Findings and recommendations
The case study findings
All of the Scottish Local Authorities who were contacted were helpful and keen
to contribute to the study. They were a useful sources of information and were
able to explain some of the wider implications and issues of the case studies
in the context of the surrounding areas.
Other organisations contacted with regard to the study expressed a willingness
to participate and provide information, however in a number of cases it proved
difficult to obtain responses or arrange meetings to discuss matters further.
Reasons given for declining to provide a response included difficulties in identifying
those responsible for car parking matters, time/resource issues, a lack of knowledge
of the facts required to complete the questionnaires, and lack of specific data
to input to the study. In general most were happy to give general comments but
when it came down to specific details and numbers this often proved to be a
stumbling block in discussions.
In general, of the 19 case studies identified within this study, the overriding
perception from local authorities and developers towards the application of
maximum parking standards has been positive.
There appears to be a general awareness of the issues by developers, and broad
recognition of the drivers behind the proposed changes to guidance in relation
to car parking standards. The need for a sustainable approach to development
is widely recognised, as is the role that car parking can play in encouraging
alternative modes of transport for workplace journeys. Feedback from the case
studies has indicated that many developers encounter a learning curve as they
come to terms with the planning implications and accessibility options available
to them. Experience suggests that many of the national "blue-chip"
companies appear to have greater awareness and experience of sustainable development
issues.
The implementation of maximum parking standards or restricted parking practices
has encouraged the uptake of sustainable transport modes and green travel plans.
The increasing requirement for green travel plans as a method of encouraging
alternative means of transport is widely recognised, and in many cases is being
implemented through the use of Section 75 agreements or planning conditions.
This is seen as a vital measure in ensuring that employers are encouraged to
provide information and encouragement on alternative means of transport for
work based journeys.
Based on the travel plans developed as part of the case studies identified in
this study, there appears to be a range in the effectiveness of plans implemented
to date. Many universities and hospitals studied genuinely embrace the environmental
and health benefits of providing non car based travel options in conjunction
with a level of restrained parking supply. However, there is limited evidence
of a concerted and co-ordinated effort to improve the situation in some business/industrial
locations. In many cases it would appear that travel plans, not linked to Section
75 agreements or planning conditions, encourage cosmetic improvements many of
which may be unrealistic in their aims to encourage a modal shift.
This clearly shows the importance of developing a range of integrated 'carrot
and stick' transport measures that will genuinely improve the choice of non-car
based options available. The package of measures including a travel plan where
relevant, should be secured either through planning conditions or a Section
75 legal agreement. The measures implemented should be monitored on a regular
basis not exceeding two years.
Whilst the need for a sustainable approach to development and the role that
car parking can play in encouraging alternative modes of transport is widely
recognised, there still appears to be a lack of understanding amongst the public
of the need to reduce car parking associated with workplace locations and to
replace with viable alternatives. This would suggest a need to promote sustainable
planning at regional and national levels as well as increasing travel awareness
to the general public.
It is clear from the case studies, that whilst car parking is initially perceived
to be a key component in the transport equation, on closer scrutiny it is in
actual fact good accessibility, by whatever mode, that is the key issue in terms
of the site selection process. As such, in locations that a suitable level of
accessibility is available by non-car modes the presence of limited parking
is easier to bear. This backs up one of the main findings of the Symonds Travers
Morgan report undertaken in 1998.
Business and industrial locations invariably consist of a collection of occupiers,
uses, shift patterns etc. This often leads to difficulties in co-ordinating
efforts that are required to address area based transportation problems. In
some cases, more stringent parking standards may be accepted by developers at
the outset but there still exists a mentality that other spaces will be found
through alternative means such as on-street parking or neighbouring facilities.
There are examples of some business park occupiers leasing additional spaces
on adjacent properties which surely goes against the principles of encouraging
sustainable travel to workplaces.
In other cases developers do genuinely see the need to reduce private car use
but may feel that there are no other alternative means of transport. There is
a long way to go to get walking and cycling figures up to substantial levels
and often public transport is perceived as being inadequate.
Whilst the overall feedback from case studies was positive towards the concept
of maximum parking standards and the resulting expansion in choice of sustainable
transport modes, the main concern expressed was the ability to retain employees
and customers when faced with a competing or alternative destination that has
a comparatively unsuppressed level of car parking. This raises the issue of
providing a level playing field for all. This could be achieved in the medium
to long term as the result of implementing a national maximum parking standard.
However, there is little or nothing that could be done in the short term to
bring existing or extant developments into line with the national standard.
This would only be achieved with time as such developments come forward for
extension or redevelopment as part of the planning process.
Discussions with local authorities and developers throughout the UK would indicate
that there is little or no evidence to suggest that maximum parking standards
have a detrimental effect on developer confidence, or where relevant, inward
investment.
For a full copy of the Governments Report visit http://www.scotland.gov.uk
Or download the pdf http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/kd01/blue/emcps.pdf
