calming in every sense? Are they clean and obviously looked after and not smelling of urine, strewn with broken bottles or used as an unofficial rubbish tip? If shrubs have been planted along the walking access routes and entrance pathways, are they regularly maintained and trimmed/ thinned out to avoid concealing an attacker ? Unobstructed sight lines are very important. (Inclusive Mobility advises on the height of planters and other street furniture to ensure that these can be identified by the visually impaired). Do the access routes “trap” pedestrians in walkways where there is no chance to avoid potential trouble? Yes/No CCTV Coverage Walking Routes Is there existing CCTV coverage along the actual walking access routes? Are the systems local authority operated, where active coverage of the interchange access routes could be a matter of negotiation, or are they privately owned but could be approached and asked to provide cover? Will a contribution be needed towards the revenue costs of this coverage? Can the existence of approach route CCTV coverage be used as a selling point for the interchange? Would it be more effective to establish a partnership with the CCTV operator that covers the local environment, allowing it to control the cameras on and around the interchange for a revenue consideration? Will any CCTV system installed at the interchange be actively monitored, particularly if it covers any access routes? Are there arrangements and protocols in place to ensure an appropriate response to problems that the CCTV picks up on the approaches to the interchange – or do passengers have to run a gauntlet unaided to reach the safety of your interchange? Can the protocols work in reverse, with interchange or security staff able to assist passengers in the immediate vicinity of the property and able to respond, within their training, to happenings identified by CCTV operators controlling surrounding systems? Yes/No Bibliography & Acknowledgements DETR Personal Security Issues in Pedestrian Journeys May 1999 The Institute of Logistics & Transport Passenger Interchanges, A practical way of achieving passenger transport integration April 2000 Steer, Davies Gleave for Merseytravel Public Transport Interchange: A Best Practice Guide March 2000 DETR/ILT & “Platform” report of the proceedings of the Rethinking Stations & Interchanges event – April 2nd 2001 4. Car Parks 4.1 Tyne & Wear Metro As a PTE and a transport operator Nexus is concerned to maximise the usage of park and ride facilities. These can vary from small twenty space station car parks to 400-500 space sites at major interchanges. All have security needs concerning auto crime, the safety of the customer using the car park and the walking route linking it with the station. The Department for Transport’s Disability Policy Branch has also emphasised the need to consider the needs of those with disabilities when designing and operating park and ride facilities. These include enforcement of disabled persons’ parking bays, provision of access for disabled people to and from car parks and ensuring ticket machines conform to the standards given in BS 8300. Examples can be found on many systems of potentially good Park and Ride sites, which are not used or are under used and suffer from poor public perception about security. The following is a brief overview of two examples on the Tyne and Wear Metro of efforts to improve security and usage at two park and ride sites. It is followed by a short glossary of some current issues and a bibliography. Kingston Park Situated to the north of Newcastle on the Airport line approximately 5 miles from Newcastle City Centre and between two major roads,A1 and A696, the 100 space car park is opposite one platform of the Metro station (the other platform being staggered on the opposite side of level crossing). Its usage prior to 1998 was virtually nil. Auto crime was high and it was used at times by joyriders and to dump stolen cars. Improvements ✔ In 1997/98 a decision was taken to upgrade the car park and develop it as a Park and Ride site for commuters and shoppers approaching Newcastle from the North and West. ✔ The car park was and is within the ownership of Newcastle City Council and an agreement was entered into under which the City Council would carry out the improvements and subsequently manage the facility; Nexus would pay for some of the upgrade and for management, staffing and maintenance. ✔ Lighting was installed, giving high lux-levels at ground level (Metro now aims at 50 lux average at ground level in car parks). ✔ Staffing was introduced 0700 1900 hrs Monday-Saturday and a secure cabin was provided for the site officer, who is employed by a private contractor. ✔ CCTV which is locally monitored and recorded, was installed. ✔ Landscaping screening the car park from the opposite platform was removed allowing a clear sight line between those locations and also the connecting footpath. ✔ Signage was erected from nearest main roads. ✔ The car park was free but a charge is being introduced. It is covered by a Parking Places Order imposed by the City Council, covering charges, vehicle size, overnight parking etc. This also allows for enforcement of the regulations and for quick removal of abandoned vehicles. Outputs & Outcomes ✔ Usership is up. It is now virtually full at 1200 hrs daily. There has been a measurable increase in revenue. Supermarket car parks nearby are adequate for their purposes and there is no apparent “misuse” i.e. all customers do Park and Ride. ✔ Auto crime remains low with 0 incidents April 2000 – February 2001. ✔ There are unplanned benefits. The site officers are regular and have become popular with customers. The cabin now has timetables and other travel information and the officers are happy to do leaflet distribution e.g. concerning travelcard promotions. Heworth Situated South of the Tyne and East of Gateshead, Heworth is a large interchange enabling transfer between bus, heavy rail, Metro and car. It has been recently upgraded under a Switch project, which has enabled the extension of the car park to over 400 spaces. The larger, long stay car park is physically separated from the rest of the interchange by a ramp and pedestrian subway under a busy dual carriageway. The smaller short stay is close to the bus and Metro stations. The car park is well used but not filled to maximum capacity – there is scope to accommodate 50 extra vehicles a day. It is staffed 0700 2000 hrs Monday - Saturday and there was until recently one CCTV camera, which was locally recorded. A charge for parking is made and a combined ticket is available which gives a discount on a day’s parking plus a return to the city centre on Metro. Despite the above measures, the autocrime figures have given cause for concern with incidents running at 3 to 4 per month compared with 3 to 4 per annum or less at comparable, part-staffed park and rides elsewhere on the system. ✔ A successful bid for extra CCTV was made in 99/00 under round 1 of the Home Office CCTV initiative as a partnership bid by Nexus and Gateshead MBC. Nexus is a partner in the Gateshead Community Safety Partnership (and in the other Local Authority Partnerships, through which Metro passes). The justification for the bid was the need to reduce both autocrime and disorder in the interchange. ✔ New cameras now cover car parks, pedestrian subway, all surface areas including bus station, platforms used by train operating companies (TOCs) and approaches to the interchange. ✔ The cameras are monitored by a nearby Local Authority monitoring room. Protocols are being developed for various parties to use the system (e.g. Metro, Northumbria Police, British Transport Police (BTP)) and for an interface between the monitoring room and Metro Control which already views the cameras on Metro platforms and concourses. Cameras are pan tilt and zoom, to police specification and can be accessed by the police camera room. CCTV Improvements ✔ Guidelines for bidding are available on the Home Office Website but essential ingredients are crime figures or meticulous recording of incidents, a welldetailed operational requirement, public consultation and a preparedness to pick up the running costs. The latter can be burdensome for one party and at Heworth a partnership approach was adopted, costs being shared with the Local Authority, which manages the car park under an agreement with Nexus, and other stakeholders within the interchange – Nexus Bus Services, Metro and a TOC. ✔ Help Points are being installed in the car parks, which link to the monitoring room. Other measures Most crime occurs in the long stay car park and analysis showed that the majority of incidents take place at an end of the car park where a footpath allows easy access through a wooded area into a housing estate. (Theft from vehicles is more common than theft of a vehicle). A metal palisade fence was installed to block off this route, the footpath being diverted outside it. Advice was taken from the Police Architectural Liaison Officer regarding secure car park status under the ACPO scheme. Lighting, fencing etc. were found to conform to the requirements quite well. The main shortfall was found to be lack of adequate access and egress controls (or CCTV giving facial recognition of those entering or leaving) and the need to draw up a customer charter. These are now being addressed. Update Auto Crime has fallen significantly since the commissioning of the cameras and unused spaces are being taken up. Auto crime April 1999 to March 2000 (before cameras) 43 incidents. (7 theft of vehicle, 23 theft from vehicle, 13 damage to vehicle total 43) Auto Crime April 2001 to March 2002 (after installation) 10 incidents. (1 theft of vehicle, 6 theft from vehicle, 3 damage to vehicle total 10) Auto Crime April 2002 to March 2003 zero theft of vehicle or from vehicle. GLOSSARY Abandoned Vehicles See “ARSON”. Acpo Association of Chief Police Officers. Launched the Secure Car Parks scheme in 1992, see below under “Secure Car Parks Award Scheme”. Arson Removal and disposal of fire damaged and/or abandoned vehicles can be a problem if the car park is not highway or covered by a Parking Places Order. Reputable dealers can refuse to destroy a vehicle without police authority even if it has no registered keeper. Crime and Disorder Partnerships (formed under 1998 Act) often have Auto Crime sub-groups. Members can form partnership solutions to tackle arson and nuisance vehicles; one is being drawn up in North Tyneside – contact D. Hogg, Tyne and Wear Metro for information. Keeping statistics and actual locations of incidents within the car park is beneficial. Three basic categories are normally used: • • • Theft (of a vehicle) Theft from UMV (unattended motor vehicle) Home Office toolkit now available – “Vehicle Crime”. Charging Has been introduced at three Tyne and Wear Metro Park and Rides to finance security improvement e.g. lighting. Initial customer resistance has been mollified by the introduction of a free parking permit for travel cardholders and a discounted combined travel and park ticket. Machines are used which give a double ticket issue – one for windscreen display, one for travel. Fencing 1.8m metal palisade is a standard for security fencing. However, on some types the rivets used to secure the palings to the rail can be worked loose and the palings themselves can be spread. Nexus has developed the following specification for palisade fencing, which has been found to be robust enough to withstand most vandal attacks :1.8m high “Ultrafence 200” palisade fence, 102x44mm rjs posts set 600m below ground at max 2.75m centres and surrounded with concrete to bases complete with 2 no. Ultraguard 50 rails, securely fixed to posts with fishplate joints and M12 bolts with snap off nuts, infilled with “Ultrapale 200” vertical pales, incorporating rivet head protection, triple spiked at tops, securely fixed to each horizontal with 8mm diameter Ultra rivets and collars at approximately 154mm centres. Lighting High standard aids security. As with secure by design principles, “white” high-pressure sodium is preferable. Tyne and Wear Metro aims at 50 lux at ground level (av) in car parks. Management agreements with local authorities Advantages include enforcement of penalties, “one stop shop” for staffing, cleaning, maintenance, winter gritting etc. Disadvantages could include lack of flexibility, direct control etc. Further information available from: D. Hogg, Nexus (operators of the Tyne and Wear Metro) Tel: 0191 203 3381 Fax: 0191 203 3309 E-mail: d.hogg@nexus.org.uk Damage to UMV (usually in course of attempted break in). Misuse Park and Ride car parks can be misused by • Commercial or large vehicles. Headroom restrictions (physical) at entry and regulations imposed by a Parking Places Order can assist. Those parking but not riding, if the site is close to an office development for example. Nexus has found that charging as described above has reduced complaints about this problem at Four Lane Ends Park and Ride. Those just parking pay full cost, those travelling as well get a discount. Penalties For non-payment of charges and infringement of regulations. • A management agreement with a Local Authority enables the imposition of a Parking Places Order (PPO) and the LA can then carry out enforcement, e.g. by using wardens and instigating court proceedings where necessary. Some security firms will carry out enforcement as well as static guarding/patrolling. Decriminalisation and civil methods of enforcing penalties are becoming more common. If you set up your own system of enforcement you will need an administrative structure and may need to create or relate to an appeals system. There is a National Parking Adjudication Service – chief adjudicator for England and Wales is Caroline Sheppard. • • • Partnership Agreements An example has been described above • Nexus has found that membership of Crime and Disorder partnerships 1998 Crime and Disorder Act (England & Wales) though time consuming, is beneficial. Auto crime sub groups formed under such partnerships can work out joint solutions to vehicle arson. Access to vehicle watch schemes and to crime prevention literature to be targeted at motorists, as well as identifying hot spots, are other benefits. • Secured Car Parks award Scheme Initiated by ACPO and administered by the AA this scheme measures a car park’s compliance with a rigorous list of requirements. If it complies an award is made. There is now only one award; formerly there were ‘Gold’ and ‘Silver’ categories and a slightly less rigorous “Management Scheme”. Information is obtainable from: The Administrator Secured Car Parks Automobile Association 3rd Floor Norfolk House Priestly Road Basingstoke RG24 9NY Tel. 01256 492 733 Fax. 01256 494 627 However, a Police Architectural Liaison Officer can provide advice from a site visit. Footnote Nexus is currently (Dec 2002) building a 400 space multi storey car at Four Lane Ends Interchange. Architects have been briefed to achieve Secure Car Parks status from the outset. Bibliography and Acknowledgements A booklet on the Secured Car Parks Award Scheme is available from AA (see above). It is a useful secure by design guide in its own right. Home Office Toolkit “Vehicle Crime” Bi-monthly Magazine “Parking Review”, Landor Publishing, Quadrant House, 250 Kennington Lane, London, SE11 5RD, fax. 0207 582 6626 Inclusive Mobility -A Guide to Best Practice on Access to Pedestrian and Public Transport Infrastructure, DFT, November 2002. Available from www.mobility-unit.dft.gov.uk/inclusive/index.htm BS 8300 - Design of buildings and their approaches to meet the needs of disabled people Code of Practice, British Standards Institute, October 2001 4.2 Manchester CCTV Control Centre For some time now, NCP car parks had problems with many of their car parking facilities located within Manchester City Centre. Many were run down, dirty and particularly unpleasing to the eye. NCP felt that this discouraged car users using the facilities as they had concerns for their personal security. NCP did not have the necessary capital needed to bring all the car parks in Manchester City Centre up to a good standard of security. NCP began talks with Manchester City Council, who at the time were looking to expand their CCTV control room and relocate as their current site had become too small. The proposed aim between the two organisations was to receive funding for a joint venture for a 24 hour CCTV Control Room with the following benefits:NCP • Improved car park quality, security and accessibility • Economies of scale • Common pricing and ticketing strategies consistent with Council policies • A smart card platform for rover cards, loyalty cards and through ticketing • Publicity campaigns that support informed choice of transport modes for residents and visitors Manchester City Council • Synergy in Transport and Community Safety Initiatives in support of the City Centre Management Strategy • Regeneration of existing car parks • Assisting the City Council in demonstrating Best Value in its Parking and Transport operations. This partnership led to the creation of NCP Manchester Limited and was able to obtain private sector funding for the delivery of public services. The new state of the art CCTV Control Centre is designed to help combat crime and anti social behaviour in Manchester City Centre. The £3m Centre, the most advanced in the U.K., is funded by Manchester City Council and NCP Manchester Limited and is fully supported by the Greater Manchester Police authority. The Centre has been successfully piloted since February 2002 and provides coverage of the City Centre and its car parks using over 400 cameras. The new Control Room is the nucleus of surveillance of Manchester City Centre and surrounding areas and the management of off-street parking within the City Centre. 5. Lighting Good lighting is generally believed to improve security and perceptions of security. Home Office Research Study 251, Effects of Improved Street Lighting on Crime: A Systematic Review D. Farrington and B.Webb 2002, concluded that improved lighting should form an element of crime reduction programmes. Its introduction leads to improved perceptions of public safety, greater use of public areas and, where well targeted, provides a cost effective means of reducing crime. Nexus pursues a policy of achieving good lighting in the travelling, waiting and pedestrian environment because it enhances personal security, safety and the ability to see signs and instructions. Bright, well-lit premises will encourage the use of public transport. The following list of desired lux levels and uniformity ratio have been determined by a combination of the above, industry guidance and research, combined with regular surveys of passenger requirements. Larger stations Lux level at floor level Ticket halls 350 Platform canopy 150 Escalators 750 Lifts 500 Smaller stations Ticket area 350 Platform canopy 100 Open platform 50 Footpaths & carparks 50 All quoted lux levels are “average” with a uniformity ratio of 0.6 6 Advice on Essential Planning for Inauguration of CCTV systems The installation of CCTV systems can provide a number of problems, especially if this is an inaugural installation. Below is a brief guide to best practice, enabling the first time users to maximise the potential of such systems. Firstly, Establish which system is required. There is a large variety of systems available, from a simple ‘stand alone’ camera and monitor, to a control centre operating an infinite number of cameras and digital technology. The best advice is, that you generally get what you pay for. For the purpose of this document, the advice given is for a complete system, as operated by a Control Centre. This system is currently used by the West Yorkshire Metro on Bus Stations, park and ride areas and unmanned bus site facilities. • The Data Protection Act 1998 and Principles must be adhered to. A Code of Practice is available at, http://wood.ccta.gov.uk/dpr/dpd The full act may be obtained at HMSO, or from the, Information Commissioner, Wycliffe House, Water Lane Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF • The first essential is that you identify and assess the appropriateness of, and reasons for using CCTV or similar surveillance equipment. This process should be documented. • The Commissioner must be notified of those reasons. • Recognised training of operatives and managers to SITO standard is therefore essential. Operator procedures should also be written. A supervisor/ manager should be appointed to the Control Centre. • Documentation / audit procedures must be an integral part of the operation. • It is imperative therefore that specialist consultants are appointed. A number of these may be found in Trade Magazines or the Internet. • Picture quality may be seriously affected by poor lighting. Technical advice on the appropriate ‘Lux’ level must be sought. • Operate a mix of cameras for best coverage. Fixed cameras should be installed at entrances, exits and other relevant areas i.e. cash machines, travel centre shops, and other vulnerable areas such as luggage lockers, stairs and telephones. • PTZ (Pan Tilt & Zoom) cameras may be used on concourses and other areas. It is also important to have cameras on manoeuvring areas and any area where there may be passenger/vehicular conflict, i.e. crossings. • In accordance with the Data Protection Act, it is important that cameras are fixed so as to avoid intrusion onto areas excluded by the act, i.e. private gardens. windows etc. The appropriate signage must be installed at sites. • It is likely that cameras may provide coverage to tenanted outlets. Consider this in any tenant agreements. Tenants should contribute to costs. • You may wish to provide monitors at sites, for customer care officers or supervisors. It is essential that if this is the case, control of the cameras should always remain with the Control Centre. It is also essential that a good communication system between site and Control Centre exists. • It is of additional benefit if your system is linked with other similar systems. METRO have recently led a partnership bid to the Home Office for funding to achieve this with the five Local Authorities and the West Yorkshire Police. The aim is to enhance communications and CCTV coverage with other. The Partnership approach should considerably improve public safety and crime reduction strategies. It would also allow ‘mutual’ or ‘exchange’ viewing’ of incidents and information. • Consider joining Town and City Centre ‘Shopwatch’ schemes, at each area site. Most have invested in radios linked thereto. This allows forewarning of events which could have a direct effect upon passenger facilities, i.e. evacuations, ongoing crimes etc. It also allows for direct communications with other agencies, i.e. police, adjacent shopping centres etc. • WYPTE have also joined a CCTV User Group, established within the County. This allows for regular meetings of similar organisations, to establish problematic areas for attention, utilise best practice and further the partnership approach in the spirit of the Data Protection, and Crime and Disorder Acts. • Consider Membership of National User Groups, i.e. the Local Government group, TAG at martin.lazell@rbk.kingston.gov.uk Or join an On Line CCTV User group for sharing problems, seeking advice, best practice etc. i.e. CCTVusergroup@Yahoogroups.com) If you have a query, someone will have dealt with that problem, have the answer, or know someone who has. • See also BS 7958:1999 (CCTV Management and operation Code of Practice) issued by British Standard Institution, 389 Chiswick High Road London W4 4AL This advice list is not definitive. Closed Circuit Television, the Data Protection Act and Human Rights legislation is fairly new and much remains to be tested in Law. The best advice is to: • • • • • • Seek advice/Share experiences Document procedures Comply with legislation Install Audit procedures Train Managers and Operators Adhere to Codes of Practice 7 Congestion/ Managing the Flow of Passengers 7. 1 Congestion Management SPT Subway Congestion management is vital to ensure the safety and security of passengers using any form of mass transit. Congestion can be defined as a situation which if allowed to continue or escalate can lead to discomfort or distress, falls on stairs or escalators, fall on or from platforms, panic and/or public disorder and ultimately, crushing and/or asphyxiation. The SPT Subway in Glasgow transports almost 15m passengers per year and is conscious of the need to ensure that the passenger flow is adequately managed on a relatively small system which has reached its peak capacity. Small trains and island platforms provide a particular challenge as does the customer expectation that trains will arrive every 4 minutes with a maximum journey time of 12 minutes. Management of passenger flow is a particular issue for peak commuter traffic and when special events or football are scheduled. Risk assessments, at the design and operational phase, and congestion plans are an integral part of congestion management. These take into account passenger numbers and passenger flows using data from the ticketing system. A central signalling and traction control room, a recently enhanced CCTV system, the gated ticketed system, trained staff and policing for special events are the main means of detecting and controlling congestion. Although SPT is currently considering the provision of a screen on the island platform at Buchanan Street Station, means of managing the flow of passengers should ideally be first considered at the design stage. The SPT has been given the opportunity to do this at Partick bus, rail and subway interchange which is being rebuilt in 2003. Partick is one of the busier stations handling on average 4,000 passengers per day. It also experiences intensive use in the 30 minutes before kick –off time when matches are scheduled at Ibrox. Strathclyde Police and Strathclyde Fire Brigade have been given the opportunity to comment on the design. The opportunity has also been taken to look at good practice on other systems regarding management of the passenger flow, in particular dynamic signage. It is important to consider abnormal and normal passenger flows and circulation areas on concourses, escalators and platforms and position any automatic ticket gates accordingly. Dynamic signage to direct passengers is also an important consideration. The trick to congestion management on underground railways is to control and limit access to the platform areas and trains, preferably by keeping intending passengers on the concourse area until it is safe to travel, or for special events, clear of the station premises. To minimise passenger frustration, provision of an enhanced and efficient train service is required as are sufficient regulators and a Police presence for special events. Interchanges, such as Partick and Buchanan Street/Queen Street, where large numbers of passengers can join the system in a very short time from heavy rail services, present a particular challenge The HSE has recently drafted Railway Safety Principles and Guidance on Automatic Ticket Gate Lines. These are primarily designed to give guidance on the risks of overcrowding associated with gate lines. The draft covers location and surroundings; normal flow capability; abnormal passenger flows; failure of power to the gates; emergencies and communication. This document supplements the HSE’s existing Railway Principles and Guidance requiring stations to provide for the free and safe movement of people; to allow for safe evacuation in an emergency and to have control measures commensurate with the fire risk and evacuation arrangements. Another useful HSE guidance document is Managing Crowds Safely. Provision of dynamic information is crucial to congestion management, particularly at times of service disruption and for special events. This has been demonstrated through good practice shared by members of the NOVA benchmarking group which comprises small to medium size metros throughout the World including SPT and Nexus. Nexus is also a member of the European Switch project which aims to reduce passenger perceived penalties of modal interchange and has been considering the issue of information as part of its remit. 7 .2 Congestion Management Piccadilly Station, Manchester Piccadilly railway station provides one of the main access points into Manchester from all over the country. The station offers links onto the metro system, bus services, and taxi rank. It has increased parking facilities and is also within walking distance of the city centre. Manchester Piccadilly received its Secure Station Accreditation in 1999 and during a survey in 2000, boasted that over 80% of its 9.416m annual passengers either feel safe or very safe. During recent years, Piccadilly has undergone a massive redevelopment to improve its facilities and quality of service to the travelling public. Each stage of the development had a duty to passenger safety and security and allowed a proactive approach to congestion management. Congestion occurs due to a variety of reasons including:• Too many passengers for the station to comfortably accommodate • Bunching of passengers in an apparently safe environment rather than venturing off alone to the correct platform/destination. • Congregating around notice stands trying to find relevant information • Looking for exits/toilets/correct platforms etc. • Conflicting passenger flows • Service disruptions (more trains arriving in a shorter period of time than would be expected.) • Commuter periods • Special events (football matches, Commonwealth Games). Most of these issues are addressed in general design implementation. For example, maintaining a consistent, secure atmosphere throughout the station, prevents “bunching.” Clear signage allows constant passenger flow during commuter hours etc. Such relevant design issues include:• Uniform lighting which doesn’t allow for dark patches or shadows. • Decoration in light colours • Clear unobstructed views and comfortable waiting areas • Informal surveillance by retail outlet staff • Electronic “real time” departure information which can be viewed in satellite lounges and on subsidiary information boards. • Clean signage in recommended white text on blue ground. • Plans of station areas during development phase • Large ticket and information desks and quick issue ticket machines • A digitally controlled p.a. system and regular, accurate announcements from a control centre. Acknowledgements HSE 27th October 2000 Draft Railway Safety Principles & Guidance Automatic Ticket Gate Lines Managing Crowds Safety HSE HS(G)154 Code of Practice for barriers in and about buildings BS6180 Access for the disabled to buildings BS5810:1979 Means of escape for disabled people BS5588 Part 8:1988 Meeting the Needs of Disabled People Officer of the Rail Regulator Fire Safety: an employers’ guide Guide to the approval of railway works, plant and equipment Railway safety principles and guidance Nova Dynamic Information Study: (restricted to NOVA group members only) The PTEG Safety & Security Task Group comprises Chair, David McNulty, GMTPE david.mcnulty@gmpte.gov.uk Mick Watson, METRO mick.watson@wypte.gov.uk Sheelagh Whittaker, Centro sheelaghwhittaker@centro.org.uk David Hogg, Nexus david.hogg@nexus.org.uk Liz Parkes, SPT liz.parkes@spt.co.uk Pam Horner, SYPTE pamh@sypte.co.uk Billy Bradshaw, Merseytravel billy.bradshaw@merseytravel.gov.uk Tony Antoniou, Transport for London TonyAntoniou@tfl.gov.uk Mentor to the Group: Douglas Ferguson, SPT douglas.ferguson@spt.co.uk Secretary to the Group: Brian Rimmer, Merseytravel brian.rimmer@merseytravel.gov.uk Acknowledgements to SPT and Centro for production of this publication. Event Planning Packages are produced for major football matches. Emergency plans are in place covering congestion arrangements and evacuation of large numbers. Through effective crowd management, it is possible to evacuate the station in a controlled manner in 5 minutes. Data is collected via passenger surveys and counts. Research has covered passenger growth assumptions, pedestrian route modelling using the Fruin Level of Congestion Scale (A = Free circulation F= Circulation reduced to shuffling), traffic impact assessments and escalator assessments. Bibliography &