Bristol workplace parking levy proposal — council OBC, Bristol 2026

Key Points

• Bristol City Council has developed an Outline Business Case (OBC) for a workplace parking levy (WPL) and plans a public consultation in autumn 2026.
• The WPL would require employers to licence liable workplace parking spaces and could raise several million pounds per year, ring‑fenced for transport investment.
• Charges modelled range from £600 to £1,250 per space per year in central areas, with lower rates in outer areas; employer thresholds tested include 11+, 5+ and 3+ spaces.
• Boundary options under consideration are city centre/Clean Air Zone (CAZ), an expanded city‑centre outer zone, and a city‑wide levy; Avonmouth is modelled separately.
• Exemptions and discounts (disabled parking, emergency services, customer/visitor parking, schools, shift workers) are proposed to protect vulnerable groups and essential services.
• Implementation timeline in the OBC sets Outline Business Case (2025–26), public consultation and Full Business Case (2026–27), and implementation/operation (2028–29), adjusted after March 2026 DfT guidance.
• The OBC assesses strategic, economic, commercial, financial and management cases and includes an Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA).
• The council recommends applying licensing to employers with five or more spaces as the current preferred threshold, recognising Bristol’s dispersed employment and parking patterns.
• Investment emphasis is on bus improvements, active travel and complementary measures that reduce congestion and support sustainable commuting.
• Nottingham is cited as the only UK city with an operating WPL; other areas exploring WPLs include Oxfordshire, Cardiff and Leeds.

Bristol Council (Bristol Express News) July 8, 2026 – Bristol City Council has produced an Outline Business Case that sets out how a workplace parking levy (WPL) licence could operate across the city, with the stated objectives of reducing congestion, encouraging walking, cycling and public transport use, and generating ring‑fenced revenue for transport improvements. The report prepared by Adam Crowther, head of city transport, frames the WPL as part of the council’s broader transport strategy and climate commitments, arguing the levy would both discourage car commuting and provide a locally controlled funding stream for new transport measures.

What are the charging and geographic options the OBC tests and how were they chosen?

As reported by Adam Crowther of Bristol City Council in the OBC, the OBC models several charge levels and boundary arrangements to reflect differing parking values, transport supply and employment geographies across Bristol. Charging scenarios for central Bristol tested in the modelling include annual per‑space rates of £600, £750, £1,000 and £1,250, with wider area rates modelled at 50% of central rates.

Boundary options include a focused city‑centre/Clean Air Zone (CAZ) area, an expanded city‑centre outer zone and a city‑wide levy; Avonmouth has been modelled separately because of its unique employment and parking profile. The charge and boundary choices were informed by international and UK precedents (including Nottingham’s scheme and consultations in Leeds, Oxford and others) and local parking price comparisons.

Which employers would be affected and what threshold is the council recommending?

The OBC (Adam Crowther, Bristol City Council) tests employer size thresholds of 11+ parking spaces (the Nottingham model), 5+ spaces (the council’s current recommendation) and 3+ spaces.

The council recommends a 5+ threshold given Bristol’s more fragmented business base and dispersed commuter parking compared with Nottingham; a lower threshold is argued to better capture cumulative congestion impacts and support mode shift while targeted discounts or exemptions could mitigate disproportionate impacts on micro‑businesses.

How much revenue could the WPL raise and how would the money be used?

According to the OBC (Adam Crowther, Bristol City Council), the levy could generate several million pounds each year; revenues would be hypothecated under the Transport Act and ring‑fenced for transport purposes. The draft WPL Investment Plan emphasises bus improvements—service frequency, reliability, route enhancement and fares—alongside active travel and demand management measures.

The OBC notes Nottingham’s experience, where WPL revenue provided a stable funding source for public transport improvements and wider transport outcomes.

What exemptions, discounts and protections are being considered for vulnerable groups and special cases?

The OBC outlines exemption and discount types modelled on Nottingham and other approaches (Adam Crowther, Bristol City Council).

Proposed protections include exemptions for disabled parking (Blue Badge holders), emergency services and NHS sites, customer and visitor parking, and operational fleet vehicles not used for commuting.

Other potential measures under consideration include exemptions or discounts for schools and education providers, limited‑hours or operational‑necessity parking, and adjustments for shift workers and night‑economy roles where public transport is limited.

The OBC also commits to updating the Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) following consultation to assess differential impacts across groups.

What does the Equality Impact Assessment reveal about who currently drives to work in Bristol?

The OBC uses high level data from the Bristol Quality of Life Survey to inform an EQIA. Crowther (Bristol City Council) reports that 34.4% of survey respondents drive to work, with particular variations by group:

carers (42.3%) and parents (46.4%) are more likely than average to drive; older people (65+) (28.3%), younger people (16–24) (19.1%), disabled people (27.4%), and LGB+ respondents (23.1%) are less likely than average to drive. Residents in the 10% most deprived areas report a slightly higher driving rate (37.9%). The EQIA will be refreshed after consultation to reflect stakeholder feedback.

What evidence and precedents does the OBC use to assess likely impacts on congestion, environment and the economy?

The OBC (Adam Crowther, Bristol City Council) follows the HM Treasury Five Case Model to appraise options against strategic, economic, commercial, financial and management cases.

It references Nottingham’s WPL—operational since 2012—as the only UK precedent with reported positive transport and economic outcomes.

The OBC says that evidence indicates WPLs can drive congestion reductions, environmental improvements and provide finance for sustainable travel.

However, it emphasises Bristol’s differing transport and employment context and argues for a Bristol‑specific assessment of business competitiveness, recruitment impacts and local economic effects.

How has the Department for Transport (DfT) guidance affected the OBC timeline and consultation timetable?

Following the DfT’s March 2026 proposals to change approval processes for WPLs, Bristol’s programme was amended to require public consultation prior to OBC sign‑off and to seek Secretary of State approval at the conclusion of the OBC stage.

The council now plans public consultation for October 2026, with the final OBC due back to the transport and connectivity committee for approval in early 2027, and implementation/operation currently envisaged for 2028–29.

What enforcement, displacement and complementary measures will the council need to consider?

The OBC (Adam Crowther, Bristol City Council) sets out the need to evaluate risks of displacement of workplace parking into surrounding residential areas, impacts on the highway network and how to protect residential streets.

Complementary actions identified include parking controls, permit schemes, employer travel plan advice, targeted enforcement and measures to increase transport alternatives where they are weaker. Phasing options include starting with a smaller central area or lower initial rates, and piloting measures to limit sudden impacts.

How have local businesses and stakeholders responded so far and what will happen in consultation?

Adam Crowther (Bristol City Council) reports extensive engagement with businesses during OBC development, with employers consistently calling for early, visible bus improvements.

The council plans a statutory public consultation in autumn 2026 to seek views from employers, employees, residents and neighbouring authorities on boundaries, charge levels, exemptions and investment priorities. Consultation findings will be published and used to refine the final proposal, which will be returned to committee to inform decision‑making.

Background of this development

Bristol’s OBC for a workplace parking levy builds on several strands of policy and local evidence. Transport and connectivity committee approval in September 2024 authorised up to £1 million for WPL project development and the OBC.

The council’s transport strategy and climate objectives provide the strategic rationale: local authorities face tightened funding for transport and seek hypothecated, locally controlled revenue to invest in bus services, active travel and congestion reduction.

Nottingham’s longer‑running scheme, early work in other authorities (Oxfordshire, Cardiff, Leeds) and evolving DfT guidance have shaped the timing and scope of Bristol’s work.

The OBC follows the HM Treasury Five Case Model and includes an Equality Impact Assessment and stakeholder engagement as core inputs.

Prediction — how this development could affect employers, commuters and local residents

• Employers: Firms with liable parking spaces would face additional costs if charged; the modelling recommends a 5+ spaces threshold to broaden coverage relative to Nottingham. Some employers could pass costs to staff or absorb them; the OBC proposes exemptions, phased implementation and potential discounts to reduce disproportionate burdens on micro‑businesses and essential services. Businesses likely to benefit from improved bus services and reliability could see recruitment and accessibility gains, but the OBC commits to a Bristol‑specific economic assessment to quantify net impacts.
• Commuters and employees: Drivers who currently use workplace parking could face higher commuting costs, pushing some to shift to public transport, active travel or car‑sharing where feasible. The OBC highlights that alternatives—improved bus frequency, reliability and affordability—are central to achieving behavioural change. For shift workers, those in areas with weaker public transport, and people with caring responsibilities, exemptions or targeted mitigation are proposed to reduce adverse effects.
• Local residents and neighbourhoods: A focused or phased boundary could reduce central congestion and pollution, but local displacement of parking to residential streets is a recognised risk; complementary parking controls and enforcement are proposed to manage displacement. Revenues ring‑fenced for transport could deliver bus and active travel improvements benefitting residents across the city.
• Public transport and active travel: If investment prioritises bus service improvements and active travel infrastructure as the OBC proposes, modal shift could be supported. The net environmental and congestion benefits will depend on charge levels, boundaries, thresholds and how quickly funded improvements are delivered and perceived by users.
• Equity and inclusion: The EQIA indicates differing baseline travel behaviours across demographic groups. The OBC proposes targeted exemptions and a consultation process to capture lived experience; outcomes will vary by neighbourhood and socio‑economic status depending on scheme design and mitigation measures.