Parking guidance for new developments

This section sets out the policy context which shaped the parking standards: the challenges we face and the opportunities we have.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (DCLG, 2012) sets out the national policy in relation to parking standards for new developments. This replaces both Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Planning Policy Guidance (PPG); specifically PPG 13 covering transport (DCLG, 2011). These earlier documents restricted the flexibility local authorities had when setting parking standards, with PPG 13 setting out maximum parking standards for large developments. However, the more recent NPPF provides much more flexibility, and simply states that the following factors should be considered if local authorities choose to set parking standards (para 39):

• the accessibility of the development
• the type, mix and use of the development
• the availability of and opportunities for public transport
• local car ownership level
• an overall need to reduce the use of high-emission vehicles

Whilst we have been developing this guidance central government has added the following text to the NPPF:

‘Local planning authorities should only impose local parking standards for residential and non-residential development where there is clear and compelling justification that it is necessary to manage their local road network’.

This has been incorporated into the NPPF due to some local authorities imposing maximum parking standards from a previous administration. However as this new guidance moves away from arbitrary and maximum parking standards, we believe that the NPPF supports our new guidance and the flexibility implemented throughout. (See paragraph 1.5.2).

It also goes onto say that parking in town centres should be ‘convenient, safe and secure, including appropriate provision for motorcycles’ (para 40).

The Planning Practice Guidance (DCLG 2014) sets out guidance on a range of issues including encouraging more town centre parking spaces and emphasises the importance of well-designed places and overcoming street design issues. The guidance highlights that there are many different approaches that support successful outcomes of residential parking, such as on-street parking, in-curtilage parking and basement parking. Natural surveillance of parked cars is an important consideration, and car parking and service areas should be considered in context to ensure the most successful outcome can be delivered in each case. In terms of town centre parking, the guidance also states that it should be ‘convenient, safe and secure’.

There is more detailed guidance available from national bodies, which has also helped to guide the development of these standards. The National Regeneration Agency’s ‘Car parking: What works where’ (English Partnership, 2006) considers what works in different locations, bearing in mind the dilemma between individuals desire to park their car, and the collective desire for safe and attractive streets. This provides guidance on how many cars we should be planning for; how to deal with specific parking issues; and how and where to best accommodate car parking. This guidance has been used as a reference point throughout this document, as it identifies a range of important issues and parking options that should be considered when formulating standards.

Manual for Streets (MfS) (DfT, 2007) also provides useful guidance, and emphasises the link between planning policy and residential street design. It challenges established working practice and standards that have failed to produce good quality outcomes, particularly within residential developments. This is significant given the role of developers in creating successful neighbourhoods with a strong sense of community. MfS does not set out a new policy, but instead provides additional detail on how to do things differently within the existing policy, technical and legal framework. This has been considered and utilised within our standards.

The guidance also aims to drive forward the government’s assurance to support the market for ultra-low emission vehicles as part of their plans for road reforms. This has been confirmed in various statements, strategies and policies, and in June 2011, the Office for Low Emission Vehicles issued its Plug In Vehicle Infrastructure Strategy ‘Making the Connection’. With a clear desire for further funding and commitment from government to use of electric vehicles, the county wide parking guidance includes support for low emission vehicle infrastructure and industries. With the government announcing long term support for the ultra-low emission vehicle sector, this move will help to address the carbon consequences of motoring and improve our air quality.

In terms of cycle parking, there is a variety of guidance available on the design and layout of cycle parking. Sustrans (2004) provides extensive information on the location, design, and amount of cycle parking. This takes into account the importance of ensuring cycle parking is safe and secure, attractive, accessible and 5 convenient to the user. Transport for London (TfL, 2006) has produced guidance for cycle parking in the workplace and this emphasises the importance of ensuring cycle parking encourages people to cycle to work, and provides further details on long-stay bike parking. The above documents have been used alongside local experiences and evidence included in other local authorities’ guidance, to ensure the BC standards are well informed and appropriate.

The BC Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3) (2011) set out our policies, strategies and priorities to address the transport related challenges and issues across the county. This document identifies the need for effective parking management and enforcement, and the role of parking in managing demand for road space within towns and villages. It identifies that appropriate parking can make a significant contribution to town centre economic vitality and peak period congestion reduction. It also acknowledges that appropriate parking levels are important to ensure that the local economy is supported, particularly in small towns and villages.

In addition to LTP3, BC encourages the use of travel plans, which aim to help new developments mitigate their impacts, reduce congestion, improve health, reduce CO2 emissions, and reduce time spent travelling. Travel plans will be used alongside the parking guidance by planners and developers to achieve the appropriate level and management of parking for new developments. The travel plans are site-specific and should be live documents. These will vary in content depending on whether they are school travel plans, developer travel plans, business travel plans or visitor travel plans.

The council is developing a fourth Local Transport Plan to replace LTP3. It will provide the (updated) overall strategy for transport in Buckinghamshire. It will build on and cross-reference this guidance where appropriate.