Parking Standards first principles assessment

Parking standards are set by local authorities to control the amount of new PNR parking in their jurisdiction. There are a number of approaches to setting parking standards, but they generally seek to either meet all actual (and sometimes anticipated) demand for PNR parking or manage travel demand through PNR parking availability. Additionally, parking spaces take up land, so reducing parking capacity may reduce land take.

In the UK, there is evidence to suggest that parking standards are set mainly to meet expected demand, and that this has been overestimated in most cases. This is despite national and regional planning guidance, such as PPG13 (http://www.planning.odpm.gov.uk/ppg/ppg13/), which indicates that parking standards should be set to encourage a reduction in car traffic (DETR, 1998). Instead, the excess provision has encouraged an increase in car travel. Excess provision is often attributed to fear of negative consequences of competition between developments within an area or between regions, when one has more generous standards than the other. Responses and Situations, and Short and Long Run Demand Responses are both completed on the basis of what should happen if the planning guidelines were followed more closely.

	= Weakest possible positive contribution,		= strongest possible positive contribution
	= Weakest possible negative contribution		= strongest possible negative contribution

= No contribution

*Where restrictive maximum standards mean that supply of parking does not meet demand at a place of employment, employees may respond by compressing their working week, to reduce the hassle of parking. This may be especially so where near by public parking (both on and off street) is also scarce, and/or expensive.

Parking standards primarily affect the supply of new PNR parking. Current planning guidance seeks to limit supply to a maximum level in new developments. This category of parking is primarily office and retail, but also includes hospitals, schools and other public services. Supply of public parking can be influenced where the commuted payments from developers approach is adopted. There is no precedent for supplying road space in this way, but commuted payments have been used for public transport.

The maximum parking standards suggested by PPG13 are set out in Maximum Parking Standards.

Use	National Maximum Parking Standard 1 space per square metre (m2) of gross floor space unless otherwise stated	Threshold from and Above Which Standard Applies (gross floor space)
Food retail	1 space per 14m2	1000m2
Non food retail	1 space per 20m2	1000m2
Cinemas and conference facilities	1 space per 5 seats	1000m2
D2 (other than cinemas, conference facilities and stadia)	1 space per 22m2	1000m2
B1 including offices	1 space per 30m2	2500m2
Higher and further education	1 space per 2 staff + 1 space per 15 students (see note 1)	2500m2
Stadia	1 space per 15 seats (see note 2)	1500 seats

Source: PPG13, 2001.

A detailed example of how these standards are applied in practice (including reductions in the maximum permissible PNR provision) is provided by Hampshire County Council in the UK, at http://www.hants.gov.uk/carparking/index.html

Financing requirements

Parking standards themselves do not require any financial commitments on the part of the local authority. However, where commuted payments are required, the authority may make some contribution to the public parking or public transport funded in this way. Local authorities are able to specify the value of commuted payments, which can vary annually according to the retail price index. The following values are set by the City of York Council in the UK.

Cars	Business (B1)	£3000 per space
	Retail (A1, A2, A3)	£5000 per space
Cycles		£100 per space for uncovered spaces
		£500 per space for covered spaces

“All commuted sums payable after 31 March 1996 will vary according to the Retail Price Index and will contribute towards providing appropriate additional transport facilities for the particular location concerned” (http://www.york.gov.uk/environment/york/localplan/appe/).

NB: B1, A1, A2 and A3 are categories of land use defined in the UK.

Expected impact on key policy objectives

Assessments of impacts on key policy objectives are made on the basis of parking standards that follow planning guidance to restrict supply of PNR parking.

Objective	Scale of contribution	Comment
		Reductions in congestion will improve efficiency.
		Reductions in car traffic will contribute positively towards liveable streets, but the greatest impacts may not be in residential areas.
		Reductions in car traffic will reduce atmospheric and noise pollution, whilst reductions in PNR parking supply may reduce land take.
		Those who continue to driver and non-car users will benefit from reductions in congestion (and possibly improved services if there is sufficient modal shift to warrant changes). However, those who would previously have had the perk of private parking get less net benefit.
		Reductions in car use will help to reduce road accidents.
	/	Improvements in efficiency will contribute positively towards economic growth. However, it is argued that restrictions will reduce development, and that this is a serious negative impact.
		No financial commitments are required.

	= Weakest possible positive contribution,		= strongest possible positive contribution
	= Weakest possible negative contribution		= strongest possible negative contribution

= No contribution

Expected impact on problems

Assessments of impacts in terms of alleviation of key problems are made on the basis of parking standards that follow planning guidance to restrict supply of PNR parking.

Contribution to alleviation of key problems

Problem	Scale of contribution	Comment
Congestion-related delay		Where alternatives to car use making modal shift feasible. Where this is not the case, congestion will either be severe as a result of traffic searching for a parking space, or congestion will shift to an alternative destination.
Congestion-related unreliability		Where alternatives to car use making modal shift feasible. Where this is not the case, congestion will either be severe as a result of traffic searching for a parking space, or congestion will shift to an alternative destination.
Community severance		Where corridors dissect local neighbourhoods amenity areas.
Visual intrusion		Large car parks at ground level or multi-storey can have significant negative visual impacts, especially in areas where land use development is not dense, or landscaping is poor. Thus, restricting new PNR can reduce visual intrusion.
Lack of amenity	-
Global warming		Reductions in traffic levels and congestion will reduce pollution.
Local air pollution		Reductions in traffic levels and congestion will reduce pollution.
Noise		Reductions in traffic levels and congestion will reduce pollution.
Reduction of green space		Limiting parking provision will reduce land take.
Damage to environmentally sensitive sites		Limiting parking provision will reduce land take and traffic impact on environmentally sensitive sites.
Poor accessibility for those without a car and those with mobility impairments		Users of alternative modes will benefit from reductions in congestion.
Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular social or geographic groups		Those in areas with poor alternatives to the car.
Number, severity and risk of accidents		Reduced traffic levels will reduce the accident risk.
Suppression of the potential for economic activity in the area		Reduced congestion will make the area more attractive, although restrictive parking standards may make an area unattractive if standards in neighbouring areas allow more parking.

	= Weakest possible positive contribution,		= strongest possible positive contribution
	= Weakest possible negative contribution		= strongest possible negative contribution

= No contribution

Expected winners and losers

Winners and losers

Group	Winners / losers	Comment
Large scale freight and commercial traffic		Such traffic spends only a small proportion of its time in urban conditions, but where it does, it will benefit from reduced congestion.
Small businesses		These will benefit from the efficiency gains brought about by reduced congestion.
High income car-users		These will benefit from the efficiency gains brought about by reduced congestion.
People with a low income	/	Those unable to afford a car and using public transport instead will benefit from reduced congestion, as will low income car users who continue to travel by car. Those forced to leave their car at home and pay for public transport, or pay for use of a public parking space will suffer financial disbenefits.
People with poor access to public transport		Where parking becomes difficult there will be a disbenefit, especially if limited PNR parking forces drivers to pay for use of public space.
All existing public transport users		Public transport will benefits from reduced congestion and potentially improved services where demand increases sufficiently to warrant this.
People living adjacent to the area targeted		There may be substantial increases in parking around the edge of a new development with restricted PNR.
People making high value, important journeys		These people will benefit from reduced congestion.
The average car user		The average car user will benefit from reduced congestion.

	= weakest possible benefit,		= strongest benefit
	= weakest possible disbenefet,		= strongest possible disbenefit

= neither wins nor loses