Fareham Borough Local Practice Note: Residential Car Parking Standards - January 2003
Introduction
1. This document is a practice note for the interpretation and application of the residential car parking standards contained in the Hampshire Parking Strategy and Standards [HPSS] 2002 (this is an external hyperlink). It does not apply to any other component of the HPSS. The Local Practice Note (LPN) will enable the Council to establish local flexibility in the level of parking provision for new housing by linking the relative accessibility of locations within Fareham Borough, and dwelling size, with the level of off-street parking.
2. The LPN will be used for determining the maximum level of off-street parking for general residential development within Fareham Borough. The maximum parking standards vary in relation to the location of new development, reflecting levels of accessibility. Accessibility has been measured in terms of access to jobs, shops, services and community facilities by non-car based travel and is shown on an Accessibility Map for Fareham Borough, which is attached at the back of this Practice Note. Key issues affecting the level of parking provision accompanying new development are examined.
3. The Practice Note also provides advice for the provision of on-street parking as part of the overall design approach for new development. The implementation of the LPN will be monitored to check that the average level of off-street parking provision across the Borough as a whole accords with Government planning guidance requirements.
Policy Background
Fareham Borough Local Plan Review 2000
4. The previously adopted parking standards are contained in Appendix 8 of the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review 2000 (FBLPR) which was adopted in March 2000.
5. Policy T5 seeks to ensure that new development makes appropriate provision for parking in accordance with adopted standards. However, paragraph 11.38 states that:
'The Borough Council recognises the need for the current standards to be applied flexibly and that reductions in the parking standards may be appropriate taking into account the availability of passenger transport and public car parking, and the need to encourage the use of more energy efficient modes of transport.'
Paragraph 11.39 also states that:
'The County Council, together with Hampshire's District Councils, are currently developing a strategic parking policy which will enable revised county-wide parking standards to be produced taking into account existing and emerging Government guidance. The new county-wide standards will reflect recent advice, particularly in PPG3 and draft revised PPG13, by setting maximum rather than minimum levels of parking for broad classes of development in order to encourage sustainable transport choices and promote development in locations well-served by public transport, walking and cycling.'
6. The adopted local plan recognises the need to apply the current standards flexibly and to review the standards in the light of existing and draft government guidance. The Hampshire Parking Strategy and Standards (2002) (see below) and this Local Practice Note are the outcome of this review process.
Government Planning Policy
7. Government policy on car parking standards developed as part of an overall strategy to ensure the creation of sustainable development patterns. This first emerged in government planning policy in PPG13 (1st edition 1994) on land use and transport. Three aims were identified:
· to reduce growth in the length and number of motorised journeys;
· to encourage alternative means of travel which have less environmental impact; and hence
· to reduce reliance on the private car
8. PPG13 also identified ways in which the location of development would contribute to the achievement of these aims, i.e. focusing development on urban areas and strengthening existing town and local centres. In addition, it listed complementary transport measures, such as car parking, traffic management, and provision for pedestrians and cyclists, which would support the locational policy.
9. This basic strategy has been further developed and refined in subsequent Planning Policy Guidance (PPG). PPG1 - General Policy and Principles (February 1997), provided a definition of 'sustainable development' and highlighted the importance of mixed use and good design in achieving sustainable development patterns. In particular, to foster forms of development which encourage walking, cycling and public transport use.
10. PPG3 Housing (March 2000) in addition to the above as part of the strategy of sustainable development, states that local authorities should:
· Provide a better mix in the size, type and location of housing than is currently available and seek to create mixed communities.
· Create more sustainable patterns of development by building in ways which exploit and deliver accessibility by public transport to jobs, education and health facilities, shopping leisure and local services.
· Place the needs of people before ease of traffic movement in designing the layout of residential developments.
· Make more efficient use of land by reviewing planning policies and standards.
11. The guidance specifically states:
'car parking standards that result, on average, in development with more than 1.5 off-street car parking spaces per dwelling are unlikely to reflect the government's emphasis on securing sustainable residential developments. Policies which would result in higher levels of off-street parking, especially in urban areas, should not be adopted'.
12. PPG13 Transport (March 2001) reiterates the advice contained in PPG3 as far as planning for housing is concerned. It provides detailed policy guidance on broader transport issues in relation to sustainable development (e.g. walking cycling and public transport provision) and deals with parking for all forms of development. Maximum parking standards for retail, leisure, education and office uses were introduced, subject to a size threshold.
Hampshire Parking Strategy and Standards (Spring 2002)
13. The Hampshire Parking Strategy and Standards (this is an external hyperlink) was adopted by Hampshire County Council in February 2002 as supplementary planning guidance to Policy T2 of the Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-2011 (Review). It has been adopted by Fareham Borough Council for development control purposes with effect from 1st January 2003. Policy T2 is suitably worded to allow subsequent alterations via supplementary planning guidance. It was developed in response to government planning policy advice, as summarised above, and The Road Traffic Reduction Act 1997.
14. The key features of the adopted Strategy and Standards include:
· The introduction of maximum parking standards to replace existing minimum standards in accordance with PPG3 and PPG13;
· The importance of the accessibility of a development site to local services, facilities, jobs, education and shops, in determining the level of parking for new developments, and the need for planning authorities to operate this approach.
15. In relation to general residential development, maximum parking standards are set depending on the size of dwellings proposed, but provide for significantly lower provision in accessible locations. However, in accordance with PPG3 advice, the Standards are to be applied in order to achieve an average residential provision of no more than 1.5 spaces per dwelling. The calculation of parking standards can be varied depending on location. The principle variant to the level of parking is the relative accessibility of the site. Other factors include whether the site is in an area of economic regeneration or restraint; whether it is in a sensitive location such as a Conservation Area; whether an area is geographically highly self-contained or where it is competing with neighbouring areas or; where there is high cycle accessibility planned or in use. The existence of public car parks within walking distance and that have spare capacity will also be taken into account.
Accessibility within Fareham Borough
Key Travel Destinations
16. Accessibility has been measured in terms of access to jobs, shops, services and community facilities by non-car methods of travel. The following locations have been identified as they represent the focus for local and borough wide social and economic activity and are of a sufficient size to act as a 'key travel destination':
· Fareham town centre;
· Portchester district centre;
· Stubbington district centre;
· Locks Heath district centre;
· Park Gate local centre;
· Titchfield local centre;
· Warsash local centre.
17. The range, level of provision and quality of services, jobs, shops and community facilities varies between destinations, and this is reflected in the different levels of accessibility. In addition to the above, access to destinations outside the Borough, principally Portsmouth and Southampton, has been taken into account given the range of services and facilities offered by these centres.
18. The proposed Whiteley local centre will, once constructed, become a destination. However, the large peripheral employment areas within the Borough, such as Segensworth, have not been included as destinations. They do not include the variety and concentration of facilities and services that the town, district and local centres provide.
Non-Car Travel Provision
19. For the purposes of defining accessibility, walking, bus and train have been identified as the principal non-car means of travel which provide access to jobs, shops, services and community facilities. These different journey types can be identified as follows:
· walk only;
· walk and train;
· walk and bus.
Walk only
20. 'Walk distance zones' have been identified for each of the key travel destinations. These zones have been identified by measuring actual walking distances along public highways, in order to take account of physical barriers on the ground. Walking distances have been measured from the perimeter of the core of the relevant centre.
21. Both 400 and 800 metre zones, equivalent to a 5 and 10 minute walk respectively, have been identified for Fareham town centre. In comparison, 400m zones have been identified for district and local centres, as a reasonable average walking time.
22. The differences in the extent of the walking zones identified reflect the extent and range of provision, and thus desirability, of shops, jobs, services and community facilities that Fareham town centre offers compared to the smaller centres.
Walk and Train
23. The frequency and duration of service are the important elements in assessing accessibility to key travel destinations by train. The following train stations are identified:
· Fareham;
· Portchester;
· Swanwick.
Generally, Fareham station has the greatest level of accessibility in terms of the frequency of services. All stations and the accessibility of destinations has been summarised in Appendix A. As a minimum, all stations have at least two trains per hour throughout the day to London, Portsmouth, Southampton and other stations in the borough.
24. An 800 metre walk distance zone has been identified for each of the train stations, reflecting the relative attractiveness of train services, in terms of journey time and reliability.
Walk and Bus
25. The frequency and duration of service are also the important elements in assessing accessibility to key travel destinations by bus. The following corridors provide a 'good' level of service of at least 4 buses per hour, in both directions, throughout the day:
· A27 between Portchester through Fareham to Catisfield;
· A32 between Fareham and Gosport.
26. Other bus transport corridors have been identified that are considered to have a 'moderate' level of service, of at least 2 buses per hour throughout the day.
27. 400 metre walk distance zones have been identified around each of the bus stops located on the relevant routes.
Other Travel Choices
28. The South Hampshire Rapid Transit system, which will connect Fareham town centre with Gosport and Portsmouth, will create an additional transport corridor that will have a good level of service. The reliability, frequency and duration of service will merit the identification of an 800 metre walk zone.
29. The Council's Cycle Strategy has resulted in the development of actual and planned cycle lanes. At present, the routes do not provide sufficient continuity to be designated as transport corridors that can make significant contributions to non-car based travel.
Accessibility Levels
30. Five categories of accessibility level have been identified, taking into account access to key travel destinations:
· High
· High/medium
· Medium
· Low/medium
· Low
31. An Accessibility Map showing which accessibility level any one location in the Borough falls within, is part of this Local Practice Note. These levels reflect relative accessibility of locations within the Borough and should not be directly compared with other areas, towns or cities.
Off-Street Residential Parking Standards
32. The accessibility levels identified above have been used to set a corresponding maximum level of off-street parking per dwelling. For example, areas with a high level of accessibility represent the best level of access in the Borough to jobs, shops, services and community facilities by non-car based means of travel. As a result, the lowest maximum level of off-street parking per dwelling is required. Conversely, areas of low accessibility require the highest maximum level of off-street parking.
33. The level of maximum off-street parking per dwelling also varies depending on the number of bedrooms each dwelling contains. The higher the number of bedrooms, the higher the level of off-street parking provision.
34. The relationship between the level of accessibility, number of bedrooms per dwelling and the corresponding maximum off-street parking provision is shown below:
Level of Accessibility |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of Bedrooms | Low** |
Low/Medium |
Medium |
Medium/High |
High** |
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | |
| 2 | 2 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1 | 1 | |
| 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1.5 | 1 | |
| 4+ | 3 | 3 | 2.5 | 2 | 1.5 | |
** The Low and High figures are the new Hampshire County maximum standards.
Note: Where the level of parking provision for a proposed development, calculated using the above standards, results in a maximum requirement including 0.5 spaces (e.g. 1 or an odd number of dwellings) the requirement will be rounded up.
Influences on the Level of Off-Street Parking Provision
36. A number of key influences on the level of off-street parking provision made with any one development scheme can be identified and these are examined below.
Housing Mix on Development Sites
37. The mix of house types, their size and layout, influences the amount of housing that can be developed on a site and thus the average level of parking per unit. The mix is also linked to the accessibility of a site. For example, within locations such as town centres, where accessibility is high, a high proportion of small units could be provided with a corresponding reduction in the maximum standard of parking provision. As a result, the average level of parking could be well below the PPG3 requirement of an average 1.5 spaces per dwelling. This may offset above average levels of parking provision within lower accessibility areas elsewhere in the Borough.
38. It should be noted that FBLPR does not include a policy that seeks to influence dwelling mix on new residential development. However, the need to meet the PPG3 requirement to ensure that housing is developed at a density of at least 30 dwellings per hectare is likely to influence dwelling mix, thus reducing the average dwelling size.
Major Housing Sites
39. These sites have historically provided a large proportion of housing supply in the Borough. If they are in low accessibility areas, then the average level of off-street parking per dwelling could be significantly above the PPG3 average of 1.5 per dwelling, due to the large numbers of units on such sites. This could markedly unbalance the average for the Borough as a whole over a year. For this reason major sites will need to be treated carefully in terms of the mix of dwelling size and layout. In particular it will be important to assess the potential to raise the accessibility level of the site through improved public transport. This is likely to involve subsidising new or diverted bus routes, most likely through developer contributions.
Conservation Areas/Listed Buildings
40. In considering proposals located within Conservation Areas or affecting listed buildings, sensitivity and flexibility will be needed in the application of the car parking standards. The integrity of these areas and buildings should be given considerable weight in considering development proposals. Parking provision below the maximum standard may therefore be appropriate.
On-Street Parking
41. The design of new housing can also be used to provide additional parking. PPG3 guidance seeks to ensure an average of 1.5 off-street spaces per dwelling. It is possible to successfully design on-street parking that is as convenient as some off-street parking, and could, in particular, provide for visitor parking needs. On-street parking provision may not, however, be appropriate where there is intense competition for existing on-street parking space, particularly for shopping or commuting purposes.
42. Generally, such on-street parking provision is accommodated within linear streets, squares or shared surface mews/courtyard developments, and can also be used in conjunction with the creation of traffic calmed streets and homezones. In essence, all of these built forms share the same characteristics:
· Parking spaces are overlooked by dwellings;
· Only small numbers of spaces are grouped together, typically less than 10;
· Groups of spaces are separated by street trees and/or under-storey planting to give a soft visual emphasis with height;
· Avoiding parking within the front curtilage. This is particularly important for narrow frontage housing where there will be less space between cars;
· Avoiding the visual dominance of the cars.
However, it should be acknowledged that the opportunities for on-street parking provision on small infill developments is likely to be limited.
43. Examples of how on-street parking can be successfully achieved are shown in 'Better Places to Live' - a companion guide to PPG3, Places Streets and Movement - a companion guide to Design Bulletin 32 and the Urban Design Compendium.
Monitoring of Parking Provision
44. The operation of the LPN will be monitored and the results assessed on an annual basis. There may, in due course, be a need to adjust off-street parking standards to achieve an average of 1.5 spaces per dwelling across the plan area, in the light of monitoring results.
45. In addition, key travel destinations and the level and/or pattern of non-car transport provision is likely to change over time and will need to be reflected in the Accessibility Map for the Borough.
Relationship with Hampshire Parking Strategy and Standards
46. This practice note only relates to general residential car parking provision. All other car parking or cycle parking provision must be calculated using the HPSS, including provision for older persons' housing developments.
Appendix A - Frequency of Rail Services from Fareham Borough Stations.
Map - Fareham Borough Accessibility Profile.
References:
PPG1 - General Planning Principles [DOE 1995]
PPG3 - Housing [DETR 2000]
PPG13 - Transport [DETR 2001]
Better Places to Live - A Companion Guide to PPG3 [ DETR 2001]
Hampshire Parking Strategy and Standards [Hampshire County Council 2002] (this is an external hyperlink)
Urban Design Compendium - [English Partnerships et al. 2000]Places Streets and Movement - A companion guide to DB32 residential Roads and Footpaths [DETR 1998]
Movement Access Streets and Spaces - Hampshire County Council [2002]
|.
|.
