How Other Towns Manage Resident Parking#

Evidence and precedents relevant to the measures Farnham residents are asking local authorities to investigate.

This page does not argue that Farnham should copy another town’s parking system. Every town has different streets, capacity and parking pressures.

Instead, we have looked at how Surrey County Council, Waverley Borough Council and neighbouring authorities have approached similar problems. The examples show that measures such as changing operating hours, reviewing the use of parking bays, considering displacement and using council car parks as part of residential parking provision are established parking-management tools.

The petition asks that these options are properly investigated for Farnham based on actual demand, capacity and displacement.

This is a living page. It may contain errors and will be continuously updated as new information is shared. If you spot something that needs correcting, please let us know.

On this page#

• 1. Review permit-only operating hours
• 2. Review suitable shared-use bays
• 3. Investigate council car parks as resident overflow
• 4. Make restrictions easier to understand
• 5. Review enforcement
• 6. Consider overall resident capacity across Zones A and B
• How Farnham currently differs
• Wider comparison: Windsor
• What these examples tell us

Read and sign the parking petition

1. Review permit-only operating hours#

What the petition asks: Review the hours during which permit-only restrictions apply, because displacement occurs outside the current operating window.

Parking restrictions only protect residents during the hours in which they operate. Where displacement occurs outside those periods, changing operating hours is an established parking-management option.

Guildford Surrey precedent#

Surrey County Council has previously considered and approved changes to Guildford controlled parking areas involving extended operating periods, including controls operating until 21:00 and across seven days.

This demonstrates that Surrey can alter CPZ operating hours where local parking pressures justify doing so.

Source: Surrey County Council — Guildford On-Street Parking Review

Woking Surrey precedent#

Surrey considered extending Woking Zone 1 controls from 18:00 until 22:00. The supporting report discusses residential displacement, neighbouring roads, town-centre car parks and enforcement.

Sources: Surrey County Council — Woking Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone 1 · Woking Zone 1 Operational Times Report (PDF)

Why it matters for Farnham#

These examples do not establish what the correct operating hours should be in Farnham. They demonstrate that reviewing and changing operating hours is an established Surrey parking-management measure where evidence shows that existing hours are not addressing the parking problem.

2. Review suitable shared-use bays#

What the petition asks: Review suitable shared-use bays where greater resident priority could improve capacity.

Not every shared bay should become resident-only. But where shared-use arrangements are reducing effective resident capacity, reviewing them is a standard part of parking management.

Guildford Surrey precedent#

Surrey’s Guildford parking work considered changes to shared-use arrangements and converting underused pay-and-display capacity to dual use so permit holders could also use it.

Source: Surrey County Council — Guildford On-Street Parking Review

Haslemere Historic precedent#

Surrey’s Haslemere parking reviews demonstrate that parking designations can be changed where actual utilisation indicates that the existing allocation is not achieving the best balance.

The relevant principle is not that Haslemere adopted the same solution requested in Farnham. It is that Surrey already reviews how parking space is actually being used and can change the designation of bays where the evidence supports doing so.

Sources: Waverley Parking Review 2020 — Statement of Reasons (PDF, link removed — original page no longer available) · Waverley Parking Review 2020 — Decision Report (PDF, link removed — original page no longer available)

Why it matters for Farnham#

The petition asks for suitable Farnham bays to be reviewed using the same evidence-led principle: understand how the available road space is being used and determine whether a different balance could provide greater resident capacity without creating unacceptable impacts elsewhere.

3. Investigate council car parks as resident overflow#

What the petition asks: Investigate whether council car parks could serve as overflow for residents when on-street capacity is under pressure.

This is not an entirely new concept for Farnham.

Farnham Current policy#

Waverley Borough Council already offers a Resident Off Peak Permit for qualifying Farnham residents. It currently covers Riverside 3, Upper Hart and Waggon Yard.

• Cost: £200/year
• One permit per household
• No guaranteed space

Sources: Waverley Borough Council — Car Park Permits · Riverside 3 · Upper Hart · Waggon Yard

Godalming Current policy#

Waverley operates the same broad resident off-peak principle across five Godalming car parks: Croft Road, Meadrow, North Street, Queen Street and South Street. The Godalming permit provides access during specified off-peak periods, including evening periods where charging applies.

This establishes that Waverley already accepts the principle that council car parks can form part of residential parking provision.

Source: Waverley Borough Council — Car Park Permits

Woking Surrey precedent#

Surrey’s Woking Zone 1 work is useful because the council explicitly considered displacement into residential areas alongside the availability of town-centre car parks. Surrey has previously considered residential displacement and available town-centre car-park capacity as connected parts of the same parking problem.

Sources: Surrey County Council — Woking Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone 1 · Woking Zone 1 Operational Times Report (PDF)

Why it matters for Farnham#

Farnham already has the beginnings of a resident car-park arrangement. The unanswered question is whether available capacity could support a more integrated overflow arrangement when resident parking within Zones A and B is under pressure.

That is exactly what the petition asks the authorities to investigate.

4. Make restrictions easier to understand#

What the petition asks: Review signage so that parking restrictions are clear to residents, visitors and enforcement officers.

Clear signs and road markings are fundamental to making controlled parking understandable and enforceable. Surrey’s parking-review process explicitly includes implementation of the necessary signs and road markings following approved changes.

Guildford Current information#

Surrey’s current Guildford parking review process demonstrates the standard approach: proposed changes to restrictions include the corresponding signs and road markings needed to make them clear.

Source: Surrey County Council — Guildford Parking Review 2026

Why it matters for Farnham#

The petition asks for existing Farnham signage to be reviewed so residents, visitors and enforcement officers can understand restrictions clearly. This is a basic operational measure rather than a change in the underlying purpose of the parking scheme.

5. Review enforcement#

What the petition asks: Review enforcement to ensure restrictions achieve their intended purpose.

Restrictions only achieve their intended purpose if they can be understood and consistently enforced. Surrey’s parking-review methodology demonstrates the relationship between Traffic Regulation Orders, signs, road markings and subsequent enforcement.

Surrey approach Current information#

Surrey’s current parking reviews set out the process by which restrictions are proposed, consulted on, implemented and then enforced. Enforcement follows from the restrictions in place.

Sources: Surrey County Council — Guildford Parking Review 2026 · Surrey County Council — Woking Town Centre Controlled Parking Zone 1

Why it matters for Farnham#

The petition asks for enforcement to be reviewed. Where restrictions are unclear or inconsistently enforced, they fail to protect the parking provision they were designed to manage.

6. Consider overall resident capacity across Zones A and B#

What the petition asks: Assess parking capacity across the whole zone rather than considering individual streets in isolation.

Parking restrictions do not remove vehicles. Where demand remains, vehicles can move into neighbouring streets or parking areas. Changes in one road can therefore affect another.

Guildford Surrey precedent#

Guildford provides useful Surrey precedent for considering capacity across neighbouring permit areas. Surrey previously considered arrangements allowing Area A permit holders to use Area E as part of measures responding to different levels of parking pressure.

Surrey’s Guildford parking reporting has also included the number of parking spaces, permit-only spaces, shared-use spaces, resident permits issued and permit-to-space ratios. This demonstrates that resident parking pressure can be assessed using actual permit and parking-space data rather than considering individual restrictions in isolation.

Sources: Surrey County Council — Guildford On-Street Parking Review · Guildford Joint Committee — September 2018 (PDF) · Guildford Joint Committee — December 2018 (PDF)

Woking Surrey precedent#

Surrey’s current Woking parking-review methodology explicitly considers whether a proposed restriction could displace a parking problem elsewhere.

Source: Surrey County Council — Woking Parking Review 2025

Haslemere Historic precedent#

Historic Haslemere parking work also considered displacement between neighbouring roads.

Sources: Haslemere — Objection Overview (PDF) · Haslemere — Officer Responses (PDF) · Haslemere — Committee Discussion

Why it matters for Farnham#

This supports the petition’s request for Zones A and B to be considered together when assessing resident parking capacity and displacement.

It does not assume that additional capacity exists. It asks that the available capacity, permits issued, utilisation, displacement and potential alternatives are measured before decisions are made.

How Farnham currently differs#

Farnham town-centre Zone A and station Zone B have specific permit-allocation rules within Surrey’s wider system.

Surrey’s permit arrangements already vary between parking areas according to local circumstances. This reinforces the case for assessing Farnham’s own capacity and parking pressures on their evidence rather than assuming that one approach must apply everywhere.

Sources: Surrey — Parking Permits Allocation, Terms and Conditions · Surrey — Controlled Parking Zones

Wider comparison: Windsor External comparator#

Windsor is included only as an external comparator. Unlike Guildford, Woking, Godalming and Haslemere, it is not evidence of Surrey or Waverley policy.

The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead uses a broader resident-parking framework including zone-based permits, visitor arrangements, care and support permits, and off-street parking considerations. It illustrates how a larger town manages similar competing pressures through a more comprehensive permit system.

Sources: RBWM — Resident Permits · RBWM — Resident Permit Terms and Conditions · RBWM — Permit Types

What these examples tell us#

None of these examples proves that a particular measure should automatically be introduced in Farnham.

What they demonstrate is that the measures residents are asking the authorities to investigate are established parking-management approaches.

Surrey has previously changed operating hours, reviewed the allocation of parking bays, considered displacement between neighbouring areas and analysed parking capacity across controlled zones.

Waverley already allows qualifying residents to use council car parks in both Farnham and Godalming.

The question is therefore not whether these approaches exist. The question is which combination, if any, is appropriate for Farnham based on actual parking demand, available capacity and displacement.

That is why the petition asks for these measures to be properly investigated as part of the next parking review.

Read and sign the petition