Parking Standards in Brent - London Borough of Brent Standards.pdf · 1.1 London Borough (LB)...

Parking Standards in

Brent

Report

December 2012

Parking Standards in

Brent

Report

December 2012

Prepared For:

Brent Council

Brent House

349-357 High Road

Wembley

HA9 9HD

Prepared by:

Steer Davies Gleave

28-32 Upper Ground

London

SE1 9PD

+44 (0)20 7910 5000

www.steerdaviesgleave.com

http://www.steerdaviesgleave.com/

Recommended Changes to Parking Standards in Brent

Contents

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1

General ................................................................................................1

Local Development Framework - Core Strategy ................................................1

Wembley Area Action Plan Issues and Options..................................................2

Development Planning Documents ................................................................2

Parking Strategy for Wembley .....................................................................2

Unitary Development Plan..........................................................................2

Wembley Regeneration Exception ................................................................3

2 POLICY BACKGROUND ............................................................................. 4

Introduction ...........................................................................................4

National Planning Policy Framework (2012).....................................................4

Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport (January 2011) ......................................5

Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (2009) ........6

London Plan (July 2011) ............................................................................7

Early Minor Alterations to The London Plan – Affordable housing, cycle parking

standards and minor clarifications (November 2011)........................................ 10

Brent UDP 2002 Inspectors Report .............................................................. 12

Unitary Development Plan (2004) ............................................................... 12

Local Development Framework Core Strategy (July 2010) ................................. 14

Wembley Area Action Plan Issues and Options (September 2011)......................... 15

Wembley West End (South) Supplementary Planning Document (November 2006) .... 16

Wembley Link Supplementary Planning Document (July 2011) ............................ 16

Wembley Master Plan Supplementary Planning Document (June 2009) .................. 17

Wembley Masterplan Transport Strategy Review (November 2008) ...................... 17

Transport Strategy Key Component Study (February 2009) ................................ 19

Framework Parking Strategy for Wembley (March 2012) ................................... 19

3 REVIEW OF PARKING STANDARDS LB BRENT ................................................ 21

Overview............................................................................................. 21

Current Transport Situation ...................................................................... 21

Benchmarking....................................................................................... 22

Main Themes ........................................................................................ 22

Key Recommendations ............................................................................ 23

4 WEMBLEY REGENERATION AREA ............................................................... 26


Contents

Overview ............................................................................................ 26

Wembley Town Centre ............................................................................ 26

Wembley Park Town Centre ..................................................................... 26

Wembley Master Plan Area ....................................................................... 27

Industrial Area ...................................................................................... 27

Indicative Uses across the Wembley Area Action Plan Regeneration Area .............. 28

Public Transport Accessibility Levels ........................................................... 29

Controlled Parking Zones ......................................................................... 34

5 BENCHMARKING – BOROUGH CAR PARKING STANDARDS REGENERATION EXCEPTIONS

........................................................................................................ 36

Overview ............................................................................................ 36

Local Development Framework Status ......................................................... 36

LB Barnet ............................................................................................ 38

LB Camden .......................................................................................... 43

LB Haringey ......................................................................................... 47

LB Wandsworth ..................................................................................... 52

6 RECOMMENDED CAR PARKING STANDARDS .................................................. 54

Introduction ......................................................................................... 54

Overview ............................................................................................ 56

Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) ................................................... 56

Town Centres ....................................................................................... 56

Flexibility............................................................................................ 57

Car Free or Limited Parking Provision Developments ....................................... 57

Elderly Persons Accommodation ................................................................ 57

Mixed Use Developments ......................................................................... 57

Car Club and Car Pools ............................................................................ 58

Electric Charging Points .......................................................................... 58

Motorcycle Parking ................................................................................ 58

No Standard ......................................................................................... 58

Travel Plans ......................................................................................... 58

Employment Use Classes.......................................................................... 58

Retail Parking ....................................................................................... 60

Residential Parking Provision .................................................................... 61

Parking for Hotels (C1)............................................................................ 63

Parking for Residential Institutions (C2) ....................................................... 64


Contents

Parking for Non Residential Institutions (D1) ................................................. 65

Disabled Parking.................................................................................... 66

7 RECOMMENDED CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS ............................................... 67

8 CONSENTED DEVELOPMENT SITES ............................................................. 71

Overview............................................................................................. 71

Ada Lewis House ................................................................................... 71

Brent Civic Centre ................................................................................. 72

Wembley Central Square ......................................................................... 74

Crescent House ..................................................................................... 76

Dexion House ....................................................................................... 77

Elizabeth House .................................................................................... 79

Elm Road Car Park ................................................................................. 81

Karma House ........................................................................................ 82

Fulton House ........................................................................................ 84

Quintain NW Lands................................................................................. 85

Shubette House..................................................................................... 88

Victoria Hall......................................................................................... 89

Forum House ........................................................................................ 91

LDA Land............................................................................................. 92

FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Wembley Growth Area..................................................... 15

Figure 2.2 Transport Strategy Key Component Study (February 2009):

Proposed Bus Routes ....................................................... 19

Figure 4.1 Wembley Town Centres Boundaries ..................................... 26

Figure 4.2 Wembley Master Plan Area ............................................... 27

Figure 4.3 Wembley Industrial Area .................................................. 28

Figure 4.4 Indicative Roles for the Wembley Area Action Plan Regeneration

Area ........................................................................... 29

Figure 4.5 Existing PTAL Map of Wembley Action Plan Regeneration Area

(2010)......................................................................... 31

Figure 4.6 Future PTAL Map of Wembley Action Plan Regeneration Area (2026)

................................................................................ 33

Figure 4.7 Controlled Parking Zones Within Wembley Action Plan Regeneration

Area ........................................................................... 35


Contents

Figure 5.1 Brent Cross – Cricklewood Regeneration Area ........................ 39

TABLES

Table 2.1 PPG13 Maximum Parking Standards ....................................... 6

Table 2.2 London Plan (2011): Maximum Residential Car Parking Standards .. 7

Table 2.3 London Plan (2011): Non Operational Maximum Standards for

Employment (B1) ............................................................. 7

Table 2.4 London Plan (2011): Maximum Car Parking Standards for Retail Uses

.................................................................................. 8

Table 2.5 London Plan (2011): Blue Badge Car Parking Standards ............... 9

Table 2.6 London Plan (2011): Minimum Cycle Parking Standards ............. 10

Table 2.7 Early Minor Alterations to the London Plan (2011): Minimum Cycle

Parking Standards .......................................................... 11

Table 2.8 Comparison of Brent’s UDP Car Parking Standards With London Plan

Standards .................................................................... 13

Table 3.1 Comparison of Brent’s Proposed Car Parking Standards (March

2012) With Wembley Regeneration Exception UDP (2004).......... 25

Table 5.1 Development Management Policies Document Status ............... 37

Table 5.2 Maximum Car Parking Standards for the Brent Cross - Cricklewood

Regeneration Area ......................................................... 40

Table 5.3 Comparison of Maximum Car Parking Standards for the Brent Cross

- Cricklewood Regeneration area With LB Brent’s Proposed

Standards .................................................................... 41

Table 5.4 Maximum Car Parking Standards for LB Camden – Low Parking

Provision Areas ............................................................. 45

Table 5.5 Comparison of Maximum Car Parking Standards for LB Camden –

Low Parking Provision Areas With LB Brent’s Proposed Standards 46

Table 5.6 Maximum Car Parking Standards for LB Haringey .................... 49

Table 5.7 Comparison of Maximum Car Parking Standards for LB Haringey

With LB Brent’s Proposed Standards .................................... 50

Table 5.8 Comparison of Maximum Car Parking Standards for LB Wandsworth

With LB Brent’s Proposed Standards .................................... 53

Table 6.1 LB Brent: Recommended Employment Maximum Car Parking

Standards .................................................................... 59

Table 6.2 Wembley: Recommended Employment Maximum Parking Standards

................................................................................ 59

Table 6.3 LB Brent: Recommended Maximum A1 Retail Parking ............... 60


Contents

Table 6.4 Wembley: Recommended Maximum A1 Retail Parking .............. 61

Table 6.5 LB Brent: Recommended Residential Maximum Car Parking

Standards .................................................................... 62

Table 6.6 Wembley Area Action Plan Regeneration Area Consented Schemes:

Average Residential Parking Standard .................................. 62

Table 6.7 Wembley: Residential Maximum Car parking Standards............. 63

Table 6.8 Wembley: Residential Maximum Car parking Standards Validation 63

Table 7.1 Recommended Cycle Parking Standards................................ 68

Table 8.1 Ada Lewis House Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking

Standards Applied With Brent’s UDP Standards and the Proposed

Wembley Standards ........................................................ 72

Table 8.2 Ada Lewis House Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking

Standards Applied With Brent’s UDP Standards ....................... 72

Table 8.3 Brent Civic Centre Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.4 Brent Civic Centre Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.5 Wembley Central Square Car Parking Standards: Comparison of

Parking Standards Applied With Brent’s UDP Standards and the

Proposed Wembley Standards ............................................ 75

Table 8.6 Wembley Central Square Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of

Parking Standards Applied With Brent’s UDP Standards ............. 76

Table 8.7 Crescent House Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.8 Crescent House Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.9 Dexion House Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.10 Dexion House Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.11 Elizabeth House Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.12 Elizabeth House Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.13 Elm Road Car Park Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking




Contents

Table 8.14 Elm Road Car Park Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.15 Karma House Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.16 Karma House Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.17 Fulton House Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.18 Fulton House Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.19 Quintain NW Lands Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.20 Quintain NW Lands Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.21 Shubette House Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.22 Shubette House Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.23 Victoria Hall Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.24 Victoria Hall Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.25 Forum House Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking



Table 8.26 Forum House Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


Table 8.27 LDA Land Car Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking Standards

Applied With Brent’s UDP Standards and the Proposed Wembley

Standards .................................................................... 93

Table 8.28 LDA Land Cycle Parking Standards: Comparison of Parking


APPENDICES

A EXISTING BRENT PARKING STANDARDS UDP 2004


1

1 Introduction

General

1.1 London Borough (LB) Brent’s parking standards as included within its adopted

Unitary Development Plan (UDP) were reviewed and updated as part of the Review

of Parking Standards - Brent study (March 2012).

1.2 The 2004 UDP parking standards make provision for maximum levels of car parking

and minimum levels of cycle parking within new development for all use classes.

These standards were adopted following an extensive study to ensure consistency

across the borough, across the use classes and with neighbouring authorities. The

standards placed significant emphasis on protecting town centre and regeneration

area economies.

1.3 The policy and legislation context for LB Brent’s standards has since altered at

both national and regional level. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

includes a presumption in favour of sustainable development, subject to there

being no significant traffic impacts. The Replacement London Plan (2011) includes

specific car and cycle parking standards applicable to referable developments.

1.4 The Government has declared the 'end of the war on the motorist', paving the way

for new, local approaches to parking issues. National planning guidance has been

revised; removing the requirement for councils to limit the number of parking

spaces permitted in new residential developments, and set high parking charges to

encourage the use of alternative modes of transport. These changes are designed

to bring the responsibility for parking back to local councils - allowing councils and

communities to set parking polices that are right for their area.

1.5 Since the adoption of the UDP, there have been changes in the approach to parking

in London and to the socio-economic characteristics of the borough and Wembley.

The March 2012 review of LB Brent’s parking standards identified that the

Wembley Area Action Plan (WAAP) regeneration area be treated as an exception

and that it will be subject to a set of parking standards specific to the area.

Local Development Framework - Core Strategy

1.6 The Core Strategy for the LB Brent is the first and key component of the new Local

Development Framework (LDF) for the borough. The Core Strategy sets out the

spatial vision, objectives and key policies for the development of Brent up to 2026.

1.7 Strategic Objective 8 is 'to reduce the need to travel and improve transport

choices by:

I Completing first class retail and other facilities in Wembley that reduces the

need to travel to other centres. Improving key transport interchanges at

Wembley, Alperton, First Central and Queen's Park;

I Promoting access to public transport, bicycle or on foot and reducing car

parking standards for growth areas because of their relative accessibility;

I Reducing modal share of car trips to Wembley from 37% towards 25%; and

I Completing at least 5 car free schemes per annum in the plan period.'


2

1.8 A number of growth areas are discussed in the Core Strategy, including Wembley,

Alperton, South Kilburn, Church End, Burnt Oak/Colindale and Park Royal. The

Core Strategy highlights that car parking provision will be based on accessibility to

public transport and proximity to town centres, such that there will be lower

parking provision in the growth areas than outside them.

Wembley Area Action Plan Issues and Options

1.9 The key objectives within the Wembley Area Action Plan (WAAP) relating to

transport that need to be considered when setting parking standards for the

Wembley regeneration area are centred around promoting improved access to the

area, and reducing the need to travel by car. These include the following:

I Create a well-connected and accessible location where sustainable modes of

travel are prioritised and modal share of car trips to Wembley is reduced from

37% towards 25%;

I Ensure that the infrastructure of Wembley is upgraded so that it supports new

development and meets the needs of the local community;

I Complete first class retail and other facilities in Wembley that reduces the

need to travel to other centres and improving key transport interchanges; and

I Promote access by public transport, bicycle or on foot and reduce car parking

standards because of Wembley’s relative accessibility.

1.10 The WAAP will provide 10,000 jobs and 11,500 plus new homes, with hotel,

conference, retail and leisure facilities. This is predicated on the access by

sustainable means, with pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users having

priority over private car.

Development Planning Documents

1.11 The Core Strategy will be supported by development control policies and the

borough is in the course of drafting such policies. Development Control policies

will include policies related to the transport needs of development, including

parking standards.

Parking Strategy for Wembley

1.12 The development of the parking standards for the WAAP regeneration area has

been undertaken in parallel with the Framework Parking Strategy for Wembley

study (MVA, March 2012). The Framework Parking Strategy sets the strategic

planning framework to plan for parking provision throughout Wembley.

Unitary Development Plan

1.13 The existing parking standards within the borough's UDP (2004) were developed

prior to the adoption of the London Plan but were kept under review as the latter

was developed. As the London Plan was emerging during the period of the local

plan review some inconsistencies did arise and were noted by the Local Plan

Inspector.

1.14 The adopted parking standards were principally differentiated according to

locations based on town centres, with some exceptions. Town centres were found


3

to be the most highly accessible areas by public transport in the borough; hence, it

was not considered necessary to differentiate parking standards by public

transport level per se.

Wembley Regeneration Exception

1.15 The parking standards within the existing UDP for Wembley are set out in policy

PS3 Regeneration Exception which allows for an increase of up to a third in parking

in the National Stadium Policy area. This exception has rarely been utilised as

developers have capitalised on the good quality public transport in the area.

1.16 The findings of the Wembley Master Plan transport strategy reviews have

concluded that measures are required to both minimise the need for travel and

secure a substantial travel mode shift away from the private car towards the use

of sustainable transport modes. Modal shift is to be achieved through the provision

of enhanced bus services and facilities, and the implementation of a range of travel

demand management measures.

1.17 Restraining the overall level of parking is an important tool to minimise road

network congestion and encourage travel by other modes. It is important that the

application of parking standards in the WAAP ensure the use of a restrained level

of parking for residential development is applied given proximity to public

transport links. Where there is good access to public transport, walking and

cycling, car-free developments should be provided as they will deliver flexibility to

provide needed spaces elsewhere. It is also essential the retail and leisure

standards continue to preserve the competitiveness of Wembley as a destination.

1.18 The London Plan now adopts an approach more explicitly based on the Public

Transport Level (PTAL) index as a measure of accessibility. In reviewing standards

for the borough, this approach is now followed.

1.19 Following on from the review of Parking Standards for the LB Brent, which

identifies Wembley as an exception, this document sets out recommended

standards to apply to new developments in the WAAP. These recommendations

take into consideration all existing policies whilst appreciating the local needs of

the WAAP area. These standards have been validated as follows:

i) Against best practice from other Local Authorities in terms of their approach

and where there are diversions from the London Plan (Chapter 5);

ii) Against consented development sites within the Wembley Area Action Plan

area to ensure standards are in line with development viability

considerations (Chapter 8); and

iii) Against the available road network capacity (to be undertaken – will be

reported on in a separate document).


4

2 Policy Background

Introduction

2.1 This section outlines the existing relevant transport policy within the LB Brent.

Also covered are the wider regional and national policies that also apply to

transport in the borough and the WAAP.

National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

2.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) sets out the

Government's planning policies for England. The document was formally published

on 27 March 2012 and its policies apply with immediate effect. Importantly, almost

all existing national guidance in the form of Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPGs)

and Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) has been revoked.

2.3 The NPPF also provides transitional arrangements for the implementation of its

policies. Paragraph 214 explains that for 12 months from the day of publication,

decision takers may continue to give full weight to relevant policies adopted since

2004 even if there is a limited degree of conflict with the Framework. This applies

to both regional and local planning policy guidance. It is considered that the

adopted London Plan (2011) remain relevant to the application proposals.

2.4 At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development

which ‘should be seen as a golden thread through both plan making and decision

making’. For decision making this means approving development proposals that

accord with the development plan without delay, unless material considerations

indicate otherwise.

2.5 In terms of land-use planning, the NPPF encourages the effective use of land by

reusing land that has been previously developed (provided it is not of high

environmental value). It also explains that land use planning should actively manage

patterns of growth to make the fullest use of public transport, walking and cycling,

and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made

sustainable.

2.6 Transport policy is dealt with in the 'Promoting Sustainable Transport' section. This

section emphasises the need for 'the transport system to be balanced in favour of

sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel.'

2.7 Guidance is also provided on the setting of car parking standards, within Paragraph

39 of the NPPF. It advises that local planning authorities should take a number of

factors into account for both residential and non-residential development when

setting local parking standards. These include:

I the accessibility of the development;

I the type, mix and use of development;

I the availability of and opportunities for public transport;

I local car ownership levels; and

I An overall need to reduce the use of high-emission vehicles.


5

2.8 The NPPF also makes reference to the need to ensure that the quality of parking in

town centres is improved, so that it is convenient, safe and secure and includes

appropriate provision for motorcycles. It also highlights the need to set

appropriate parking charges that do not undermine the vitality of town centres.

Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport (January 2011)

2.9 As part of the policy changes associated with the 1998 White Paper, the

Government published a revised version of Planning Policy Guidance: Transport

(PPG13). This replaced the original document originally published in April 2001.

PPG13 sets out central government's aims to integrate planning and transport at

the national, strategic and local level and to promote more sustainable transport

choices for both people and freight. It aims to improve integration between

planning and transport and places greater emphasis on the need to provide good

public transport accessibility as part of new developments.

2.10 The main changes to the document relate to parking standards and charges. The

revised version (January 2011) provides greater flexibility to local authorities in

determining the parking requirements for development schemes. The significant

changes are:

I Removal of reference to a direct link between parking availability and modal

choice;

I Removal of requirement to promote cycle use through increase cycle parking

provision;

I Removal of the requirement for there to be no minimum parking standards -

this potentially opens the door for the request of commuted sums from

developers if minimum standards are set; and

I Removal of the use of parking charges as a means of encouraging sustainable

modal choices.

2.11 Contained within PPG 13 are recommendations for maximum parking standards

(see Table 2.1). These are applicable to all Local Authorities in England and any

additional allowance must be justified by the applicant through a Transport

Assessment.


6

TABLE 2.1 PPG13 MAXIMUM PARKING STANDARDS

Use

National Maximum Parking

Standard*

Threshold from

and Above

Which Standard

Applies (gross

floor space)

Food retail 1 space per 14 m2 1,000 m2

Non-food retail 1 space per 20 m2 1,000 m2

Cinemas and conference facilities 1 space per 5 seats 1,000 m2

D2 (other than cinemas, conference

facilities and stadia)

1 space per 22 m2

1,000 m2

B1 including offices 1 space per 30 m2 2,500 m2

Higher and further education

1 space per 2 staff

Plus 1 space per 15 students

2,500 m2

Stadia 1 space per 15 seats 1,500 seats

*1 space per square metre (m2) of gross floor space unless otherwise stated

2.12 PPG 13 does not include maximum standards for residential developments.

Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth

(2009)

2.13 Planning Policy Statement 4 (PPS4) was adopted on December 2010 and was the

first PPS to contain 'policies' rather than guidance. The document has five key aims

centred around creating sustainable economic growth and covers all land uses.

2.14 The key change for transport is that the new PPS4 gives the authority to Local

Planning Authorities to set maximum parking standards for non-residential

development and should take into account:

I Need to encourage access for those without the use of a car;

I Need to reduce carbon emissions;

I Current, and likely future levels of public transport;

I Need to reduce the amount of land needed for development;

I Need to tackle congestion;

I Need to attain air quality objectives; and

I Need to enable schemes to fit into central urban sites and promote linked trips.


7

London Plan (July 2011)

2.15 The London Plan (July 2011) addresses the key trends and challenges that London

will have to address up to 2031. Car parking standards in the London Plan (July

2011) follow the 2006 Alterations to the London Plan. The maximum parking

standards for residential development is determined by the number of bedrooms

per unit which more closely relates to the likely occupancy of a dwelling. For

residential units with 1 or 2 beds the standards is more stringent; changing from '1

to less than 1 space per unit' to 'less than 1 space per unit'. Also, all developments

in areas of good public transport accessibility should aim for significantly less than

1 space per unit. Table 2.2 details these standards.

TABLE 2.2 LONDON PLAN (2011): MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL CAR PARKING

STANDARDS

Predominant Housing

Type

4+ bed units

3 bed units

1-2 bed units

Car Parking Provision

2-1.5 spaces per

unit

1.5-1 space per unit

space

Less than 1 space

per unit

2.16 The London Plan also requires provision of spaces for electric vehicles:

I 20% of all spaces should be for electric vehicles; plus

I An additional 20% passive provision.

2.17 The maximum standards for employment and retail land uses are detailed in

Tables 2.3 and 2.4, respectively.

TABLE 2.3 LONDON PLAN (2011): NON OPERATIONAL MAXIMUM STANDARDS

FOR EMPLOYMENT (B1)

Location

Maximum spaces per square

metres of gross floor space

Central London (CAZ) 1,000 – 1,500

Inner London 600 – 1,500

Outer London 100 – 600

Outer London locations identified through a DPD where

more generous standards should apply*

50-100

*More generous standards can be applied subject to the demonstration of the following: A regeneration

need; No significant adverse impact on congestion and air quality; A lack (now and in future) of public

transport; A lack of existing on or off street parking; A commitment to provide space for electric and

car club vehicles, bicycles and parking for disabled people above the minimum thresholds; A

requirement, via Travel Plans, to reduce provision over time

2.18 There have been no alterations to the maximum standards for Central and Inner

London in the London Plan. However an additional standard has been included for

outer London locations, as identified though a DPD, where more generous

standards are required subject to criteria.


8

2.19 The employment parking levels, therefore, continue to provide some degree of

flexibility for developments in the borough. LB Brent is designated as an Outer

London borough and so can provide parking at a level of as high as 1 space for every

100 square metres of gross floor space or 1 space for every 50 square metres in

locations identified through a DPD.

2.20 The Plan also requires that 20% of all parking spaces must be for electric vehicles,

with an additional 10% passive parking provision for electric vehicles in the future.

TABLE 2.4 LONDON PLAN (2011): MAXIMUM CAR PARKING STANDARDS FOR

RETAIL USES

Use

Maximum spaces per square metres of gross floor space

PTAL 6 and 5 PTAL 4 to 2 PTAL 1

Food up to 500 m2 75 50-35 30

Food up to 2500 m2 45-30 30-20 18

Food over 2500 m2 38-25 25-18 15

Non-food 60-40 50-30 30

Garden Centre 65-45 45-30 25

Town

Centre/Shopping

Mall/Dept Store

75-50

50-35

30

2.21 The levels of parking vary by both the accessibility of the area by public transport

and the type of retail being provided. The highest levels of parking are permitted

for food superstores, as expected, where customers are most likely to require the

use of private cars. In addition, large areas of land where food superstores are

likely to be constructed are unlikely to be available in areas of high public

transport accessibility.

2.22 The London Plan also states that no non-operational parking should be provided for

locations in central London with a PTAL of 6, with the exception of disabled

parking. Also, no additional parking should be provided for classes A2-A5 in town

centre locations, unless for disabled people.

2.23 A provision is also made for electric vehicles - 10% of all parking provision must be

for electric vehicles, with a further 10% passive provision for electric vehicles in

the future.

2.24 Parking for other commercial development is also addressed in the Replacement

London Plan, which specifies that for B2 or B8 use a maximum of one space per

500 m2 of gross floor space should be applied. In addition, a proportion of car

parking spaces should be for motorcycle parking.

2.25 An approach to parking for leisure and hotel uses is provided in the London Plan

rather than the provision of maximum standards. For hotel/leisure uses in

locations with a PTAL of 4-6, onsite parking should be limited to operational needs


9

and parking for disabled people. It should also provide for taxis, coaches and

deliveries/servicing. In locations with a PTAL of 1-3 'provision should be consistent

with objectives to reduce congestion and traffic levels and to avoid undermining

walking, cycling or public transport'.

2.26 Attracting hotels can be important for town centres, limiting parking to

operational needs may not be appropriate for individual circumstances of some

sites in outer and inner London boroughs.

2.27 Policy 6.13 states that 'in town centres where there are identified issues of vitality

and viability, the need to regenerate such centres may require a more flexible

approach to the provision of public car parking to serve the town centre as a

whole'. This level of flexibility will be an important consideration when determining

revised parking standards for Wembley.

2.28 Coach parking is also specifically addressed in the London Plan. One coach parking

space should be provided per 50 rooms for hotels. Leisure, stadia and major

exhibition venues should provide appropriate levels of coach parking in relation to

demand.

2.29 The London Plan also provides parking standards for blue badge holders. This sets

out levels of provision for building types from the outset (2.4m wide by 4.8m long

with a 1.2m zone) as well as future provision for enlarged spaces (3.6m wide by

6m long). Table 2.5 details the standards by building type.

TABLE 2.5 LONDON PLAN (2011): BLUE BADGE CAR PARKING STANDARDS

Building Type

Provision from the Outset Future Provision

Number of spaces

for each employee

who is a disabled

motorist

Number of spaces

for visiting disabled

motorists

Number of

enlarged standard

spaces

Workplaces

1

5% of total capacity

A further 5% of total

capacity

Shopping,

recreation and

leisure facilities

1



capacity

Railway buildings

1



capacity

Religious buildings

and crematoria

2 or 6% whichever is the greater


capacity

Sports facilities Determined according to the usage of the sports facility

2.30 The London Plan sets out minimum cycle parking standards, as detailed in Table

2.6.


10

TABLE 2.6 LONDON PLAN (2011): MINIMUM CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS

Use Class

1 space per square metre of gross floor

space (unless otherwise stated)

A1 – Food

Out of centre 1/350

In centre 1/125

A1 – Non Food

Out of centre 1/500

In centre 1/300

A2 (Financial Services) 1/125

A3 – A5

Cafes & Restaurants

Pubs & Wine Bars

Takeaways

1 per 20 staff + 1 per 20 customers

1/100

1/50

B1 (Business) 1/250

B2-B8 (General Industry and Storage &

Distribution)

1/500

C1 (Hotels) 1 per 10 staff

C2 (Residential Institutions)

Care Homes

Hospitals

1 per 3 staff

1 per 5 staff + 1 per 10 visitors

C3 (Dwellings)

1 per 1 or 2 bed unit

2 per 3 bed or more unit

D1 (Non-residential institutions)

Primary, Secondary School

University/Colleges

Libraries

Health facilities/clinics

1 per 10 staff or students

1 per 8 staff or students



D2 (Assembly & Leisure)

Cinemas

Leisure facilities

1 per 20 staff + 1 per 50 seats

1 per 110 staff + 1 per 20 peak period visitors

Early Minor Alterations to The London Plan – Affordable housing, cycle

parking standards and minor clarifications (November 2011)

2.31 The Mayor has issued early minor alterations to the new London Plan which was

adopted in July 2011. The alterations published in November 2011 focus on the

incorporation of the affordable rent category into affordable housing and

amendments to cycle parking standards. The amendments to the cycle parking

standards include clarification on standards relating to both staff and visitors and


11

an increase in provision for B1 offices and the inclusion of standards for student

accommodation, stations and sui generis uses. Table 2.7 details these standards.

TABLE 2.7 EARLY MINOR ALTERATIONS TO THE LONDON PLAN (2011):

MINIMUM CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS

Use Class



A1 – Food

Out of centre 1/350 for staff and visitors

In centre 1/125 for staff and visitors

A1 – Non Food

Out of centre 1/500 for staff and visitors


A2 (Financial Services) 1/125 for staff and visitors

A3 – A5

Cafes & Restaurants

Pubs & Wine Bars

Takeaways


1/100 for staff and visitors


B1 (Business)

Business offices

Light industry and research and development



B2-B8 (General Industry and Storage &

Distribution)


C1 (Hotels) 1 per 10 staff +minimum 2 spaces for visitors

C2 (Residential Institutions)

Care Homes / secure accommodation

Hospitals

Student accommodation

1 per 3 staff +minimum 2 spaces for visitors


1 per 2 beds + 1 per 10 visitors

C3 (Dwellings)

1 per 1 or 2 bed unit for residents + 1 per 40

units for visitors

2 per 3 bed or more unit + 1 per 40 units for

visitors

D1 (Non-residential institutions)

Nurseries and Primary/Secondary School

University/Colleges

Other e.g. libraries, dentist, church


1 per 10 staff + 1 per 10 students

1 per 8 staff 1 per 8 students




Other e.g. cinemas, bingo etc.

Sports e.g. sports hall, swimming bath,

gymnasium etc.




12

Use Class



Sui generis

As per most relevant standard e.g. casino and

theatre – D2

Stations

To be considered on a case by case basis

through liaison with TfL.

Brent UDP 2002 Inspectors Report

2.32 LB Brent produced their Replacement UDP in 2001 which was subsequently

reviewed as part of the Public Local Inquiry and recommendations were made by

the Inspector as a result of a series of objections.

2.33 A key objection was the limited conformity with both PPG13 parking standards and

the London Plan standards. In particular, the inclusion of more relaxed parking

standards for certain regeneration areas was considered to be a clear departure

from the London Plan. An increase of up to one third in parking was permitted in

certain identified areas of the borough. At the time of the Inspectors Report, this

was highlighted although it was not recommended this policy be changed and was

retained in the final adopted UDP.

2.34 The Inspectors report recommended a closer relationship between public transport

accessibility and parking standards. In addition, a stronger emphasis on the

appreciation of the national PPG13 standards and the regional London Plan

standards was recommended.

Unitary Development Plan (2004)

2.35 Following the publication of the Inspectors Report in 2002, a revised UDP was

produced and adopted in 2004. This featured minor amendments to the parking

standards although was still considered by the GLA to have limited conformity with

the now adopted London Plan.


PS3 Regeneration Exception:

An increase of up to a third in parking will exceptionally be made in Strategic

Employment Areas, Park Royal and the National Stadium Policy Area, providing

the applicants can demonstrate the following:

i) It is a key regeneration proposal supportive of regeneration projects in the

area;

ii) The transport and environmental impact of the scheme is acceptable; and

iii) The proposal secures significant and sufficient public

transport/walking/cycling improvements, and/or contributions towards on-

street parking controls, and implementation of a green transport plan.

2.37 The parking standards within the existing UDP are set out in Appendix A.


13

2.38 Table 2.8 compares Brent’s current UDP car parking standards and the Wembley

regeneration exception with the London Plan car parking standards discussed

previously. Differences are highlighted in bold.

TABLE 2.8 COMPARISON OF BRENT’S UDP CAR PARKING STANDARDS WITH

LONDON PLAN STANDARDS

Use Class

Maximum Standard

London Plan (2011)

Brent’s UDP (2004)

Wembley

Regeneration

Exception UDP (2004)

A1 Food over 2,000 m2

PTAL 5 and 6: 1/38 - 25

PTAL 4 to 2: 1/25 - 18

PTAL 1: 1/15

In/Adjacent to Major

Town Centres/District

Centres: 1/50

Elsewhere: 1/25



Centres: 1/38

Elsewhere: 1/19

A1 Non-food

PTAL 5 and 6: 1/60 - 40

PTAL 4 to 2: 1/50 - 30

PTAL 1: 1/30



Centres: 1/50

Elsewhere: 1/25



Centres: 1/38

Elsewhere: 1/19

B1 Business

Inner London 1/600 –

1,000

Outer London 1/100 – 600

Outer London (DPD) 1/50

- 100



Centres: 1/300

Elsewhere: 1/150



Centres: 1/226

Elsewhere: 1/113

B2 General Industry

1/500



Centres: 1/300

Elsewhere: 1/150



Centres: 1/226

Elsewhere: 1/113

B8 Storage &

Distribution

1/500



Centres: 1/300

Elsewhere: 1/150



Centres: 1/226

Elsewhere: 1/113

C1 Hotels

PTAL 4 to 6:

Operational/blue badge

PTAL 1 to 3: restraint

1 per 5 bedrooms + 1

per 5 employees

1 per 4 bedrooms + 1

per 4 employees

C3 Dwellings

1 units

2 unit

3 units

4 or more units

Less than 1/unit

Less than 1/unit

1.5-1/unit

2-1.5/unit

1.0/unit

1.2/unit

1.6/unit

2.0/unit

1.3/unit

1.6/unit

2.1/unit

2.7/unit


14

Local Development Framework Core Strategy (July 2010)

2.39 The LDF will replace Brent's UDP, as required by the Planning and Compulsory

Purchase Act 2004. It will provide a strategic planning framework for the Borough,

guiding change to 2026. When adopted, Brent's LDF, together with the London

Plan, will form the statutory Development Plan for the Borough.

2.40 The Core Strategy was adopted on the 12 July 2010. It outlines key strategic

objectives. Strategic Objective 8 is 'to reduce the need to travel and improve

transport choices by:


need to travel to other centres. Improving key transport interchanges at

Wembley, Alperton, First Central and Queen's Park;





2.41 A number of growth areas are discussed in the Core Strategy, including Wembley,

Alperton, South Kilburn, Church End, Burnt Oak/Colindale and Park Royal. The

Core Strategy highlights that car parking provision will be based on accessibility to

public transport and proximity to town centres, such that there will be lower

parking provision in the growth areas than outside them.

2.42 The Wembley growth area is detailed in Figure 2.1 and as defined in Policy CP7

‘will drive the economic regeneration of Brent. It will become a high quality,

urban, connected and sustainable city quarter generating 10,000 new jobs across a

range of sectors including retail, offices, the new Brent civic centre, conference

facilities, hotels, sports, leisure, tourism and visitor attractors, creative and

cultural industries and education facilities reflecting its designation as a Strategic

Cultural Area for London’.

2.43 Wembley will also provide at least 11,500 new homes to 2026 redeveloping land

around the Wembley National Stadium and Wembley town centre.


15

FIGURE 2.1 WEMBLEY GROWTH AREA

Source: LB Brent Core Strategy

Wembley Area Action Plan Issues and Options (September 2011)

2.44 The WAAP regeneration area covers the town centres of Wembley and Wembley

Park, the Wembley Masterplan area, including both the stadium area and the key

development sites around it, and also the industrial area up to the North Circular

road. This area covers an approximate total of 230 hectares, and over half of the

borough’s projected new housing, as well as most of the new commercial floor

space, will be constructed within the area boundaries.

2.45 The key objectives within the WAAP relating to transport that need to be

considered when setting parking standards for the WAAP regeneration area are

centred around promoting improved access to the area, and reducing the need to

travel by car. These include the following:

I Create a well-connected and accessible location where sustainable modes of

travel are prioritised and modal share of car trips to Wembley is reduced from

37% towards 25%;

I Ensure that the infrastructure of Wembley is upgraded so that it supports new

development and meets the needs of the local community;

I Complete first class retail and other facilities in Wembley that reduces the

need to travel to other centres and improving key transport interchanges; and

I Promote access by public transport, bicycle or on foot and reduce car parking

standards because of Wembley’s relative accessibility.


16

2.46 The WAAP will provide 10,000 jobs and 11,500 plus new homes, with hotel,

conference, retail and leisure facilities. This is predicated on the access by

sustainable means, with pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users having

priority over private car.

2.47 The WAAP highlights the opportunity that parking standards can be used as a

mechanism for implementing a policy of car restraint and promoting sustainable

modes of transport. However, it recognises that there is a need to promote

successful regeneration and it is therefore necessary to provide a level of car

parking that will attract visitors, workers and residents. An appropriate balance is

required.

Wembley West End (South) Supplementary Planning Document

(November 2006)

2.48 The Wembley West End Supplementary Planning Document highlights the need to

retain short-stay public parking in support of town centre retail activity and

competitiveness. Town centre parking is to be ‘the first priority in any scheme

with clear priority over residential provision’. It also notes the potential for car-

free development in this highly accessible location.

Wembley Link Supplementary Planning Document (July 2011)

2.49 The Wembley Link Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) states that it will:

I Contribute to the delivery of a significantly enhanced retail offer for Wembley;

I Develop and stimulate the regeneration of the area known as “Wembley Link”

which provides the important connection between the Wembley Stadium

development and Wembley’s primary shopping area around Central Square;

I Enable the creation of high quality, active frontages to this part of the High

Road;

I Facilitate medium density development and identify a locations to provide an

opportunity for taller buildings;

I Encourage exemplary standards of design to reflect the benchmark provided by

the stadium; and

I Encourage the provision of family.

2.50 The SPD emphasises the excellent public transport provision to the area, provided

by rail and bus services. It also acknowledges that there are regular problems of

congestion along the High Road, particularly at key junctions.

2.51 Consequently the SPD emphasises the need for developments to continue to exploit

the proximity of Wembley Central and Wembley Stadium stations and the very

good bus routes in the area. It also highlights the need to manage car parking and

to encourage car free commercial and residential development in the area.

2.52 The presence of local CPZ control is mentioned as an efficient means of addressing

overspill parking from new developments onto local roads, with new residents

prevented from having residents’ parking permits or event day parking permits.

2.53 Maximum parking ratios for new residential development in the area will be set at

0.5 spaces per residential unit. This is in accordance with the Stadium Masterplan.


17

Wembley Master Plan Supplementary Planning Document (June 2009)

2.54 The vision for the Wembley Master Plan is:

“A new place, a new home and a new destination - modern, urban and exciting. At

its core will be a comprehensive range of leisure and commercial facilities,

exploiting excellent public transport connections to the rest of London and the

United Kingdom, all in a contemporary, lively and distinctive setting.”

2.55 The master plan seeks to achieve the comprehensive and sustainable regeneration

of the Wembley Master Plan area. It details the strategy for the future transport

infrastructure of the area and focuses on sustainable modes of travel, including

public transport, walking and cycling.

2.56 The SPD clearly states that the promotion of a sustainable travel mode shift

alongside minimising car use is fundamental to achieving the level of development

proposed and to enable a high quality living, working, retail and leisure

environment. Travel demand management is cited as integral to this. Consequently

Travel Plans for new developments will be required. Also, car free development in

areas of high public transport accessibility and Car Clubs will be supported to assist

in the reduction of car usage.

2.57 The master plan recognises that car travel will nonetheless remain important and

must be sufficiently catered for. An average of 0.5 spaces per residential unit will

be applied throughout the master plan area. Where residential development is

proposed in areas of high public transport accessibility, car free developments will

be supported. Also higher levels of parking may be permitted further away from

transport hubs.

2.58 On-street parking provision will be limited in number, with only short-stay spaces

provided for where appropriate.

2.59 Event day parking will continue to be managed carefully supported by event day

restrictions and CPZ designation. On event days, new public car parks are to be

maintained for general rather than event use to support the use of public transport

by event visitors.

Wembley Masterplan Transport Strategy Review (November 2008)

2.60 The Wembley Masterplan Transport Review (November 2008) raised concern over

the level of traffic forecast to result from the Wembley Masterplan development.

Given that the road network in the surrounding area, and to a lesser extent within

it, is already under pressure, particularly at peak times, the report concluded that

the road network was anticipated to be substantially overloaded at key points

during Stage 1 of the Master Plan, worsening with each subsequent stage.

2.61 The assessment undertaken and reported on in the document, demonstrated very

significant traffic impacts, and the analysis undertaken demonstrated the need for

essential junction improvements at the following locations:

I Empire Way/Engineers Way;

I Wembley Hill Road/Empire Way;

I Engineers Way/Olympic Way;


18

I Wembley Hill Road/South Way;

I Wembley High Road/Wembley Hill Road,

I (reconnection of) North End Road/Bridge Road,

I North End Road/Albion Way,

I Bridge Road/Forty Lane; and

I Albion Way/Fulton Road.

2.62 These report highlighted that these improvements are required to prevent undue

traffic congestion but also to deliver essential bus priority measures and provide a

more positive environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

2.63 Improvements at the following junctions would be beneficial though not essential:

I Empire Way/Wembley Park Drive;

I Empire Way/Fulton Road, and

I Drury Way/A406 North Circular Road (strategic scheme needed).

2.64 The review also concluded that, alongside the need for the highway improvements

outlined above, the level and type of growth proposed could be accommodated if

it was primarily based on public transport access and travel demand measures. The

report highlighted that:

I Rail and underground capacity is considered appropriate, but considered its

geographical coverage a limitation to its effectiveness, which supresses its

modal share;

I Bus services provide access to local rail and underground stations as well as

providing orbital and radial connectivity. The report promotes a step change in

bus service provision to the area;

I Walking and cycling the review highlights the need to ensure the provision of

high quality public realm with safe and convenient pedestrian and cycle routes.

This will encourage journeys on foot within and between master plan districts,

and to access public transport nodes and local destinations in the wider

Wembley area; and

I Travel Demand Management integrated within new development is reported to

make a potentially substantial contribution to minimising demand on the

transport network across all modes in Wembley. Measures such as Travel Plans,

car clubs and car sharing, personalised travel planning and flexible working are

discussed.

2.65 The review concludes that ‘restraining the overall parking level remains important

to minimise road network congestion and encourage travel by other modes’. The

use of a restrained level of parking for residential development (0.5 spaces per

unit) is cited as being consistent with this. Moreover the report considers that

there is opportunity to consider further parking restraint for developments which

have good public transport access and access to walking and cycling networks. It

also highlights the need to deliver more car-free developments as they will deliver

flexibility to provide needed spaces elsewhere.


19

Transport Strategy Key Component Study (February 2009)

2.66 This study reaffirmed the conclusions of the initial study and recommended

potential measures to both minimise the need for travel and secure a substantial

travel mode shift away from the private car towards the use of sustainable

transport modes.

2.67 The report examined in detail the modal shift impact of the provision of enhanced

bus services and facilities, and the implementation of a range of travel demand

management measures that result in a sufficient reduction in development related

traffic to allow the level of development envisaged in the master plan. Figure 2.2

details the proposed enhancements to bus services.

FIGURE 2.2 TRANSPORT STRATEGY KEY COMPONENT STUDY (FEBRUARY

2009): PROPOSED BUS ROUTES

Source: Transport Strategy Key Component Study, February 2009

Framework Parking Strategy for Wembley (March 2012)

2.68 The parallel Framework Parking Strategy for Wembley (FPSW) study concluded that

demand for parking within the WAAP area will change as planned development

comes forward. Currently the majority of parking demand is focussed on the town

centre area. It is anticipated that future development will bring increased parking

pressures to areas to the west and north-west of Wembley Stadium, with potential

impacts on traffic flows along the Wembley Hill Road/Empire Way corridor.

2.69 The FPSW highlighted the need for the Wembley’s parking strategy to be

responsive and flexible.


20

2.70 In order to reduce the proportion of car journeys into Wembley as per the Core

Strategy and WAAP objectives managing parking demand and supply will be

integral. The study found that:

I existing public parking supply is focussed on the town centre, primarily in the

area surrounding Wembley Central station;

I Current demand for parking within the town centre is such that the available

car parks are, in general, poorly utilised; and

I Whilst planned and conceptual developments within the town centre may bring

an increase in demand for town centre parking, it is expected that a level of

over-supply of spaces will remain.

2.71 The report highlights that it has not been possible to forecast the levels of public

parking demand that will be generated by the new retail provision in the Quintain

Stage 1 and NW Land developments. In the shorter term any demand is expected

to be taken up by the re-developed Red car park. In the event that parking

capacity at this location becomes insufficient, opportunities for the provision of

additional parking towards the eastern end of Wembley High Road should be

investigated, subject to the provision of satisfactory access arrangements.

2.72 Consequently, Wembley’s Framework Parking Strategy for the supply of parking

spaces will seek to:

I Monitor car park usage levels to determine appropriate levels of parking supply;

I Consolidate town centre car parking provision in line with expected future

parking demand;

I Ensure new car parking provision is of good quality in order to promote usage;

and

I Pursue opportunities for new car parking at the eastern end of Wembley High

Road if demand is identified

2.73 Wembley’s Framework Parking Strategy for public parking locations will be to:

I Consolidate town centre parking into covered parking areas at Central Square,

Elm Road and, on completion, Wembley West End with a view to freeing up

existing surface parking areas for development;

I Create and promote three Primary Parking Locations at edge of town locations

at Wembley West End and at the two multi-storey car parks within the

Wembley Masterplan area; and

I Seek to provide a fourth Primary Parking Location at the eastern end of

Wembley High Road.

2.74 Wembley’s Framework Parking Strategy for parking at Wembley Stadium will be to:

I Seek to ensure that adequate event parking is provided during and after the

redevelopment of the Red car park, either in the Yellow car park or at other

suitable locations, in conjunction with landowners Quintain; and

I Identify a strategy for the future provision of event parking at Wembley Stadium

for the periods during and following the development of the Green car park.


21

3 Review of Parking Standards LB Brent

Overview

3.1 LB Brent’s parking standards as included within its adopted UDP, were reviewed

following the changes to the approach to parking in London (as set out within the

new London Plan) and also the change in socio-economic characteristics of LB

Brent since the previous review. The results of the study including

recommendations are detailed in the London Borough of Brent: Review of Parking

Standards (March 2012) document. This chapter provides a summary of the key

findings.

3.2 The objective of the review was to ensure that the local needs of the borough are

met, whilst remaining conformant to the standards set out in the London Plan.

There is also a need for the parking standards to support the wider strategic

objectives set out in the LB Brent Core Strategy document, namely to reduce the

need to travel and to improve transport choices within the borough.

3.3 The approach of the study was to first review current policy, specifically the

standards adopted within the UDP, and the new London Plan. Spatial and socio-

economic analysis of the borough was then undertaken to highlight variation in

local needs across the borough. An extensive benchmarking exercise was then

carried out to assess alternative approaches to parking standards across other

boroughs; and to establish any boundary or competitive criteria that could

influence local standards.

Current Transport Situation

3.4 Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) scores vary significantly across the

borough. Key town centres such as Wembley and Kilburn enjoy very high levels of

public transport access, but other areas nearby such as Church End and Tokyngton

have PTAL scores of 1, the lowest possible score.

3.5 There is a clear north-south divide within the borough in terms of deprivation.

Areas such as Harlesden and Park Royal are among the top 10% of areas in England

on the Index of Multiple Deprivation. This is reflected in the comparative levels of

car ownership, which are considerably higher in the north of the borough.

3.6 Public transport use in LB Brent is much higher than in neighbouring outer London

boroughs. This is higher in the south and east of the borough, where access to

public transport (particularly into central London) is much greater.

3.7 45% of Brent residents work within the borough, and 56% of Brent employees live

within the borough. Of those residents that work outside of the borough, many will

work within inner London, or in neighbouring boroughs. Those that work in Brent

but live outside the borough are more likely to live in neighbouring boroughs.

3.8 Controlled parking zones (CPZ) in the borough are concentrated to the south of the

borough and around key transport interchanges.


22

Benchmarking

Car Parking

3.9 A number of boroughs, namely LB Barnet, RB Greenwich, LB Harrow and LB

Merton, currently follow London Plan standards across all four key categories.

3.10 Across other London boroughs, there is a large range in standards applied for both

A1 retail and B1 office. LB Hammersmith & Fulham have policies towards greater

cycle provision, with 1 space per 25 m2 for A1 retail, and 1 space per 50 m2 for B1

office. In contrast, LB Ealing standards are 1 space per 450 m2 in each instance.

3.11 Currently LB Brent standards for A1 retail and B1 office are greater than for the

London Plan, with 1 space per 125 m2 in each instance. At present LB Brent has yet

to adopt any cycle parking standards for C1 hotel land use.

3.12 LB Brent at present requires 1 cycle parking space per C3 residential unit, which is

somewhat lower than the current London Plan standards (2 per unit) and

consequently lower than most comparator boroughs.

3.13 LB Barnet and LB Wandsworth employ regeneration exceptions for the Brent Cross

- Cricklewood regeneration and Vauxhall Nine Elms and Battersea regeneration

area, respectively.

Cycle Parking

3.14 LB Barnet, RB Greenwich, LB Harrow and LB Merton currently follow London Plan

standards across all four key categories.

3.15 Across other London boroughs, there is a large range in standards applied for both

A1 retail and B1 office. LB Hammersmith & Fulham have chosen to adopt policies

towards greater cycle provision, with 1 space per 25 m2 for A1 retail, and 1 space

per 50 m2 for B1 office. In contrast, LB Ealing standards are 1 space per 450 m2 in

each instance.

3.16 Currently LB Brent standards for A1 retail and B1 office are greater than for the

London Plan, with 1 space per 125 m2 in each instance. At present LB Brent has yet

to adopt any cycle parking standards for C1 hotel land use.

3.17 LB Brent at present requires 1 cycle parking space per C3 residential unit, which is

somewhat lower than the current London Plan standards (2 per unit) and

consequently lower than most comparator boroughs.

Main Themes

3.18 The key factor in determining non-residential parking standards across the

comparator boroughs is variation in PTAL scores across the boroughs, with all

boroughs recognising the merit in using PTALs as a tool to measure accessibility.

3.19 Many boroughs, in particularly the outer London boroughs, have chosen to apply

London Plan non-residential standards, which is a PTAL based approach to setting

parking standards. Inner London boroughs where PTALs are high across the

borough, such as Camden and Westminster, have chosen to apply more restrictive

non-residential standards in order to address congestion.


23

3.20 Car free developments are widely encouraged across the comparator boroughs in

appropriate locations, which should broadly satisfy the following conditions:

I The area has a high PTAL score (4 or above);

I The development lies within an existing/proposed controlled parking zone;

I There are accessible alternative modes of transport that can support the

additional demand generated by the development; and

I There is sufficient Blue Badge parking provided.

3.21 The most common electric charging vehicle parking standards are to follow the

minimum standards as set out in the London Plan.

3.22 A number of the boroughs also recognise the need to encourage car club and car-

pooling within developments in order to reduce the need for car ownership.

3.23 Cycle parking standards follow the minimum standards set out by the London Plan

across most boroughs. Certain boroughs (e.g. Hammersmith and Fulham) where the

projected cycling mode share is higher than the London average have chosen to set

higher standards than those set out in the London Plan.

Key Recommendations

3.24 The key objective for LB Brent parking standards is to ensure general conformity

with the London Plan and that such standards are set at levels consistent with

meeting the objectives of NPPF. However the London Plan also recognises that

parking standards need to be set in the context of transport policies generally, and

area-specific initiatives and needs specifically.

3.25 For residential parking standards, there is clear correlation between deprived

areas, public transport accessibility and reduced car ownership. The wards in the

north of the borough show higher levels of car ownership, lower levels of

deprivation and lower levels of public transport accessibility. Therefore, the study

recommended that residential parking standards are related to public transport

accessibility, whilst remaining within the London Plan recommended standards.

3.26 For town centres located in the area of the borough classified as Inner London

(namely the area south of Dudding Hill railway line with PTAL greater than 4),

more restrictive maximum standards are applied to retail parking provision.

3.27 For the smaller town centres across the borough, which range in accessibility to

public transport, standards are lower than London Plan standards, but have a

higher allowance than in the Inner London Brent town centres. This will allow for

development of larger retail stores where higher parking levels are needed.

3.28 Employment areas in LB Brent have varying levels of access to public transport

accessibility and individual characteristics. On this basis, parking standards (where

parking is required) are recommended to follow the midpoint of the London Plan

range of standard for employment use parking.

3.29 For hotel developments within the Major Town Centres of Wembley and Kilburn, it

is proposed that only operational and disabled provision should be provided, with

employee parking provided based solely on Transport Assessment justification. For

new hotels outside this area, a maximum of one space per five bedrooms should be


24

provided. The study also recommended that a minimum of one coach parking

space should be provided for every 100 bedrooms.

3.30 The study also proposed that the Wembley Area Action Plan regeneration area be

treated as an exception to the standards set out in this document and will

therefore be subject to a set of car parking standards specific to the area.

3.31 Table 3.1 details the proposed parking standards for LB Brent and compares them

with the current regeneration exception standards for Wembley. Differences are

highlighted in bold. This illustrates that the application of the Wembley

regeneration exception compared to the proposed parking standards for LB Brent

would result in a significantly higher level of parking.

3.32 Finally, the study proposed that the cycle parking standards provided in the

London Plan – Early Alterations (2011), will be adopted by LB Brent within its

emerging DMPD. The only exception to this rule is the cycle parking standard for

B1 business offices, which has been retained from the UDP as it exceeds the

London Plan standard.


25

TABLE 3.1 COMPARISON OF BRENT’S PROPOSED CAR PARKING STANDARDS

(MARCH 2012) WITH WEMBLEY REGENERATION EXCEPTION UDP (2004)

Use Class

Maximum Standard

Proposed Standards LB Brent

(2012)

Wembley Regeneration Exception

UDP (2004)

A1 Food over 2,500 m2

Major Town Centres: 1/100

Rest of the Borough: 1/50

In/Adjacent to Major Town

Centres/District Centres: 1/38

Elsewhere: 1/19

A1 Non-food





Elsewhere: 1/19

B1 Business

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350

Outer London – regeneration

exception: 1/75



Elsewhere: 1/113

B2 General Industry

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75



Elsewhere: 1/113

B8 Storage &

Distribution

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75



Elsewhere: 1/113

C1 Hotels

Major Town Centres Wembley

and Kilburn: employee parking

provided based on transport

assessment

Elsewhere: 1 per 5 bedrooms

1 per 4 bedrooms + 1 per 4

employees

C3 Dwellings

1 - 2 beds 3 beds

4 + beds

PTAL 4-6: 0.75/unit

PTAL 1-3: 1.0/unit PTAL 4-6: 1.2/unit

PTAL 1-3: 1.5/unit PTAL 4-6: 1.2/unit

PTAL 1-3: 2.0/unit

1.3 to 1.6/unit

2.1/unit

2.7/unit


26

4 Wembley Regeneration Area

Overview

4.1 The Wembley Area Action Plan regeneration area covers the town centres of

Wembley and Wembley Park as well as the Wembley Master Plan area, which

includes the stadium and key development sites around it. Is also includes the

industrial area to the east of the stadium, which extends to the North Circular

Road.

Wembley Town Centre

4.2 Figure 4.1 details the town centre boundaries for both Wembley and Wembley

Park. Wembley is designated a Major Centre within the London Plan. It is

comparable in size to Kilburn, within the borough, however the neighbouring town

centres of Ealing, Harrow and Brent Cross are substantially bigger. Comparison

retail accounts for 26% of total floor space and convenience retail accounted for

10%. Wembley has a significant amount of land available for development.

FIGURE 4.1 WEMBLEY TOWN CENTRES BOUNDARIES

Source: Wembley Area Action Plan Issues and Options, September 2011

Wembley Park Town Centre

4.3 Wembley Park is designated a District Centre within the London Plan. Wembley

Park extends to the north and south of the underground station, incorporating the

Stadium Retail Park. It is dominated by convenience retail, which accounts of 60%

of total floor space. Comparison shopping is small in proportion, boosted by the


27

Stadium Retail Park. Food and drink premises are encouraged in this area to serve

event goers and account for 10% of the total floor space.

Wembley Master Plan Area

4.4 Figure 4.2 illustrates the Wembley Master Plan area.

FIGURE 4.2 WEMBLEY MASTER PLAN AREA

Source: Wembley Master Plan SPD

Industrial Area

4.5 This area encompasses the area to the east of the stadium, extending to the North

Circular Road, as detailed in Figure 4.2.


28

FIGURE 4.3 WEMBLEY INDUSTRIAL AREA


4.6 It includes Strategic Industrial Locations (SIL), which were designated in 2004 with

the adoption of the LB Brent’s UDP. Since 2004, there has been significant change

in the area in terms of use and occupation of the land. There has been a reduction

in demand for industrial premises. Consequently there are areas of land within this

area which are underused in terms of the level of employment provided as large

parcels of land are being used for storage or waste transfer. The area designated

as a business park has not been developed as such.

Indicative Uses across the Wembley Area Action Plan Regeneration Area

4.7 The WAAP envisages a number of specific town centre uses across the area

including meeting local convenience needs within the existing Wembley town

centre, providing service related retail at Wembley Park for stadium visitors and

providing specialist or niche retail uses across the new part of the centre with

extension to the east.

4.8 Indicative roles for the WAAP are shown in Figure 4.4.


29

FIGURE 4.4 INDICATIVE ROLES FOR THE WEMBLEY AREA ACTION PLAN

REGENERATION AREA


Public Transport Accessibility Levels

4.9 Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) is the most widely recognised form of

measuring accessibility to the public transport network in London. The analysis

takes account of walk access time to and frequency of public transport services

and measures the density of the public transport network. The levels of

accessibility range from 1 (low level of accessibility) to 6 (high level of

accessibility).

4.10 Parking standards are commonly defined against PTAL of an area, with reduces

parking in areas with good public transport accessibility.

Current PTAL for Wembley (2010)

4.11 Figure 4.5 illustrates the current PTAL for the Wembley Area Action Plan

regeneration area.

4.12 The map highlights that the area from Wembley Town Centre to Wembley Stadium

Station ranges in PTAL between 6a and 4. With the higher PTAL levels contoured

from the High Road due to proximity to rail and bus services. The area of the town

centre located to the west of the National Stadium, ranges in PTAL from 2 to 6a,

with a very small area immediately adjacent to the stadium scoring 2.

4.13 Wembley Park town centre follows a similar pattern, with a range of PTAL

between 6a and 4. The higher PTAL scores are contoured from Empire Way and

Wembley Park station.


30

4.14 Lower PTAL scores are evident in the industrial area of the WAAP; from First Way to

the railway lines, ranging from 1 to 2. This is as a result of remoteness from public

transport nodes. Higher PTAL scores occur in the industrial area south of the railway

lines to the North Circular, where retail superstores are located. This is as

a result of proximity to Neasden where a higher level of public transport nodes

(bus and rail) can be accessed.

4.15 The remaining Wembley Master Plan area outside the Wembley and Wembley Park

town centre zones ranges in PTAL from 2 to 5.

P \Projects\224\5\56\01\GIS\MAPPING\Mapinfo\Workspace s\Revised_PTA L_Map.wrx

- PTAL Legend

LeveiO

Level 1a

Level 1b

Level2

Level3

• Level4

LevelS

Level6a


Review of Parking Standards: Recommended Changes to Parking Standards in Wembley ]§ steer davies gleave

Figure 4.5:2010 PTAL: Wembley Action Plan Regeneration Area Drawn by

JAT

Las t updated

11/05/2012

R evision

1

Recommended Changes to Parking Standards in Wembley

32

Future PTAL for Wembley (2026)

4.16 Transport for London (TfL) have produced future PTAL mapping for the year 2026.

These maps are designed to represent future transport improvements across

London. These improvements may include the following:

I New rail/underground lines/stations;

I Increased service frequency of current rail/underground services;

I New/revised bus routes;

I Walking/cycling route improvements;

I Improvements to the road network/road capacity.

4.17 The changes to transport within LB Brent that have the most significant impact on

PTAL scores are:

I Bus frequencies increased: an overall increase in bus frequencies of 4% in

Central London and 2.5% in all other areas to 2016; and

I Bakerloo Post 2016 – this is the only scheme beyond 2026 that will have an

impact on PTALs, though frequency changes are relatively small (overall 2

additional 2vph).

4.18 Figure 4.6 illustrates the future PTAL for the Wembley Area Action Plan

regeneration area.

4.19 The map shows that the area from Wembley Town Centre to Wembley Stadium

Station continues to range in PTAL between 6a and 4, however most of the area

scores 5/6. The area that previously scored 5 has increased to level 6a.

Accordingly a significant proportion of the area that scored level 4 has increased

to 5. Higher PTAL levels continue to contour out from the High Road due to

proximity to rail and bus services. The area of the town centre located to the west

of the National Stadium, remains unchanged.

4.20 The level of public transport accessibility around Wembley Park town centre has

also increased, with most of the area scoring either PTAL 5 or 6a. Higher PTAL

scores contour out from Empire Way and Wembley Park station.

4.21 The industrial area of the WAAP; from First Way to the railway lines, is unchanged,

continuing to ranging in PTAL from 1 to 2. This is as a result of remoteness from

public transport nodes. Higher PTAL scores remain in the industrial area south of

the railway lines to the North Circular, where retail superstores are located. This

is as a result of proximity to Neasden where a higher level of public transport

nodes (bus and rail) can be accessed. The remaining Wembley Master Plan area

continues to range in PTAL from 2 to 5, with limited change.

P \Projects\224\5\56\01\GIS\MAPPING\Mapinfo\Workspace s\Revised_PTA L_Map.wrx

e

-

PTAL Legend

LeveiO

Level 1a

Level 1b

Level2

Level3

Level4

LevelS •

Level6a


Review of Parking Standards: Recommended Changes to Parking Standards in Wembley ]§ steer davies gleave

Figure 4.6: 2026 PTAL: Wembley Action Plan Regeneration Area Drawn by JAT

Las t updated 11/05/2012

R evision 1


34

Controlled Parking Zones

4.22 Figure 4.7 illustrates the boundaries of the Controlled Parking Zones (CPZ) that

operate within the WAAP. These CPZs prioritise long-stay on-street parking for

local residents. Currently, the CPZs are concentrated around Wembley town

centre. In addition, a number of on-street Pay & Display schemes are in operation.

These enable short-stay parking to be available to shoppers to encourage use of

the retail offer.

4.23 This shows existing effort by the borough to deter the generation of unnecessary

car trips, around Wembley town centre, particularly for those making use of public

transport to complete their journey.

4.24 Proposals exist for a Civic Centre CPZ associated with the Wembley Master Plan

development proposals but has not yet been implemented.

4.25 The development of further CPZs should be done in conjunction with the

consideration of future development. Where off-street parking is particularly

restricted, an appreciation of the impact such restrictions will have on the

surrounding streets is necessary.

Key Controlled Parking Zones March 2012

Wembley Growth Area

NC1 NC2

W

NS

Wembll ey C

© ro n C yriiiC w op igigight i t s rvedRe e , , r na Surve O d nce y

2010 TelllleleleAtltlllalalas B.V.V.s.s Hertotogenbosch. Allllllllll riiiigigightsts reserl tl . . t . ll i t ved. .

Review of Parking Standards: Recommended Changes to Parking Standards in Wembley


T HY

steer davies gleave

Figure 4.7: Controlled Parking Zones: Wembley Area Action Plan Regeneration Area Drawn by:

JAT

Last updated: 11/05/2012

Revision: 1

P:\Projects\224\5\56\01\GIS\MAPPING\Mapinfo\Workspaces\Revised_CPZ_Updated.wor


36

5 Benchmarking – Borough Car Parking Standards

Regeneration Exceptions

Overview

5.1 Benchmarking of car parking standards has been undertaken for the following

authorities, which include all of the London Borough's that border LB Brent:

I LB Barnet;

I LB Camden;

I LB Ealing;

I RB Greenwich;

I LB Hammersmith & Fulham;

I LB Haringey;

I LB Harrow;

I RB Kensington & Chelsea;

I LB Merton;

I LB Wandsworth; and

I Westminster City Council.

5.2 These boroughs have been agreed with LB Brent.

Local Development Framework Status

5.3 The LDF is the collection of local development documents produced by the

Council's, which collectively deliver the spatial planning strategy for a borough.

The Core Strategy sets out the vision, objectives and detailed spatial strategy for

future development in the borough along with specific strategic policies and

targets, development management policies and site allocations. The Development

Management Policies Document (DMPD) supports the Core Strategy and London

Plan. It sets out each Council's detailed policies for managing development in their

borough.

5.4 The status of the DMPD's varies by authority, some have adopted DMPDs, and

others are in draft form, having been subject to consultation. A number of

authorities do not have DMPDs. The status of each comparator boroughs DMPD is

detailed in Table 4.1. It also classifies each borough as Inner, Outer or Central

London, in accordance with the London Plan.

5.5 Although a number of the comparator boroughs have used the London Plan

standards across their parking standards, the version that was used in developing

these standards is different across the boroughs. Those whose UDP is still in place,

or who prepared their draft prior to July 2011 will have worked from the original

London Plan, which was first published in 2004, and was updated in 2008. These

boroughs are LB Barnet, LB Ealing, RB Greenwich, LB Haringey, LB Harrow and RB

Kensington & Chelsea. The remaining boroughs have used the Replacement London

Plan as the basis for their standards.


37

TABLE 5.1 DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES DOCUMENT STATUS

Borough

London Plan

Designation

Benchmark

Adopted

DMPD

Draft

DMPD

UDP

LB Barnet Outer √

LB Camden Inner √

LB Ealing Outer √

RB Greenwich Inner √

LB Hammersmith & Fulham Inner √

LB Haringey Outer √

LB Harrow Outer √

RB Kensington & Chelsea Inner and Central √

LB Merton Outer √

LB Wandsworth Inner and Central √

City of Westminster Central and Inner √

5.6 Benchmarking has been undertaken to review London Borough (LB) LB Brent's

current car parking standards against comparator borough's standards, capturing:

I The application of regeneration exceptions to car parking standards within a

borough.

5.7 Where authorities have proposed or adopted car parking standards included within

DMPDs the assessment, as detailed above, has been undertaken. Consequently the

following boroughs have been reviewed with regard to their general method,

approach and justification of parking standards:

I LB Barnet;

I LB Camden;

I RB Greenwich;

I LB Hammersmith & Fulham;

I LB Haringey;

I LB Harrow;

I LB Merton;

I LB Wandsworth; and

I Westminster City Council.

5.8 This chapter presents a comparison of the above authorities car parking standards

with the proposed recommendations to LB Brent’s parking standards, where a

regeneration exception has been made for each of the land uses set out in the

March 2012 report.


38

LB Barnet

5.9 LB Barnet's DMPD was submitted to the Secretary of State in September 2011 for

Examination in Public. The preparation of the Development Management policies

submission document follows two extensive consultations on the development

between autumn 2010 and spring 2011. The Core Strategy was submitted to the

Planning Inspectorate on the 16 August 2011 and a joint Examination in Public was

held in December 2011 for both the Core Strategy and Development Management

Policies documents.

5.10 The Development Management Policies documents that have been reviewed for

this study are:

I Development Management Policies proposed submission document (May 2011);

and

I Pre-Submission Amendments to Development Management Policies (September

2011).

5.11 Also reviewed is the Core Strategy – Submission Stage Development Plan document

(May 2011).

5.12 The key policies relating to LB Barnet's proposed parking standards are:

Core Strategy Policy CS9: Providing Safe, Effective and Efficient Travel aims to

relieve pressure on the transport network in LB Barnet and reduce the impact of

travel whilst maintaining freedom and ability to move at will, as well as

facilitating growth.

Development Management Policy DM17: Travel Impact and Parking Standards

sets the policies on movement that will work towards CS9. Policy G: Parking

Management sets out the policy on parking standards, which is that development

will provide parking in accordance with the London Plan standards, except for

residential development, which will differ from the London Plan for 1 bed (1 to

less than 1 per unit rather than less than 1 per unit). It also states that residential

development with limited/no parking will be considered where the following can

be demonstrated:

I Surveys indicate that there is sufficient on-street parking capacity; or

I Where the proposal is within a CPZ or town centre and surveys indicate there is

not sufficient on-street parking capacity, the roads outside a CPZ which are in

close proximity to the proposal will need to have sufficient capacity to

accommodate parking from development.

Core Strategy Appendix A: ’Saved’ UDP Policies on Brent Cross – Cricklewood –

Policy C8 Parking Standards which sets standards for the regeneration area.

5.13 The general method used to set car parking standards in LB Barnet is the

application of London Plan standards, which is a PTAL based approach for all land

uses except residential development.

5.14 In general LB Barnet accepts the need for a restraint led approach to car parking,

but proposes that this is applied with sensitivity to local circumstances. Hence a

flexible approach to the application of residential standards is proposed, that

takes account of:


39

I PTAL;

I Parking stress, including level of on-street parking control;

I Population density and parking ownership of surrounding areas;

I Location (i.e. is it a town centre);

I Ease of access by cycling and walking; and

I Other relevant planning or highway considerations e.g. whether it is a

conversion of an existing use.

5.15 LB Barnet also proposes that the LB Brent Cross - Cricklewood regeneration area is

an exception to the standards set out in policy DM17. The suite of saved policies on

Brent Cross - Cricklewood in the UDP will continue to be applied.

5.16 The Brent Cross and Cricklewood regeneration area (see Figure 4.1) is one of

London’s major regeneration schemes, is designed to provide a brand new town

centre, creating over 25,000 new jobs and acting as a catalyst for future economic

growth within LB Barnet.

FIGURE 5.1 BRENT CROSS – CRICKLEWOOD REGENERATION AREA

Source: Core Strategy


40

5.17 The Brent Cross Cricklewood regeneration area is identified as having capacity for

20,000 jobs and a minimum housing target of 10,000 new homes between 2011 and

2031. Proposals for Brent Cross – Cricklewood as set out in the Development

Framework will transform it into a sustainable new town centre as part of the

wider regeneration of the area complementing the role of other town centres

nearby

5.18 The Brent Cross - Cricklewood regeneration area, as detailed in Figure 4.1, has two

railway stations (Hendon and Cricklewood) and two underground stations (Brent

Cross and Hendon Central on the Northern Line) located on its periphery, but no

stations are provided within it. The A406 North Circular road and the junction with

the M1 are located within its boundaries.

5.19 Consequently much of the Brent Cross - Cricklewood regeneration area suffers from

very low public transport accessibility, with large areas with PTAL scores of less

than 3. There are areas closer to Brent Cross and Hendon Central underground

stations for which the PTAL scores are much higher, though this is only a small

proportion of the overall regeneration area. This is in contrast to the WAAP

regeneration area, as discussed in Chapter 3.

5.20 Table 5.2 sets out the Brent Cross and Cricklewood regeneration area parking

standards as set out in saved UDP Policy C8.

TABLE 5.2 MAXIMUM CAR PARKING STANDARDS FOR THE BRENT CROSS -

CRICKLEWOOD REGENERATION AREA

Land Use Maximum Car Parking Standard

Residential 1 space per unit

Business (B1 or B2) 1 space per 300 m2

Retail, leisure facilities and hotels within

the new town centre

No further parking beyond the 7,600 spaces

that already have planning consent.

Other retail locations in the Cricklewood

and West Hendon town centres

London Plan standards

Hotels outside the town centre

1 space per 2 bedrooms + 1 space per 5 seats

for conference facilities

Existing and new Cricklewood Railway

stations

Parking for disabled passengers and staff and

for pick up and set down purposes.

Other Uses London Plan standards

5.21 The standard set for new housing in Policy C8 is a maximum of one space per unit,

which is the average for residential development across the Regeneration Area.

The stipulation in Policy C8 that there will be no further car parking for retailing

and leisure services in the new town centre to the north of the North Circular Road

is based on the 7,600 spaces that already have planning consent. The stipulation

regarding leisure services is targeted primarily at evening and night time-based


41

activities, which present opportunities for shared parking with the retail and other

uses within the town centre.

5.22 The residential parking standard is in line with London Plan standards for

residential developments, with an average of 1 space per unit being applied.

5.23 B1 employment use parking standards are set around the midpoint of London Plan

standards for Outer London, which are 1 space per 100-600 m2. B2 employment

parking standards for the regeneration area will provide a higher level of parking

compared to London Plan standards, with a standard of 1 space per 300 m2

compared to 1 space per 500 m2.

5.24 Hotel parking standards outside the town centre will provide a higher level of

parking than if London Plan standards were applied.

5.25 Table 5.3 compares the standards detailed in Table 5.2 with the proposed

recommendations to LB Brent’s car parking standards.

TABLE 5.3 COMPARISON OF MAXIMUM CAR PARKING STANDARDS FOR THE

BRENT CROSS - CRICKLEWOOD REGENERATION AREA WITH LB BRENT’S

PROPOSED STANDARDS

Land Use

Maximum Car Parking Standard

Brent Cross – Cricklewood

Regeneration Area

LB Brent’s Proposed

Non Food Retail (A1)

New Town Centre: No further parking

beyond the 7,600 spaces that already

have planning consent

Cricklewood and West Hendon town

centres: London Plan standards



Food Retail (A1)








Financial &

professional services

(A2)






Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75

Restaurants and

cafes (A3)






Inner London Town Centres:

operational and disabled

only

Other Town Centres:

through transport

assessment.

Drinking

establishments (A4)






42

Land Use



Regeneration Area





only

Other Town Centres:

through transport

assessment.

Hot Food takeaways

(A5)








only

Other Town Centres:

through transport

assessment.

Business (B1)

1/300

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75

General Industry (B2)

1/300

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75

Storage and

Distribution (B8)


Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75

Hotel (C1)




Hotels outside New Town Centre: 1/ 2

bedrooms + 1/ 5 seats for conference

facilities

Major Town Centres

Wembley and Kilburn:

employee parking provided

based on transport

assessment

Elsewhere: 1 per 5

bedrooms

Residential

Institutions (C2)


Hospitals: individual

assessment

Other: 1/10 beds

Residential (C3)

1.0/unit

1 - 2 beds:

PTAL 4-6: 0.75/unit

PTAL 1-3: 1.0/unit

3 beds

PTAL 4-6: 1.2/unit

PTAL 1-3: 1.5/unit


43

Land Use



Regeneration Area


4 + beds

PTAL 4-6: 1.2/unit

PTAL 1-3: 2.0/unit

Non Residential

Institutions (D1)


High PTAL: transport

assessment

Elsewhere: 1/10

users/visitors

Assembly and Leisure

(D2)




Use publically available

parking. If required 1/10

users/visitors

LB Camden

5.26 LB Camden's LDF, including the Core Strategy and Development Management

Policies documents replaced their UDP in November 2010. The Development

Management Policies document that has been benchmarked for this study is:

I LB Camden Development Policies - adopted (November 2012).

5.27 The key policies relating to LB Brent's proposed parking standards are:

Core Strategy Policy CS11: Promoting Sustainable and Efficient Travel states

that 'the Council will pursue the delivery of additional transport infrastructure and

promote sustainable transport in order to support growth in the borough, and will

manage the impact of growth on the road network.'

Development Policy DM18: Parking Standards and Limiting the Availability of Car

Parking sets out LB Camden's approach to parking in new development. The

premise is that the key factor in addressing congestion is the limitation of car

parking provision. Therefore LB Camden seeks, through this policy, to minimise the

level of car parking whilst promoting cycle parking, car clubs and electric charging

points. Car free development 'is a way of encouraging car free lifestyles,

promoting sustainable ways of travelling and helping to reduce the impact of

traffic.' This is for both residential and non-residential development.

Development Policy DM19: Managing the Impact of Parking follows on from

DM18, by addressing the impacts in terms of on-street parking and wider

environmental considerations.

5.28 LB Camden therefore looks to ensure that developments will provide the minimum

necessary car parking.

5.29 Although LB Camden has not provided a regeneration exception, it has

distinguished between areas defined as Low Parking Provision Areas and the rest of

the borough and is therefore important to highlight as part of this exercise. This is


44

a restraint led approach, to ensure that the minimum level of parking is provided

in new development, in order to address congestion.

5.30 Low Parking Provision Areas are defined as:

I Central London Area;

I Town centres of LB Camden Town, Finchley Road/Swiss Cottage, Kentish Town

I Kilburn High Road and West Hampstead; and

I Other areas with CPZs that are easily accessible by public transport.

5.31 The provision of car free development in Low Parking Provision Areas is generally

expected. Where car free/car capped developments are permitted the Council will

support this by:

I Limiting on-site parking to operational and blue badges; and

I Not issue on-street parking permits through a legal agreement.

5.32 Furthermore, the application of car parking standards in the Low Parking Provision

Areas will only be permitted when a developer can demonstrate that it should be

provided. Table 5.4 details the parking standards for areas of Low Parking

Provision, which provide standards that provide lower levels of parking than

London Plan standards.

5.33 LB Camden does provide a level of flexibility to some aspects of the application of

minimum standards, such as where the existing street frontages preclude access to

on-site parking, the Council may consider the potential for designating disabled

parking bays on-street.


45

TABLE 5.4 MAXIMUM CAR PARKING STANDARDS FOR LB CAMDEN – LOW

PARKING PROVISION AREAS

Land Use Maximum Car Parking Standard

Non Food Retail (A1) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Food Retail (A1) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Financial & professional services (A2) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Restaurants and cafes (A3) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Drinking establishments (A4) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Hot Food takeaways (A5) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Business (B1) 1 space per 1,500 m2

General Industry (B2) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Storage and Distribution (B8) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Hotel (C1) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Residential Institutions (C2) 1 space per 20 beds

Residential (C3) 0.5 spaces per unit

Non Residential Institutions (D1) 1 space per 1,500 m2

Assembly and Leisure (D2) 1 space per 1,500 m2




46

TABLE 5.5 COMPARISON OF MAXIMUM CAR PARKING STANDARDS FOR LB

CAMDEN – LOW PARKING PROVISION AREAS WITH LB BRENT’S PROPOSED

STANDARDS

Land Use


LB Camden Low

Parking Provision

Areas



1/1,500



Food Retail (A1)

1/1,500



Financial & professional

services (A2)

1/1,500

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350

Outer London – regeneration exception: 1/75

Restaurants and cafes

(A3)

1/1,500

Inner London Town Centres: operational and

disabled only

Other Town Centres: through transport

assessment.

Drinking establishments

(A4)

1/1,500


disabled only


assessment.

Hot Food takeaways

(A5)

1/1,500


disabled only


assessment.

Business (B1)

1/1,500

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350



1/1,500

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


Storage and Distribution

(B8)

1/1,500

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


Hotel (C1)

1/1,500

Major Town Centres Wembley and Kilburn:

employee parking provided based on transport

assessment



47

Land Use


LB Camden Low

Parking Provision

Areas


Residential Institutions

(C2)

1/20 beds

Hospitals: individual assessment

Other: 1/10 beds

Residential (C3)

0.5/unit

1 - 2 beds:

PTAL 4-6: 0.75/unit

PTAL 1-3: 1.0/unit

3 beds

PTAL 4-6: 1.2/unit

PTAL 1-3: 1.5/unit

4 + beds

PTAL 4-6: 1.2/unit

PTAL 1-3: 2.0/unit

Non Residential

Institutions (D1)

1/1,500

High PTAL: transport assessment

Elsewhere: 1/10 users/visitors


(D2)

1/1,500

Use publically available parking. If required 1/10

users/visitors

LB Haringey

5.35 Following revised consultation of the Core Strategy Fundamental Changes, the

additional hearing for LB Haringey's Core Strategy Examination in Public will take

place in February 2012. The Development Management and Site Allocations

Development Plan Document is currently being prepared for the next stage of

consultation, expected to take place later in 2012. Therefore the Development

Management Policies document that has been reviewed for this study is:

I The Development Management Policies draft (May 2010).

5.36 The key policies relating to LB Haringey's proposed parking standards are:

Development Management Policy DMP10 Sustainable Transport, which states

that 'the Council will measures to discourage car usage and ownership such as car

clubs, travel information and marketing, promotion of car sharing, car parking

management.'

Development Management Policy DMP11: Car Free Residential Developments, to be

considered:

I where there are alternative and accessible means of transport available;

I PTAL is between level 4 to 6; and

I A controlled parking zone exists or will be provided prior to occupation of the

development.


48

Development Management Policy DMP12: Parking for Development, which states

that 'Development proposals will be assessed against the parking standards set out

in Appendix 1. Proposals that do not meet these standards will not normally be

permitted. For larger developments the parking requirement will be assessed on

an individual basis as part of the Transport Assessment or Statement.'

5.37 Although LB Haringey has not provided a regeneration exception, it has proposed

approach to car parking standards that defines areas in the borough as low,

medium and high levels of Public Transport Accessibility, and is therefore

important to highlight as part of this exercise. It defines the areas of accessibility

as:

I Low: PTAL 1-2

I Medium: PTAL 3-4

I High: PTAL 5-6

5.38 This approach is proposed, in order to restrain car use, reduce congestion, give

priority to essential users and people with disabilities, improve the environment,

encourage sustainable regeneration and improve local accessibility.

5.39 Where several different land uses are included in a proposal the parking standards

should be applied to each land use and where possible the shared use of parking is

encouraged.

5.40 Table 5.6 details LB Haringey’s car parking standards by land use.


49

TABLE 5.6 MAXIMUM CAR PARKING STANDARDS FOR LB HARINGEY

Land Use


Low PTAL Medium PTAL High PTAL

Non Food Retail (A1) 1 space per 25 m2 1 space per 35 m2

1 space per 40 m2

Food Retail (A1) – less than 2,000

m2

1 space per 20 m2

2 1 space per 35 m 1 space per 45 m2

Food Retail (A1) –2,000 m2 + Through the transport assessment

Financial & professional services

(A2)

This land use should be located in town centres with no on-

site parking.

Outside town centre B1 standards apply

Restaurants and cafes (A3) 1 space per 12 m2 1 space per 15 m2

1 space per 20 m2

Drinking establishments (A4) 1 space per 15 m2 1 space per 30 m2

1 space per 60 m2

Hot Food takeaways (A5)

Less than 20- seats:

More than 20 seats:

None

1 space per 5

seats

None

1 space per 8 seats

None

None

Business (B1)

1 space per 600

m2

1 space per 800 m2 1 space per 1000

m2


1 space per 600

m2


m2

Storage and Distribution (B8)

1 space per 600

m2


m2

Hotel (C1) 2 spaces per 3 bedrooms

Residential Institutions (C2)

Hospitals

Elderly Persons’ Home

Nursing/Convalescence Home

Individual Assessment

1 space per 10 occupants + 1 space per 3 staff

1 space per 5 occupants + 1 space per 3 staff

Residential (C3)

Detached and semi-detached houses: 1.5 spaces per unit

Terraced houses and flats (2 or more beds): 1 space per unit

Flats/Bedsits (1 bed): 0.33 spaces per unit

Non Residential Institutions (D1)

2 spaces per

practitioner + 1

per 2 aux staff

2 spaces per

practitioner + 1

per 1 aux staff

None

Assembly and Leisure (D2)

Individual basis – for large development Transport Assessment

might be required.




50


HARINGEY WITH LB BRENT’S PROPOSED STANDARDS

Land Use


LB Haringey LB Brent’s Proposed


Low PTAL: 1/25

Medium PTAL: 1/35

High PTAL: 1/40



Food Retail (A1)

Through transport assessment



Financial &

professional services

(A2)

This land use should be located in

town centres with no on-site

parking.

Outside town centre B1 standards

apply

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75

Restaurants and

cafes (A3)

Low PTAL: 1/12

Medium PTAL: 1/15

High PTAL: 1/20


operational and disabled only

Other Town Centres: through

transport assessment.

Drinking

establishments (A4)

Low PTAL: 1/15

Medium PTAL: 1/30

High PTAL: 1/60





Hot Food takeaways

(A5)

Less than 20 seats:

Low PTAL: none

Medium PTAL: none

High PTAL: none

More than 20 seats:

Low PTAL: 1/25

Medium PTAL: 1/35

High PTAL: none





Business (B1)

Low PTAL: 1/600

Medium PTAL: 1/800

High PTAL: 1/1000

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75


Low PTAL: 1/600

Medium PTAL: 1/800

High PTAL: 1/1000

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75

Storage and Low PTAL: 1/600 Inner London: 1/800


51

Land Use


LB Haringey LB Brent’s Proposed

Distribution (B8) Medium PTAL: 1/800

High PTAL: 1/1000

Outer London: 1/350


exception: 1/75

Hotel (C1)

2/3 bedrooms

Major Town Centres Wembley and

Kilburn: employee parking

provided based on transport

assessment


Residential

Institutions (C2)


Elderly persons home: 1/10

occupants + 1/3 staff

Nursing/Convalescence Home:

1/5 occupants + 1/3 staff


Other: 1/10 beds

Residential (C3)

Detached and semi-detached

houses: 1.5/unit

Terraced houses and flats (2 or

more beds): 1/unit

Flats/Bedsits (1 bed): 0.33/unit

1 - 2 beds:

PTAL 4-6: 0.75/unit

PTAL 1-3: 1.0/unit

3 beds

PTAL 4-6: 1.2/unit

PTAL 1-3: 1.5/unit

4 + beds

PTAL 4-6: 1.2/unit

PTAL 1-3: 2.0/unit

Non Residential

Institutions (D1)

Low PTAL: 2/practitioner

+1/2aux staff

Medium PTAL: 2/practitioner

+1/1aux staff

High PTAL: None

High PTAL: transport assessment

Elsewhere: 1/10 users/visitors


(D2)

Individual basis – for large

development Transport

Assessment might be required,

which would inform parking

provision.

Use publically available parking. If

required 1/10 users/visitors


52

LB Wandsworth

5.42 LB Wandsworth's DMPD was formally adopted by the Council on 8 February 2012.

Together with the Core Strategy, this document replaces the Wandsworth Unitary

Development Plan (UDP) 2003, and form the statutory Development Plan for the

borough, along with the London Plan, guiding change for the next 15 years and

beyond. The document that has been reviewed as part of this study is:

I Development Management Policies Document - adopted (February 2012).

5.43 The key policies relating to LB Wandsworth's proposed parking standards are:

Policy DMT 2: Parking and Servicing, which sets out the parameters for parking in

the context of development, as well as policies on car free development and

exemptions from CXPZ permits for new residential development as well as the split

of car parking between affordable and private housing

5.44 LB Wandsworth's approach to determining car parking standards in the borough, is

to strike an appropriate balance between meeting essential parking needs of the

development on site while neither acting as a discouragement to using public

transport nor over spilling onto surrounding streets.

5.45 For retail and leisure developments in town centres, where PTALs are generally

high car parking can only be considered if it is managed to encourage short-stay

use and is available for general town centre use.

5.46 Car clubs are promoted as they help reduce the overall demand for car parking

space, by giving residents, visitors and employees access to a car without the need

for individual car ownership.

5.47 Car-free and low-car development may be permitted where:

I the PTAL is high;

I adequate public transport capacity to accommodate trips generated by the

development (current or proposed);

I Transport Assessments demonstrate that through a combination of Car Club

parking, Travel Plans and any other relevant measures that further car parking

is not required; and

I A minimum number of disabled parking spaces are provided in accordance with

the London Plan.

5.48 It provides a regeneration exception for the Vauxhall and Nine Elms Opportunity

Area for business and industry (B1/B2/B8) land uses, providing 1 space per 1,000

m2 floor space. This is in line with the Central London standard for B1

employment. This standard is also applied by LB Wandsworth to town centres.

5.49 Table 5.8 compares the standards detailed in paragraph 5.48 with the proposed



53


WANDSWORTH WITH LB BRENT’S PROPOSED STANDARDS

Land Use


LB Wandsworth LB Brent’s Proposed

Business (B1)

1/1000

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350



1/1000

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350


Storage and

Distribution (B8)

1/1000

Inner London: 1/800

Outer London: 1/350



54

6 Recommended Car Parking Standards

Introduction

6.1 It is a key objective for borough parking to be in general conformity with the

London Plan and that such standards are set at levels consistent with meeting the

objectives of the NPPF.

6.2 By general conformity, it should be assumed that variations from the London Plan

only occur in specific instances where departures are justifiable in accordance

with either the policies of the plan or the objectives of the borough's LDF. In terms

of such policies and objectives, there are several general considerations that may

give rise to departures, as follows:

I The London Plan allows for flexibility in parking provision where these are

justified in the context of the borough's overall policies for traffic reduction.

I Regeneration of specific areas of opportunity may justify higher levels of

parking in the short term to stimulate inward investment.

I Town centre parking provision should support objectives to enhance vitality and

viability.

I Off-street parking standards should be considered together with on-street

provision in meeting overall policy objectives.

I Cross-boundary consistency of standards may justify higher parking standards in

order to avoid a migration of investment.

I Provision needs to be made in developments for the needs of the disabled.

6.3 Clearly, the London Plan recognises that parking standards need to be set in the

context of transport policies generally, and area-specific initiatives and needs

specifically. Maximum permissible levels of parking will vary with the availability

of public transport, but several other factors need to be considered.


PS3 Regeneration Exception which allows for an increase of up to a third in parking

in the National Stadium Policy area. This exception has rarely been utilised as

developers have capitalised on the good quality public transport in the area.

6.5 It is proposed that the Wembley Area Action Plan regeneration area is treated as an

exception to the standards set out in the Brent Parking Standards report (see

separate report) will therefore be subject to a the set of car parking standards set

out in this chapter.

6.6 Strategic Objective 8 of the Brent’s Core Strategy is 'to reduce the need to travel

and improve transport choices by:


need to travel to other centres;






55

6.7 The above analysis has identified a number of characteristics within Wembley that

are material to the parking standards to be adopted. The Wembley Area Action

Plan regeneration area covers the town centres of Wembley and Wembley Park as

well as the Wembley Master Plan area, which includes the stadium and key

development sites around it. Is also includes the industrial area to the east of the

stadium, which extends to the North Circular Road.

6.8 The findings of the Wembley Master Plan transport strategy reviews have

concluded that measures are required to both minimise the need for travel and

secure a substantial travel mode shift away from the private car towards the use

of sustainable transport modes. Modal shift is to be achieved through the provision

of enhanced bus services and facilities, and the implementation of a range of travel

demand management measures.

6.9 Restraining the overall level of parking is an important tool to minimise road

network congestion and encourage travel by other modes. The use of a restrained

level of parking for residential development (0.5 spaces per unit) is cited as being

consistent with this. Moreover the report considers that there is opportunity to

consider further parking restraint for developments which have good public

transport access and access to walking and cycling networks. It also highlights the

need to deliver more car-free developments as they will deliver flexibility to

provide needed spaces elsewhere.

6.10 In order to reduce the proportion of car journeys into Wembley as per the Core

Strategy and WAAP objectives managing parking demand and supply will be

integral. The Framework Parking Strategy for Wembley study found that:

I existing public parking supply is focussed on the town centre, primarily in the

area surrounding Wembley Central station;

I Current demand for parking within the town centre is such that the available

car parks are, in general, poorly utilised; and

I Whilst planned and conceptual developments within the town centre may bring

an increase in demand for town centre parking, it is expected that a level of

over-supply of spaces will remain.

6.11 The standards are qualified by a series of criteria where exceptions may be

granted subject to explicit justification - such as, for example, may be provided by

the transport assessment, provision of a car club etc.

6.12 London Plan standards are only given for the main employment, retail and

residential categories. For other land uses, standards are required that reflect a

uniformity and consistency of approach compatible with overall objectives.

Parking standards and their application are discussed below for all land uses.

6.13 The London Plan now adopts an approach more explicitly based on the Public

Transport Level (PTAL) index as a measure of accessibility. In reviewing standards

for the borough, this approach is now followed.


56

Overview

6.14 It is accepted that the provision of private off-street parking has a direct influence

on the levels of traffic generated by a new development. It is for this reason that

maximum parking standards are applied to development in line with PPG13,

whether it is residential, commercial or industrial. However, in formulating

policies to restrain traffic, parking standards need to be set in the context of

wider local circumstances and initiatives.

6.15 As discussed earlier, the Wembley WAAP has a range of public transport

accessibility levels within different areas of the WAAP. There are reasonable

grounds therefore to apply differing standards to different areas of the WAAP

based on their accessibility to public transport.

Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL)

6.16 Figures 4.5 and 4.6 displayed the current and future (2026) PTAL levels across the

WAAP regeneration area.

6.17 PTAL indices are the most widely recognised form of measuring accessibility to the

public transport network in London. A PTAL index gives an indication of the

relative density of the public transport network at a specific location.

6.18 The accuracy of PTAL calculations is essential, therefore where a PTAL is used to

determine the level of parking provision, a site specific calculation should be used.

PTAL maps should only be used as a guide as the specific score for a site can vary

considerably depending on the location of the main access point. Any applicant

should agree with the borough the PTAL score of a site based on the accepted TfL

methodology. This should also take account of the future PTAL of a site when

public transport enhancements are committed.

6.19 The referencing of much of the standards set out below to public transport

accessibility is a way of ensuring that the any variation that exists in Wembley is

reflected as far as possible in the parking allowances. Alongside the consideration

of access to public transport, these standards should be considered against the

borough's land use policy.

Town Centres

6.20 Given the level of accessibility to public transport in the town centres of Wembley

and Wembley Park (PTAL levels between 4 and 6) there is an expectation that the

provision of any non-residential parking generated by a development above a

threshold of 50 spaces in a location identified in the Framework Parking Strategy for

Wembley as a strategic public parking location will be designated as public parking.

No more than 5 of those spaces could be allocated for the sole use of the

development. It is noted that the supply and location of public parking will be kept

under review and consequently this threshold is for guidance and that it could be

possible to justify a higher level of private parking if there is surplus public parking

available.

6.21 The Framework Parking Strategy for Wembley study found that it is expected that

there will be a level of over-supply of public parking within Wembley town centre.

Therefore any additional private parking for non-residential uses will need to be


57

very carefully justified, through a transport assessment, to show that there will

not be any adverse impact.

Flexibility

6.22 It is recommended that a level of flexibility to some aspects of the application of

parking standards, such as where the existing street frontages preclude access to

on-site parking, the Council may consider the potential for designating disabled

parking bays on-street.

6.23 It is also recommended that flexibility in the application of standards at certain

locations is also proposed, particularly in town centres, where it's difficult to meet

parking requirements - and therefore the provision of car free/limited parking

could help reduce parking congestion for other town centre users.

Car Free or Limited Parking Provision Developments

6.24 New developments in the most accessible parts of Wembley will be encouraged to

be car free. This should be in areas where there are Controlled Parking Zones

(currently in existence or to be in place prior to occupation), and where they are

supported by a high level of public transport accessibility. It will be necessary for

these proposals to be supported by a parking survey that demonstrates that there

is sufficient on-street capacity and that it doesn't result in parking stress in a wider

area.

6.25 Car free or limited parking provision for residential developments will be

encouraged in locations with a PTAL between 4 to 6 and will be considered in

locations with a PTAL between 1 and 3 with respect to the achievement of certain

criteria, namely:

I Controlled parking zone in existence or to be in place prior to the occupation of

the development;

I Where occupants are unlikely to need a car;

I Quality of life criteria such as access to amenities are satisfied;

I Adequate blue badge parking provided;

I Where limited parking is provided, sufficient parking is provided to meet

social/affordable tenants essential needs; and

I Use a legal agreement to ensure that future occupants are aware they are not

entitled to on-street parking permits.

Elderly Persons Accommodation

6.26 It is recommended that where developments are designed as accommodation

specifically for elderly persons, there is a reduction in the levels of parking

provided. In these types of development, there is lower demand for parking by

residents. This must be assessed on an individual basis through a transport

assessment. Operational and disabled car parking spaces must still be provided.

Mixed Use Developments

6.27 It is recommended that in mixed use developments the shared use of spaces is

encouraged, where practical.


58

Car Club and Car Pools

6.28 It is recommended that car club and car pools are encouraged in new

developments to reduce the need for car ownership. It is likely that that a car club

space will be required for residential developments which provide a 100 or more

units. Contributions to car clubs and pool car schemes in place of private parking

in new developments will be encouraged borough wide to remove the need for car

ownership. Contributions to car club membership for residents will be sought

through a Section 106 agreement.

Electric Charging Points

6.29 It is recommended that the provision of electric charging points is encouraged to

support air quality objectives. Contributions towards the provision of on-street

electric vehicle recharging points (to be implemented in the vicinity of the

development) will be considered where on-site parking is not provided or access is

restricted.

Motorcycle Parking

6.30 The demand for motorcycle parking should be identified in the transport

assessment, and an appropriate level of parking provided in new developments.

Where practical there should be the potential to convert car parking spaces to

motorcycle spaces should they be required following occupation - this will be

monitored through a Travel Plan.

No Standard

6.31 If a development is not specifically covered by a standard, the level of parking will

be determined by the nature of the development and the likely level of demand

generated, taking into account the level of public transport accessibility, the

presence of on-street parking controls and other local characteristics.

Travel Plans

6.32 Travel Plans should be used to monitor and control parking levels over time where

private car use is to be reduced. Travel Plan measures will include the continuous

review of the parking levels, with a reduction over time where possible. The re-

development of parking areas will be considered where a Travel Plan has enabled a

reduction in parking demand.

Employment Use Classes

6.33 The Review of LB Brent’s Parking Standards recommends that employment

standards should fall within the London Plan range of standards for B1 and be

applied to all employment uses. Table 6.1 summarises the proposed standards,

including a proposed regeneration exemption for growth areas (which is subject to

verification in the Transport Assessment).


59

TABLE 6.1 LB BRENT: RECOMMENDED EMPLOYMENT MAXIMUM CAR PARKING

STANDARDS

Location

Definition Maximum Parking

Standard

Inner Brent

South-east of Dudding Hill

railway line

1 space per 800 m2 gross

floor space

Outer Brent

North-west of Dudding Hill

railway line


floor space

Regeneration exception

Opportunity and growth

areas


floor space

6.34 The principle of discouraging journeys to work by private car applies to the WAAP.

Where parking is to be provided, the standards given in Table 6.2 should be

applied. The proposed standards reflect the Outer Brent proposed standard for

areas within the WAAP with a PTAL of 1 to 3. The standards are reduced for areas

with a PTAL of 4 to 6. The provision of parking in new developments below the

standards set out in Tables 6.2 is encouraged (see car free/car capped section).

TABLE 6.2 WEMBLEY: RECOMMENDED EMPLOYMENT MAXIMUM PARKING

STANDARDS

PTAL

Maximum Parking Standard

B1 A2 B2 and B8

1-3


floor space


floor space


floor space

4-6


floor space

No additional parking –

use existing public supply


floor space

6.35 In accordance with the London Plan exception for Outer London borough locations,

which allows for higher levels of parking in defined circumstances, it is proposed

that more generous parking standards than those set out in Table 6.2 could be

acceptable, provided the following criteria can be demonstrated:

I Ensuring no significant adverse impacts on congestion or air quality;

I A lack of existing on or off-street parking spaces;

I A commitment by the developer to provide space for electric and car club

vehicles, bicycles and parking for disabled people above the minimum

thresholds; and

I A binding commitment via a Travel Plan to reduce more generous provision over

time.


60

Retail Parking

6.36 The provision of public parking in town centre areas in order to attract retail

development needs to be balanced with the need to deter unnecessary car trips.

The London Plan is most prescriptive when dealing with retail parking standards.

However, it also states that standards should be consistent across town centre

areas to avoid variations in parking over small areas.

6.37 The Framework Parking Strategy for Wembley concluded that despite an increase

in demand forecast from both planned and conceptual developments within the

town centre (which may increase demand for town centre parking), it is expected

that a level of over-supply of spaces will remain. Therefore the provision of

shared-use parking will be encouraged. Also any additional private parking for non-

residential uses within Wembley town centre will need to be very carefully

justified, through a transport assessment, to show that there will not be any

adverse impact.

6.38 Given the level of accessibility to public transport in the town centres of Wembley

and Wembley Park (PTAL levels between 4 and 6) there is an expectation that the

provision of any non-residential parking generated by a development above a

threshold of 50 spaces in a location identified in the Framework Parking Strategy for

Wembley as a strategic public parking location will be designated as public parking.

No more than 5 of those spaces could be allocated for the sole use of the

development. It is noted that the supply and location of public parking will be kept

under review and consequently this threshold is for guidance and that it could be

possible to justify a higher level of private parking if there is surplus public parking

available.

A1 Retail

6.39 The Review of LB Brent’s Parking Standards (October 2012) recommended that for

town centres located in the area of the borough classified as Inner London, more

restrictive maximum standards are applied to A1 retail. Lower parking provision in

these town centres is reflective of the levels of public transport accessibility

compared with the rest of the borough. Table 6.3 details these standards.

TABLE 6.3 LB BRENT: RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM A1 RETAIL PARKING

Retail Land Use

Maximum Standard

Major Town Centres Rest of the Borough

Food – up to 500 m2 1 space per 200 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 100 m2 gross floor space

Food – up to 2,500 m2 1 space per 120 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 60 m2 gross floor space

Food – over 2,500 m2 1 space per 60 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 30 m2 gross floor space

Non Food 1 space per 100 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 50 m2 gross floor space

Garden Centre 1 space per 100 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 50 m2 gross floor space

Town Centre/Shopping

Mall/Department Store

1 space per 100 m2 gross floor space



61

6.40 It is proposed that more restrictive standards are applied within the WAAP

regeneration area, given accessibility to public transport and the availability of

public parking. Consequently the major town centre standard has been applied to

the areas of the WAAP with lower PTAL (1-3). This standard has been reduced by

50% for areas with good transport accessibility (PTAL 4-6). It is acknowledged that

larger food retail developments have a greater need for car trips and therefore the

more generous standards for this land use for LB Brent have been retained for

Wembley. Table 6.4 details these standards.

6.41 Where there is existing public parking available in the vicinity of the site, for

example within Wembley town centre, there should be a reduction from the

maximum standards. A full assessment of existing parking will be required as part

of the transport assessment to justify any additional parking requirements.

TABLE 6.4 WEMBLEY: RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM A1 RETAIL PARKING

Retail Land Use

Maximum Standard

PTAL 1-3 PTAL 4-6

Food – up to 500 m2 1 space per 200 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 100 m2 gross floor space

Food – up to 2,500 m2 1 space per 120 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 60 m2 gross floor space

Food – over 2,500 m2 1 space per 60 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 30 m2 gross floor space

Non Food 1 space per 100 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 50 m2 gross floor space

Garden Centre 1 space per 100 m2 gross floor space 1 space per 50 m2 gross floor space

Town Centre/Shopping

Mall/Department Store



A3/A4/A5 Food and Drink Establishments

6.42 Food and drink premises will be located with the town centres and have been

assigned a lower level of parking provision within the WAAP. Given the higher

levels of public transport accessibility at both town centre locations and the

availability of public parking, no additional parking will be provided over and

above operational and disabled parking requirements. This is in line with London

Plan standards and in accordance with neighbouring boroughs.

Residential Parking Provision

6.43 A balance should be achieved for residential parking provision between the needs

of residents to park off-street and the objective to not encourage an increase in

parking amongst residents by providing excessive parking facilities.

6.44 The London Plan does not differentiate between areas of London or access to

public transport within the standards provided. The levels of parking are

determined solely by the size of the units proposed.


62

6.45 The Review of LB Brent Parking Standards recommends that residential parking

standards are related to public transport accessibility but within the London Plan

recommended standards, as detailed in Table 6.5. It is recommended that that this

is also the case for residential parking standards in the WAAP regeneration area.

TABLE 6.5 LB BRENT: RECOMMENDED RESIDENTIAL MAXIMUM CAR PARKING

STANDARDS

PTAL

Housing Type

4+ beds 3 beds 1-2 beds

1-3 2.0 spaces per unit 1.5 spaces per unit 1.0 spaces per unit


6.46 The benchmarking exercise of consented schemes has identified that the

application of standards by LB Brent's Development Control team for residential

developments in the WAAP demonstrates that an average standard of approximately

0.5 spaces per residential unit has been applied (see Chapter 8) and Table 6.6

which summarises the results of this assessment.

TABLE 6.6 WEMBLEY AREA ACTION PLAN REGENERATION AREA CONSENTED

SCHEMES: AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL PARKING STANDARD

Scheme Units Spaces Average Standard

Ada Lewis House 84 33 0.39

Wembley Central 223 81 0.36

Elizabeth House 115 66 0.57

Elm Road 121 54 0.45

Quintain 1,300 650 0.50

Shubette House 158 110 0.70

Forum House 286 132 0.46

Total 2,287 1,126 0.49

The above comparison suggests that a de facto standard of about 0.5 spaces per

unit has been applied in the Wembley area in recent years. Consequently, the

recommended standards for Wembley assume some reduction from the proposed

borough standards but with flexibility for higher levels of parking for larger units.


63

TABLE 6.7 WEMBLEY: RESIDENTIAL MAXIMUM CAR PARKING STANDARDS

PTAL

Housing Type

4+ beds 3 beds 1-2 beds



6.47 The proposed standards have been tested for robustness as detailed in Table 6.8.

This test assumes that of the total 11,500 new homes are provided in Wembley by

2026 and that 80% of these are located in areas within the PTAL 4-6 range and 20%

are located in areas within the PTAL 1-3 range. It also assumes that following split

of beds:

I 1 bed: 25%

I 2 beds:35%

I 3 beds:30%

I 4+ beds:10%

TABLE 6.8 WEMBLEY: RESIDENTIAL MAXIMUM CAR PARKING STANDARDS

VALIDATION

PTAL

New

Homes

Number of Parking Spaces by Housing Type Average

Parking

Standard

4+ beds

3 beds

1-2 beds Total

1-3 2,300 230 518 690 1438

0.50

spaces

per unit

4-6 9,200 690 1380 2208 4278

Total 11,500 920 1898 2898 5716

6.48 Table 6.8 illustrates that based on the assumptions detailed in paragraph 6.47 the

application of the proposed parking standards detailed in Table 6.8 generates an

average standard of 0.5 spaces per unit in line with consented schemes.

Parking for Hotels (C1)

6.49 It is recognised that hotel developments can generate additional car trips and

parking demand. The benchmarking undertaken of comparator boroughs has found

that where a standard other than the London Plan has been specified, a relatively

common level of parking provision for hotels based on the number of bedrooms in

the development has been proposed.

6.50 It is proposed that the following standards, in accordance with the London Plan are

adopted for new hotels:

I PTAL 4-6: operational and disabled parking provision only with minor exceptions

where warranted;


64

I PTAL 1-3: additional parking allowable up to 1 space per five bedrooms if

justified by a transport assessment.

6.51 When considering the justification for additional parking, the following criteria

should be applied:

I Parking is not available in nearby public car parks, and;

I Parking spaces provided on-site should be made publicly available wherever

feasible.

6.52 Only operational and disabled parking should be provided for new hotels in the

Major Town Centre of Wembley. By “Town Centre” here, we are defining this as

the new town centre area as defined within the Wembley Area Action Plan as the

traditional town centre area plus the town centre area within the new masterplan

area, as shown on the map on page 66 of the Wembley Area Action Plan

6.53 It is recommended that a minimum of one coach parking space should be provided

for every 100 bedrooms where justified given the proximity to Wembley National

Stadium. This is a lower provision than London Plan standards. This

recommendation is flexible and should be justified within a Transport Assessment.

6.54 This standard is consistent with the proposed standards for LB Brent (see separate

report).

Parking for Residential Institutions (C2)

6.55 This land use covers both hospitals and residential schools and colleges, which

have differing parking requirements. The London Plan does not specify detailed

parking standards for residential institutions. The benchmarking of comparator

boroughs shows varying ways of dealing with these land-uses.

Hospitals

6.56 It is proposed that hospitals should be assessed individually due to the differing

nature of the parking demands depending on the range of treatments offered. It is

considered that parking for visitors should not be encouraged but there is a higher

level of operational parking required than for other large institutions.

6.57 A Travel Plan should be developed in order to ensure that visitor and employee

parking is managed.

6.58 Where existing hospitals are subject to developments or refurbishments, the

existing levels of parking should be the starting point with any additional

requirements justified through a Transport Assessment.


report).

C2 Other

6.60 Other residential institutions such as halls of residence and residential schools and

colleges should base the parking provision on the number of bedrooms. It is

proposed that a maximum standard of one space per 10 beds is applied. Further

visitor parking may be acceptable provided adequate justification is provided

within a Transport Assessment.


65

6.61 Where the development is for the provision of student halls of residence, in line

with recent consented schemes, the borough would seek car free schemes, due to

the low levels of car ownership amongst students.


report).

Parking for Non Residential Institutions (D1)

6.63 This category covers places of worship, health centres, nurseries and museums all

with varying parking requirements. It must be demonstrated that the parking

provision proposed for a new D1 development can cater for the worst case but also

does not encourage the use of the private car to access where alternative modes

would be used.

6.64 For all D1 uses it is proposed that 1 car parking space is provided per 10

users/visitors on site at any time. However for developments in situated in high

PTAL locations parking provision should be justified by a transport assessment.

Longer stay visitor parking should be deterred.

6.65 Where venues provide a total capacity over 500 patrons, it is proposed that the

level of parking is determined on an individual basis, subject to a detailed


6.66 A separate standard is proposed for schools:

I PTAL 1-3: one car parking space per 5 staff; and

I PTAL 4-6: operational and disabled provision only, unless otherwise justified

through a transport assessment.


report).

Parking for Assembly & Leisure (D2)

6.68 This category covers cinemas, bingo halls and theatres along with leisure centres,

swimming pools and gymnasiums.

6.69 The London Plan states that "In locations with a PTAL of 4 -6, on-site provision

should be limited to operational needs, parking for disabled people and that

required for taxis, coaches and deliveries/ servicing. In locations with a PTAL of 1-

3, provision should be consistent with objectives to reduce congestion and traffic

levels and to avoid undermining walking, cycling or public transport."

6.70 The benchmarking exercise found that standards for this use vary; with some

boroughs requiring standards to be determined through a transport assessment and

others provided standards based on the number of uses.

6.71 Applicants are encouraged to make use of existing publically available parking

spaces before making on-site provision. Where on-site provision is required, it is

proposed that 1 car parking space is provided per 10 users/visitors on site at any

time. Where venues provide a total capacity over 500 patrons, it is proposed that

the level of parking is determined on an individual basis, subject to a detailed



66


report).

Disabled Parking

6.73 It is proposed that for new residential developments a minimum of 5% of parking

spaces provided for private units should be dedicated to disabled use. 10% of

parking spaces provided for affordable units should be dedicated to disabled use.

6.74 For all other uses a minimum of 5% of parking spaces provided should be dedicated

to disabled use.


67

7 Recommended Cycle Parking Standards

7.1 It is proposed that the cycle parking standards provided in the London Plan – Early

Alterations (2011), will be adopted by LB Brent within the WAAP regeneration.

7.2 The cycle parking standards in the 2004 UDP were reviewed to ensure consistency

with the London Plan. In general for most land uses the 2004 UDP cycle parking

standards were similar to those currently in the London Plan.

7.3 Policy 6.1(b) of the London Plan seeks to improve the capacity and accessibility of

public transport, walking and cycling, particularly in areas of greatest demand,

and states that boroughs should use the standards contained in the Plan to set

their local minimum cycle parking standards. The London Plan standards reflect a

continuing growth in cycle use in London and seek to ensure that minimum levels

of parking are provided to facilitate this.

7.4 The London Plan levels are considered appropriate for Brent, and it is not

considered that separate standards are needed for Wembley, but where the UDP

contained an allowance for more generous standards for visitor cycle parking

provision, these have been retained. In adopting this approach, the proposed

standards are consistent with both the London Plan and existing borough policy.

The resulting proposed cycle parking standards are presented in Table 9.1. These

are in accordance with the standards proposed within the LB Brent Review of

Parking Standards (see separate report).

7.5 Cycle parking should be designed and located in accordance with best practice

guidance, so that it is fully accessible, convenient and secure. Longer stay cycle

parking should be weather protected.

7.6 Contributions to off-site cycle parking may be sought if these minimum standards

are not achieved on-site.

7.7 Lower standards can be provided for residential institutions if the visitors are

unlikely to cycle due to age, disability. Also exceptions can be made where

dwellings will be solely available to occupants unlikely to use cycles due to

disability.

7.8 Consideration may be given, on a site by site basis, to the provision of cycle hire

spaces in lieu of visitor cycle parking.

7.9 Applicants are welcome to propose innovative ideas for cycle parking, within the

context of providing fully accessible, convenient and secure cycle provision.


68

TABLE 7.1 RECOMMENDED CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS

Use Class Existing UDP (2004) Cycle Parking

Standards

Recommended Cycle Parking Standards Comments / Consistency with London

Plan

1 Space per square metre of gross floor place (unless otherwise stated)

A1 – Food

1/125 Out of centre 1/350 for staff and visitors


Updated for consistency with London Plan

(July 2011)

A1 – Non Food

1/300 Out of centre 1/500 for staff and visitors



(July 2011)

A2 (Financial Services)

1/125 (minimum of 2 spaces) 1/125 for staff and visitors


(July 2011)

A3 – A5

Cafes & Restaurants

Pubs & Wine Bars

Takeaways

1 space per 20 seats (minimum of 2

spaces)

1/100

1/50





(July 2011)

B1 (Business)

Business offices

Light industry and

research and development

1/125

1/500



London Plan (July 2011) standard is 1/250

across all B1 types. UDP standard retained

as more generous for business offices

B2-B8 (General Industry

and Storage &

Distribution)

1/500


No change, London Plan consistent with

UDP


C1 (Hotels)

No standard 1 per 10 staff + minimum 2 spaces for

visitors


(July 2011) plus additional standard for

visitors

C2 (Residential

Institutions)

Care Homes/ secure

accommodation

Hospitals


1 space per 8 staff

No standard

1 space per 2 students

1 per 3 staff + minimum 2 spaces for

visitors


1 per 2 beds + 1 per 10 visitors



visitors


(July 2011) No precedent within London Plan (July

2011) – UDP standard retained and visitor

parking requirement aligned with the

standard for other types within this use

class

C3 (Dwellings)

1 space per unit (normal)

1 space per 5 staff (sheltered)

1 per 1 or 2 bed unit for residents + 1 per

40 units for visitors 2 per 3 bed or more unit + 1 per 40 units

for visitors



visitors

D1 (Non-residential

institutions)


68

69


Nurseries and

Primary/Secondary School

University/Colleges

Other e.g. libraries,

dentist, church


1 per 10 staff/student

1 per 8 staff/student

Libraries: 1 space per 10 staff + 1 space

per 10 visitors

Dentist: 1 space per 5 staff + 1 space per 5

visitors

1 space per 5 staff and 1 space per 5

visitors







visitors



visitors


(July 2011) More generous than the London Plan

requirement but less generous than the

UDP standard


Other e.g. cinemas, bingo

etc.

Sports e.g. sports hall,

swimming bath,

gymnasium etc.

1 space per 50 seats (2 min)

1 space per 10 staff + 1 space per 5 staff

for visitors




(July 2011)

London Plan standard is 1 per 120 staff + 1

per 20 peak period visitors. UDP standard

retained but visitor requirements made

less generous towards London Plan

Sui generis

As per most relevant standard e.g. casino

and theatre – D2

Stations

To meet local demand To be considered on a case by case basis

through liaison with TfL.


70

8 Consented Development Sites

Overview

8.1 Several consented development sites were agreed with LB Brent for review:

I Ada Lewis House (08/3370);

I Brent Civic Centre (09/2450);

I Wembley Central Square (03/3765);

I Crescent House (08/2672);

I Dexion House (11/0142);

I Elizabeth House (09/2506);

I Elm Road Car Park (03/3727);

I Karma House (05/0626);

I Fulton House (08/2633);

I Quintain NW Lands (10/3032);

I Shubette House (08/3009);

I Victoria Hall (07/2772);

I Forum House (05/2949); and

I LDA Lands (04/040379).

8.2 These are consistent with the sites reviewed as part of the Framework Parking

Strategy for Wembley.

Ada Lewis House

8.3 The Ada Lewis House development (planning application 08/2633) was granted full

planning permission on the 06 April 2009. The scheme comprises 84 residential

units. The scheme has been constructed.

8.4 The development is located on Empire Way, on the fringe of the Wembley Area

Action Plan area, west of the Stadium. The current PTAL for the site is 5 and will

increase to 6a in 2026.

Car Parking

8.5 Table 8.1 compares the consented car parking standards for the site with the

standards in LB Brent's UDP.


73

TABLE 8.1 ADA LEWIS HOUSE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF

PARKING STANDARDS APPLIED WITH BRENT’S UDP STANDARDS AND THE

PROPOSED WEMBLEY STANDARDS

Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces

Car Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Residential

Not

stated

36

0.39 spaces

per unit

(average)

33

0.50

spaces per

unit

(average)

42

Source: Ada Lewis House Decision Notice (06 April 2009) and Committee Report (24 February 2009)

8.6 The committee report highlights that the provision of 33 spaces accords with LB

Brent's car parking standards for this use. It is at a level below the UDP maximum

standards (36 spaces) and is in accordance with the policy objectives to reduce the

provision of parking in areas with good to very good access to public transport.

Cycle Parking

8.7 Table 8.2 compares the consented cycle parking standards for the site with the


TABLE 8.2 ADA LEWIS HOUSE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF

PARKING STANDARDS APPLIED WITH BRENT’S UDP STANDARDS

Land Use

Brent’s UDP Parking Standard Applied

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Residential Not stated Not stated Not stated 85

Source: Ada Lewis House Decision Notice (06 April 2009) and Committee Report (24 February 2009)

Council Requirements

8.8 A Travel Plan will be developed in full for the site prior to occupation and will be

included in the Section 106 agreement.

8.9 Residents will not be able to apply for parking permits.

8.10 Three car-club parking spaces to be provided.

Brent Civic Centre

8.11 The Brent Civic Centre development (planning application 09/2450) was granted

full planning permission on the 22 March 2010. The scheme comprises 14,527 m2

administrative office space (B1), 1,755 m2 library/council services centre (D1/A3),

1,894 m2 community hall and winter garden (D1/D2), civic hall and 1,087 m2

committee rooms (D1), 659 m2 registrar’s office (D1), 699 m2 members

accommodation (B1), 372 m2 café (A3) and 1,200 m2 retail/office space

(A1/A2/B1). The scheme is under construction and is due to be completed in 2013.


72

8.12 The development is located on the north side of Engineers Way directly opposite

the Wembley Arena and Arena Square, an area of privately owned public open

space within the Quintain Stage 1 site area. It is within the Wembley Area Action

Plan area, to the north of the Stadium. The current PTAL for the site is 5 (at the

time of application was 4) and will be 5 in 2026.

Car Parking



TABLE 8.3 BRENT CIVIC CENTRE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces

Administrative

Offices

Not

reported

Not

reported

Not

reported

158

1 space per

600 m2

24

Library/Council

Services Centre

1 space per

10 users

Community Hall

and Winter Garden

1 space per

10 users

Civic Hall and

Committee Rooms

1 space per

10 users

Registrar’s Office

1 space per

10 users

Members

Accommodation

1 space per

600 m2

1

Café

Operational

and

disabled

only

Retail/Office

1 space per

600 m2/

1 space per

150 m2

1/4

Source: Brent Civic Centre Decision Notice (22 March 2010) and Committee Report (16 March 2010) and

LB Brent spread sheet


Brent's UDP and London Plan car parking standards for these uses. The number of

spaces represents a significant reduction in the number spaces when compared

with those available at the buildings currently occupied by the Council. The


74

reduction is supported by Travel Plan measures. It also states that the provision of

12 disabled bays (8%) also exceeds the minimum UDP requirement of 5%.

8.15 Condition 20 of the consent states that the development shall not commence until

a scheme to establish a Controlled Parking Zone within the vicinity of the site has

been submitted to and approved in writing' with LB Brent.

Cycle Parking



TABLE 8.4 BRENT CIVIC CENTRE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON

OF PARKING STANDARDS APPLIED WITH BRENT’S UDP STANDARDS

Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Administrative Offices

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

250

Library/Council Services

Centre

Community Hall and

Winter Garden

Civic Hall and Committee

Rooms

Registrar’s Office

Members Accommodation

Café

Retail/Office

Source: Brent Civic Centre Decision Notice (22 March 2010) and Committee Report (16 March 2010)

8.17 The committee report highlights that the provision of 250 spaces, of which 150 are

secure spaces for staff and 100 are publically available spaces, accords with LB

Brent's UDP and London Plan cycle parking standards.




8.19 A detailed car park management plan to be submitted and approved by LB Brent to

prevent overspill parking in the surrounding area.

8.20 A Controlled Parking Zone within the vicinity of the site is also required.

Wembley Central Square

8.21 The Wembley Central Square development (planning application 03/3765) was

granted full planning permission on the 13 October 2005. The scheme is a mixed


75

use development comprising 3,209 m2 existing and 7,440 m2 new retail, food and

drink uses, 2,172 m2 leisure, 223 residential units and a 120 bed hotel. The

majority of the scheme has been built, with the final stage including the hotel to

be completed in 2013.

8.22 The development is located on Wembley High Road, located within the Wembley

Area Action Plan area, within the town centre above Wembley Central station. The

current PTAL for the site is 6a (and at time of permission) and will continue to

score 6a in 2026.

Car Parking



TABLE 8.5 WEMBLEY CENTRAL SQUARE CAR PARKING STANDARDS:

COMPARISON OF PARKING STANDARDS APPLIED WITH BRENT’S UDP STANDARDS

AND THE PROPOSED WEMBLEY STANDARDS

Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Retail

Not

reported

78

Not

reported

270

1 space per

100 m2

74

Food and

drink

Not

reported

Not

reported

Operational

and

disabled

only

Leisure

1 space

per 60

patrons +

1 space

per 5 staff

Not

reported

1 space per

10 users

Hotel

Not

reported

24 + staff

Operational

and

disabled

only

12

Residential

Not

reported

143

0.36

spaces per

unit

(average)

81

0.50 spaces

per unit

(average)

112

Source: Wembley Central Square Decision Notice (13 October 2005), Committee Report (08 April 2004)

8.24 The committee report highlights that the provision of the spaces detailed in Table

8.5 accords with LB Brent's UDP car parking standards for these uses. The number

of public car park spaces represents a reduction when compared with those

available in the existing car park. The reduction in residential parking is supported


76

because of its town centre location, the provision of a CPZ and very good public

transport access. The council requests that a Section 106 agreement is entered

into to remove the right of residents to apply for on street parking permits in the

area to ensure that overspill parking does not lead to congestion or parking

problems in the area. Also a contribution to a car club on site is deemed

beneficial.

8.25 Condition 3 of the consent requires a car park management plan.

8.26 Two coach parking spaces are required for the hotel.

Cycle Parking



TABLE 8.6 WEMBLEY CENTRAL SQUARE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS:

COMPARISON OF PARKING STANDARDS APPLIED WITH BRENT’S UDP STANDARDS

Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Retail

Not reported

Not reported

Not reported

50 Food and drink

Leisure

Hotel Not reported Not reported Not reported Not reported

Residential 1 space per unit 223 1 space per unit 223

Source: Wembley Central Square Decision Notice (13 October 2005) and Committee Report (08 April

2004)

8.28 The committee report highlights that the provision of 223 residential spaces

accords with LB Brent's UDP.




8.30 A detailed car park management plan to be submitted and approved by LB Brent to

ensure short stay parking is maintained.

8.31 Also included in the Section 106 agreement is the removal of the right of residents

to apply for on street parking permits in the area to ensure that overspill parking

does not lead to congestion or parking problems in the area. Plus a contribution to

a car club on site.

Crescent House

8.32 The Crescent House development (planning application 08/2672) was granted full

planning permission on the 30 March 2009 for an educational facility (D1),

including performance space and ancillary hair and beauty salons.


77

8.33 The development is located on the south-eastern side of Wembley Park Drive, on

the fringe of the Wembley Area Action Plan area, west of the Stadium. The current

PTAL for the site is 6a (at the time of application was 5) and will be 6a in 2026.

Car Parking



TABLE 8.7 CRESCENT HOUSE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Educational

facility

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

2 for

disabled

users

Operational

and

disabled

only

2

Source: Crescent House Decision Notice (30 March 2009) and Committee Report (09 December 2008)

Cycle Parking



TABLE 8.8 CRESCENT HOUSE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF


Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Educational facility Not stated Not stated Not stated 131

Source: Crescent House Decision Notice (30 March 2009) and Committee Report (09 December 2008)


8.36 A Travel Plan will be developed in full for the site prior to occupation.

Dexion House

8.37 The Dexion House development (planning application 11/0142) was granted full

planning permission on the 14 June 2011 for 661 bed student accommodation,

community swimming pool and fitness facilities and 530 m2 commercial

(A1/A2/A3/A4/A5) space.

8.38 The development is located on eastern side of Empire Way, north west of the

Stadium. The current PTAL for the site is 5 (at the time of application was 4) and

will increase to 6a in 2026.


78

Car Parking



TABLE 8.9 DEXION HOUSE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces

Student

accommodation

1 space

per 16

bedrooms

41

Not stated

4 disabled

bays

Car free

0

Community

swimming pool

and fitness

1 space

per 5

staff and

1 per 60

visitors

6

Not stated

Operational

and

disabled

only

4

Commercial

Not

stated

3

Not stated

1 space per

300 m2

2

Source: Dexion House Decision Notice (14 June 2011) and Committee Report (21 January 2011)

8.40 The committee report highlights that the provision of 4 disabled car parking spaces

accords with LB Brent's car parking standards. This more than satisfies the number

of disabled bays required. It also highlights that any future CPZ in the area would

help to prevent potential overspill parking on nearby residential streets (students

and visitors would be ineligible for permits). Visitors to the health and fitness

facilities would be able to make use of future public car parks provided as part of

wider development proposals.

Cycle Parking




79

TABLE 8.10 DEXION HOUSE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF


Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Cycle

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces


1 space per

2 students

329

Not stated

354 Community swimming pool and fitness Not stated Not stated

Commercial Not stated 4

Source: Dexion House Decision Notice (14 June 2011) and Committee Report (21 January 2011)

8.42 The committee report states that the provision of 354 cycle parking spaces is

broadly in line with cycle parking standards. Ideally the split of spaces provided in

a secure storeroom for students would be higher than 75% of the required total

within the building, however the Council considered this acceptable. This is

because a cycle hire scheme is also proposed to operate on site.


8.43 The parking spaces cannot be used for Wembley Stadium event parking or for those

that do not patronise the development.

8.44 Details of 249 cycle spaces within the building and 104 surface level spaces to be

provided and development not to be occupied until provided.

8.45 Building cannot be occupied until the 4 disabled bays are provided.



8.47 Residents will not be able to apply for parking permits (event day or future CPZ).

8.48 Provision of a financial contribution to parking controls or non car access/highway

safety improvements.

Elizabeth House

8.49 The Elizabeth House development (planning application 09/2506) was granted full

planning permission on the 08 February 2011 for 115 residential units and

commercial (A1/2/3) space.

8.50 The development is located on the south side of the High Road within the Wembley

Central town centre area of the WAAP. The current PTAL for the site is 5 and will

increase 5 in 2026.

Car Parking




80

TABLE 8.11 ELIZABETH HOUSE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Residential

Not stated

Not stated

0.57

spaces per

unit

(average)

66

0.50

spaces

per unit

(average)

58

Commercial

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

0

No

additional

parking

use

existing

supply

0

Source: Elizabeth House Decision Notice (08 February 2011), draft Committee Report (unknown) and LB

Brent’s WAAP parking spread sheet

Cycle Parking



TABLE 8.12 ELIZABETH HOUSE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF


Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Residential Not stated Not stated Not stated 126

Commercial Not stated Not stated Not stated 16

Source: Elizabeth House Decision Notice (08 February 2011), draft Committee Report (unknown) and LB

Brent’s WAAP parking spread sheet





8.55 Car club parking spaces to be provided.

8.56 Car park management plan required for the basement car park.




81

Elm Road Car Park

8.58 The Elm Road Car Park development (planning application 03/3727) was granted

full planning permission on the 26 August 2005 for 121 residential units and 166 m2

community/commercial (A1/A2/B1/D2) space.

8.59 The development is located on Elm Road within the Wembley Central town centre

area of the WAAP. The current PTAL for the site is 6a and will be 6b in 2026. The

site has been built.

Car Parking



TABLE 8.13 ELM ROAD CAR PARK CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Residential

Not stated

76

0.45

spaces per

unit

(average)

54

0.50

spaces

per unit

(average)

61

Commercial

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

100

1 space

per 300

m2

1

Source: Elm Road Car Park Decision Notice (26 August 2005) and Committee Report (30 June 2004)

8.61 The 100 spaces are the provision of public parking for the town centre, of which 6

spaces are disabled bays. The committee report points out that this public parking

is welcomed as it will maintain and enhance the role of the High Road as a major

town centre. This equates to 6% and exceeds the UDP’s 5% requirement. 5

motorcycle parking spaces are also provided.

8.62 The committee report states that the shortfall in parking is offset by the excellent

nearby public transport facilities and residents would not be eligible for parking

permits. Sufficient parking is provided within the public car park for the

commercial uses.

Cycle Parking




82

TABLE 8.14 ELM ROAD CAR PARK CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON


Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Residential Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

122

Commercial

Source: Elm Road Car Park Decision Notice (26 August 2005) and Committee Report (30 June 2004)





8.66 Car-club parking spaces to be provided.

8.67 The short stay public car park should be operated under Secured by Design Car

park standards.

8.68 Management of the short stay public car park.

Karma House

8.69 The Karma House development (planning application 05/0626) was granted outline

planning permission on the 18 April 2008 for 120 bed hotel, 108 bed apart hotel

and a restaurant.

8.70 The development is located on North End Road within the Wembley Master Plan

area of the WAAP. The current PTAL for the site is 5 and will be 5/6a in 2026.

Car Parking




83

TABLE 8.15 KARMA HOUSE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Hotel

1 space

per 5

bedrooms

24

1 space

per 5

bedrooms

40

Operational

and disabled

only

12

Apart

hotel

1 space

per 5

bedrooms

22

1 space

per 5

bedrooms

Operational

and disabled

only

11

Source: Karma House Decision Notice (18 April 2008) and Committee Report (28 July 2005)

8.72 The committee report states that the provision of 40 car parking spaces is in

accordance with UDP standards. 5% of spaces are required to be provide, the

provision of 2 disabled bays achieves this.

8.73 A car pooling scheme (electric vehicles) is proposed for use by temporary visitors.

Funding is also sought for the implementation of a CPZ in the area. The committee

report highlights that these measures would reduce the potential for overspill

parking in the local area.

8.74 2 coach parking spaces are considered acceptable (standard would require 4).

Cycle Parking



TABLE 8.16 KARMA HOUSE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF


Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Hotel No requirement

No

requirement

Not stated

10 for staff

Apart hotel

Source: Karma House Decision Notice (18 April 2008) and Committee Report (28 July 2005)





84

8.77 Provision of a financial contribution to parking controls or non car access/highway

safety improvements



Fulton House

8.79 The Fulton House development (planning application 08/2633) was granted full

planning permission on the 19 December 2008. The scheme comprises a 262 room

hotel with ancillary restaurant.

8.80 The site is located in the Wembley Area Action Plan, north of the Stadium. The

PTAL is 6a for the site.

Car Parking



TABLE 8.17 FULTON HOUSE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Hotel

Not

recorded

Not

recorded

Not

recorded

53

Operational

and

disabled

only

26

Source: Fulton House Decision Notice (19 December 2008) and Committee Report (09 December 2008)


Brent's and London Plan car parking standards for this use. It also states that the

provision of 3 disabled bays (6%) also accords with LB Brent's standards.

8.83 Condition 12 of the consent states that 'the car parking spaces shall not be made

available for commercial parking to Stadium visitors on Wembley event days,

unless otherwise agreed in writing' with LB Brent.

Cycle Parking




85

TABLE 8.18 FULTON HOUSE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF


Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Hotel

Not recorded

Not

recorded

Not recorded

12

Source: Fulton House Decision Notice (19 December 2008) and Committee Report (09 December 2008)




Quintain NW Lands

8.86 The Quintain NW Lands development (planning application 10/3032) was granted

outline planning permission on the 24 November 2011 for:

I 815 to 1,300 residential units;

I 17,000 m2 to 30,000 m2 retail floor space (A1 to A5);

I Up to 25,000 m2 business floor space (B1)

I 5,000 m2 to 20,000 m2 hotel (C1);

I 1,500 m2 to 3,000 m2 community use (D1);

I Up to 5,000 m2 leisure and entertainment (D2);

I 7,500 m2 to 25,000 m2 student accommodation/serviced apartments/apart

hotels (sui generis)

8.87 The development is located on Engineers Way, north of the Stadium. The current

PTAL for the site is 5 and will be 5 in 2026.

Car Parking




86

TABLE 8.19 QUINTAIN NW LANDS CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Residential

Not stated

Not stated

0.50

spaces per

unit

(average)

650

0.50

spaces per

unit

(average)

650

Business

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

200

1 space

per 600 m2

42

Hotel

Not stated

Not stated

Operationa

l and

disabled

only

29

Leisure and

entertainment

Not stated

Not stated

1 space

per 10

users

Community

Not stated

Not stated

Operationa

l and

disabled

only

10

Student/

serviced

apartments/

apart hotel

Not stated

Not stated

Car free/

Operationa

l and

disabled

only

0/36

Retail

Not stated

Not stated

1 space

per 50m2

600

1 space

per 75 m2

400

Source: Quintain NW Lands Decision Notice (24 November 2011) and Committee Report (12 May 2011)

8.89 The committee report states that parking for disabled users is in accordance with

Brent’s UDP. A total of 10% of the residential parking allocation will be disabled

spaces and 5% of the commercial spaces will be disabled space. This is in

accordance with the UDP.

Cycle Parking




87

TABLE 8.20 QUINTAIN NW LANDS CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON


Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Cycle

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Cycle

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Residential

Not stated

Not

stated

London

Plan

standards

Not stated

Business

Not stated

Not

stated

London

Plan

standards

Not stated

Hotel

Not stated

Not

stated

London

Plan

standards

Not stated

Retail

Not stated

Not

stated

London

Plan

standards

Not stated

Leisure and entertainment

Not stated

Not

stated

London

Plan

standards

Not stated

Community

Not stated

Not

stated

London

Plan

standards

Not stated

Student/ serviced apartments/ apart

hotel

Not stated

Not

stated

London

Plan

standards

Not stated

Source: Quintain NW Lands Decision Notice (24 November 2011) and Committee Report (12 May 2011)

8.91 The committee report states that the cycle parking will be provided in accordance

with London Plan standards. A cycle hire scheme could be implemented if

agreement is reached between TfL and LB Brent.


8.92 A car park management plan to be provided for all non-residential and disabled

parking provided – will need to include allocation, enforcement, and the

mechanisms to prevent the use of the spaces for Wembley Stadium event day

parking.

8.93 A residential and workplace Travel Plan will be developed in full for the site prior

to occupation and will be included in the Section 106 agreement.

8.94 Provision of car club spaces up to a maximum of 8 cars.

8.95 Provision of electric charging points to be provided at appropriate locations.


88

8.96 Residents, visitors and businesses will not be able to apply for parking permits

(event day, surrounding or future CPZ).

8.97 Provision of a financial contribution to parking controls in the immediate vicinity

of the site.

Shubette House

8.98 The Shubette House development (planning application 08/3009) was granted full

planning permission on the 14 February 2011 for 158 residential units, 225 bed

hotel, 12 apart hotel, and 1,400 m2 business and food and drink floor space

(B1/A3/A4).

8.99 The development is located at the junction of Olympic Way and Fulton Road within

Wembley Regeneration Area. The current PTAL for the site is 5 (PTAL 4 when the

planning application went to committee) and will be 5 in 2026. The development is

under construction.

Car Parking



TABLE 8.21 SHUBETTE HOUSE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces

Residential

0.78

spaces per

unit

(average)

124

0.69

spaces per

unit

(average)

110

0.50 spaces

per unit

(average)

79

Hotel/Apart

Hotel

Not stated

61

Not stated

19

Operational

and

disabled

only

23

Business

Not stated

0

1 space per

600 m2

1

Food and

drink

Not stated

No

additional

operational

and

disabled

only

0

Source: Shubette House Decision Notice (14 February 2011) and Committee Report (17 June 2009)


89

8.101 The committee report highlights that the level of parking provided complies with

the London Plan.

Cycle Parking



TABLE 8.22 SHUBETTE HOUSE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF


Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Residential Not stated Not stated 1 space per unit 158

Hotel/Apart Hotel Not stated Not stated Not stated 20

Business Not stated Not stated Not stated 20

Food and drink Not stated Not stated Not stated

Source: Shubette House Decision Notice (14 February 2011) and Committee Report (17 June 2009)





8.105 2 car-club parking spaces to be provided.

Victoria Hall

8.106 The Victoria Hall development (planning application 07/2772) was granted full

planning permission on the 26 February 2008. The scheme comprises a 445 student

beds.

8.107 The site is located on northern side of North End Road in the Wembley Area Action

Plan, north of the Stadium. The PTAL is 6a for the site currently and in 2026.

Car Parking




90

TABLE 8.23 VICTORIA HALL CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of

Spaces

Student

Accommodation

Not

stated

Not stated

Not stated

4 disabled

Car

free/

disabled

only

4

Source: Victoria Hall Decision Notice (26 February 2008) and Committee Report (05 February 2008)

8.109 The committee report highlights the impact of overspill parking is considered

negligible because:

I A financial contribution towards a CPZ has been secured;

I A car free agreement will be implemented upon the introduction of any future

CPZ;

I Existing competition for kerb space on North End Road would discourage

student car ownership;

I There is high access to public transport;

I The letting contracts to students will state that no parking permits will be

issued to student residents and that non car forms of transport will not be

supported through the Travel Plan.

Cycle Parking



TABLE 8.24 VICTORIA HALL CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF


Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Student Accommodation Not stated Not stated Not stated 384

Source: Victoria Hall Decision Notice (26 February 2008) and Committee Report (05 February 2008)

8.111 The provision of 384 cycle parking spaces is above the UDP standard.




8.113 Students will not be able to apply for parking permits.


91

8.114 A financial contribution towards non car access/highway safety improvements,

parking controls and/or a bicycle hire scheme.

Forum House

8.115 The Forum House development (planning application 05/2949) was granted planning

permission on the 12 January 2006. The scheme comprises 286 residential units,

office and 300 m2 retail floor space.

8.116 The site is located on Empire Way, West of the Stadium. The PTAL is 6a for the

site currently and in 2026.

Car Parking



TABLE 8.25 FORUM HOUSE CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF



Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Residential

Not stated

Not stated

0.46

spaces per

unit

(average)

132

0.50

spaces

per unit

(average)

143

Office Not stated Not stated Not stated 0

Retail

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

0

1 space

per 300

m2

1

Source: Forum House Decision Notice (12 January 2006) and Committee Report (11 January 2006)

8.118 The committee report states that the level of residential car parking accords with

standards. In addition the provision of 7 disabled spaces satisfies standards.

8.119 The impact of overspill parking is considered negligible because:

I A financial contribution towards a CPZ has been secured;

I A car club scheme will be implemented; and

I A car free agreement will be implemented upon the introduction of any future

CPZ.

Cycle Parking




92

TABLE 8.26 FORUM HOUSE CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF


Land Use


Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Residential Not stated Not stated Not stated

286 Office Not stated Not stated Not stated

Retail Not stated Not stated Not stated

Source: Forum House Decision Notice (12 January 2006) and Committee Report (11 January 2006)


8.121 Basement parking requires electric charging facilities to be provided.

LDA Land

8.122 The Forum House development (planning application 05/2949) was granted outline

planning permission on the 12 November 2004. The scheme comprises:

I Business and employment uses up to 21,747 m2 (B1);

I Retail and food and drink up to 7,475 m2 (A1/A2/A3);

I Residential up to 43,160 m2 (C3); and

I Community and leisure facilities up to 12,961 m2 (D1 and D2)

8.123 The current PTAL for the site is 4 and will continue to score 4 in 2026.

Car Parking




93

TABLE 8.27 LDA LAND CAR PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF PARKING

STANDARDS APPLIED WITH BRENT’S UDP STANDARDS AND THE PROPOSED

WEMBLEY STANDARDS

Land Use

Brent’s UDP

Parking Standard

Applied

Proposed Wembley

Standard

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Car

Parking

Standard

Number

of Spaces

Business

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

526

1 space

per 600

m2

36

Residential

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

0.50

spaces per

unit

(average)

216

Retail and

food and

drink

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

1 space

per 100

m2

75

Community

and leisure

Not stated

Not stated

Not stated

1 space

per 10

users

Source: LDA Land Decision Notice (12 November 2004) and Committee Report (26 August 2004)

8.125 Reduced levels of car parking are appropriate given the good access to public

transport.

Cycle Parking




94

TABLE 8.28 LDA LAND CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS: COMPARISON OF PARKING

STANDARDS APPLIED WITH BRENT’S UDP STANDARDS

Land Use


Cycle

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Cycle

Parking

Standard

Number of

Spaces

Business Not stated Not stated Not stated

Residential Not stated Not stated Not stated

Retail and food and drink Not stated Not stated Not stated

Community and leisure Not stated Not stated Not stated

Source: LDA Land Decision Notice (12 November 2004) and Committee Report (26 August 2004)







8.130 A car park management plan to be provided.


Appendix A

APPENDIX

A

EXISTING BRENT PARKING STANDARDS UDP 2004


Appendix A

A1 PARKING STANDARDS – UDP 2004

Business (B1) & Financial & Professional Services (A2), General Industry

(B2) and Warehousing (B8)

A1.1 Maximum one space per 300 m2 GFA in or adjacent to Major Town Centre & District

Centre.

Elsewhere one space per 150 m2 GFA

Retail (A1) Less Than 2000m2

A1.2 Up to 400 m2 GFA – one space

Plus one space for each extra 100 m2 GFA pro-rata thereafter

Retail (A1) 2000m2 and Over

A1.3 Maximum of one space per 50 m2 GFA in or adjacent to Major Town Centre and

District Centre.

Elsewhere one space per 25 m2 GFA

Food & Drink (A3)

A1.4 Up to 400 m2 GFA – one space

Plus one space for each extra 100 m2 GFA pro-rate thereafter.

Assembly & Leisure (D2)

A1.5 Spaces equivalent to one in 60 patrons, based on maximum patron capacity, plus

one space per 200 m2 non-seating/assembly area.

Maximum employee parking of one space per five employees

Hotels (C1)

A1.6 Maximum of one space per five bedrooms

Plus maximum of one space per five employees

Where hotels have 50 rooms or more, one coach space should be provided per 50

rooms.

Non-Residential Institutions (D1) and Hospitals (C2)

A1.7 Places of Worship – two spaces for every five visitors based on maximum capacity

Hospitals – one space per five beds

Education, Other health and community facilities – one space per five employees

For all educational and health uses, the maximum additional visitor/student

parking should be 20% of the employee parking, with a minimum provision of one

space.

For community facilities, the maximum additional parking for visitors should be 5%

of the maximum attendance.

Appendix A


Residential Development (C3) Appendix 2

APPENDIX TABLE A.1 RESIDENTIAL PARKING STANDARDS

Type of Dwelling Spaces per Unit

New Dwellings

1 bedroom 1.0

2 bedrooms 1.2

3 bedrooms 1.6

4+ bedrooms 2.0

Elderly Persons Accommodation*

Category 1 0.5

Category 2 0.25

Category 2.5 0.1

*Plus one warden space

A1.8 The total parking provision for the development as a whole should be divided

between assigned (allocated to an individual unit, such as front garden parking),

and unassigned spaces. As unassigned spaces can be used more flexibly and

reduce the overall provision, at least 50% of spaces should be unassigned for 1 or 2

bedroom properties, with 20% of spaces unassigned for larger properties. A

maximum of 2 parking spaces per unit may be assigned.

A1.9 For both new dwellings and conversions in areas with very good public transport

accessibility, and town centres with good public transport accessibility and a

controlled parking zone, a reduced provision or 0.7 spaces per unit applies for 1-2

bedroom units and 1.2 spaces per unit for 3+ bedrooms. Spaces should be

unallocated as far as practical.

A1.10 An exception can be made for affordable housing by a registered social landlord of

up to 50% reduced provision (after all other reductions).

Control Sheet

CONTROL SHEET

Project/Proposal Name Review of Parking Standards

Document Title Recommended Changes to Parking Standards in Wembley

Client Contract/Project No. .

SDG Project/Proposal No. 22455601

ISSUE HISTORY

Issue No. Date Details

1 14 May 2012 Issued to Steve Salter – First Review

2 19 June 2012 Issued to Steve Salter – Second Review

3 6 December 2012 Final

REVIEW

Originator Charlotte Spetch

Other Contributors Simon Hollowood

Review by: Print Keith Sowerby

Sign

DISTRIBUTION

Client: Brent Council

Steer Davies Gleave:

P:\Projects\224\5\56\01\Work\Wembley Standards\Report_June 2012\Wembley Standards Report v9 6 December 2012.docx

Parking Standards in Brent - London Borough of Brent Standards.pdf · 1.1 London Borough (LB)...

Documents

Transcript of Parking Standards in Brent - London Borough of Brent Standards.pdf · 1.1 London Borough (LB)...