Return to Agenda

ITEM EX11

PARKING STANDARDS

Introduction

1. District Councils are the planning authorities for the majority of planning applications and ultimately decide on parking provision for new developments under their powers in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The County Council as Local Highway Authority provides advice to the District Councils on planning applications. The purpose of the County Council setting a car parking standard is to provide consistent advice to the Districts. Moreover the level of off-street parking can have significant implications on on-street parking for which the County Council, as Local Traffic Authority, has responsibility.
2. The Oxfordshire Local Transport Plan 2001-2006 (LTP) contains draft guideline car parking standards which were significantly different from the previous standards that had been formulated in the late 1980s. The draft standards were based on the draft Government Planning Policy Guidance which was available at the time, in line with the concept of sustainable development. In the LTP it was stated that further work and agreement would be necessary before the parking standards could be finalised.
3. The process of finalising the car parking standards began in September 2001 at the Planning Issues Group, which is a joint member and officer forum. It was followed in October 2001 by a request to the District Planning Authorities for comments on the draft parking guidelines and since then there has been an ongoing dialogue. Copies of the final comments, where received, from the District Councils will be placed in the Members’ Resource Centre.
4. Cycle parking requirements for new developments are published in draft form in the LTP cycling strategy and these have been finalised alongside the car parking standards.
5. The proposed car parking standards are shown on Table 1 (download as .rtf file) and the proposed cycle parking standards are shown on Table 2 (download as .rtf file). Tables 3 (download as .rtf file)and Table 4(download as .pdf file) show the current draft standards for car parking and cycle parking respectively. This report seeks the approval of the Executive to the proposed car parking and cycle parking standards.

Government Policy Guidance

6. Planning Policy Guidance ‘Transport’ (PPG13) published in March 2001 contains the Government guidance on car parking provision for new development. This replaced the draft guidance which was available at the time of formulating the County Council’s draft parking standards.
7. PPG 13 sets out maximum parking standards for various land uses and a threshold gross floor area of developments above which the standards are intended to apply. For smaller developments, PPG 13 suggests more rigorous standards with no minimum requirement. It also states that ‘reducing the amount of parking in new developments … is essential as part of a package of planning and transport measures to promote sustainable travel choices’.
8. Planning Policy Guidance ‘Housing’ (PPG3) sets out car parking standards as 1.5 spaces per dwelling for housing developments. This does not specifically apply to individual dwellings but is an average across a development area.
9. The general thrust of Government guidance is that car parking should be restricted as part of the overall initiative to reduce private vehicle mileage to minimise greenhouse gases. The cycle parking standards will require developers to provide cycle parking at new developments and this is seen as complementary to the car parking standards with the overall aim of reducing car dependency.

The Issues

10. The proposed car parking standards, and the existing draft standards, specify the maximum level of parking provision for different land uses in line with PPG13, whereas previous standards prescribed a set parking level for various land uses. All authorities need to have due regard to PPG13 when setting their parking standards. It is also important that there is a broadly similar standard across the County and that this is compatible with adjacent counties. This ensures that one area does not become disproportionately attractive to developers by virtue of levels of parking available with new developments.
11. During the consultation with the District Councils there was a clear general concern that the PPG13 standard was essentially an urban standard where public transport is frequent and efficient. They considered that it was not particularly suitable for rural areas where individuals had a greater need to use the car, although they support the concept of sustainable development. They required some flexibility to decide what was best for their areas.
12. The opportunity has been taken to include provision for car parking for people with disabilities. Developers will be required to conform to BS 8300:2001 which gives details of layouts and parking provision for various land uses. A summary of the parking provision for people with disabilities is shown in Table 5.
13. One major problem with restricting car parking at employment sites is that where there are no on-street parking controls people will still drive to work, irrespective of the level of off-street car parking provided. No benefit, therefore, would be gained by restraining the number of parking spaces in terms of reduction of pollutant gases, but there is a risk that there would be deterioration in residential amenity caused by the parked cars on-street and there could be road safety implications. This risk highlights the important relationship between land use planning, parking provision, parking controls and the level of public transport provision.
14. Using a maximum parking standard does not necessarily mean that developers have to provide the maximum level indicated. Equally, it does not mean that if a developer applies for planning permission with a very low level of parking, this would have to be accepted. This inevitably results in development proposals having to be considered in greater detail when being assessed against policies. To assist in this judgement, the proposed Oxfordshire standards require that, if developers seek less parking than indicated as the maximum level, then they will need to provide supporting evidence to show that this will not result in on-street parking problems, nor will there be any road safety implications.
15. The threshold levels at which the standard applies are recommended as the same as set out in PPG13, except for the hotel/guesthouse and residential use which are not dealt with in PPG13. Most planning applications within the County are below the threshold level and the suggested standard recommends use of the same maximum standard below the threshold but allows District Councils flexibility to consider cases on merit in the context of the general aims of the standards. During the consultation process it was clear that the District Councils wanted this flexibility.
16. The general assumption in the Government’s advice on parking provision is that it is mainly related to the level of public transport available. However, the need for car parking, and hence car usage, not only depends on the level of public transport provision but also depends on what local facilities there are at a location.

Parking Standards

17. In recognition of the complex relationship between level of public transport provision, local facilities within an area and the need for car trips, the number of zones with different maximum parking provision has been reduced from that published in the LTP, both to simplify and offer greater flexibility. There are now only two types of zones being proposed, with Type 1 parking standards only applying within the larger towns with a good level of public transport provision. It will be for the District Councils to decide if the Type 1 parking standard applies in their larger towns and again, offers some flexibility to the District Planning Authorities.
18. Residential parking standards are not included in PPG13, although they are included in broad terms in PPG3. Residential parking standards are probably the most contentious and difficult aspect because car ownership does not necessarily relate to vehicle usage. However, it is of fundamental interest to developers and District Planning Authorities and, therefore, is included in the proposed standards.
19. The general thrust of Government guidance is to reduce the level of private vehicle mileage; and the parking standards attempt to strike a balance between encouraging alternatives to car transport and ensuring that development sites remain viable.
20. Oxford City Council has set its own car parking standards which have lower maximum levels than those recommended in the County Council standards in recognition of the high public transport accessibility within the City. The City Council’s parking standards sit within the maximum range set by the County Council recommended standards and, therefore, are compatible with them.
21. The car parking standards set out in Table 1 seek to encourage sustainable development, and provide flexibility to cater for differing characteristics of areas across the County and include car parking requirements for people with disabilities as set out in BS 8300:2001 which are summarised separately in Table 5.(download as .rtf file) The cycle parking standards set out in Table 2 complement the car parking standards in encouraging alternative modes of travel to the private car.

RECOMMENDATION

22. The Executive is RECOMMENDED to approve the car parking and cycle parking standards for new developments as respectively set out in Table 1 and Table 2 annexed to the report.

DAVID YOUNG
Director of Environmental Services

Background papers: Nil

Contact Officer: Paul Staley - Tel: Oxford 815707

November 2002


Return to TOP