11. TRANSPORT

Introduction

11.1 It should be noted that this chapter on transport policies deals exclusively with those policies that have District-wide application. There is a need for further transport policies which are related to particular areas of the District, such as Colchester Town Centre, Mile End, Stanway and Eastern Approaches (in the Hythe). These latter policies will be found in the relevant chapter for each area, towards the end of this Local Plan.

11.2 It should also be noted that the transport package of policies contained in this local Plan does not represent the full breadth and content of the Councils transport policy framework. This is also expressed elsewhere in other documents, most notably through the “Local Transport Plan” (LTP) as it relates to Colchester and, through the Council’s Transportation Strategy, which sets out the basic principles and priorities of the Council’s general strategic approach to transport issues. The Council has, in addition, issued more closely focused policy guidelines, including a statement of intention regarding the establishment of a cycle network in Colchester.

Objectives

11.3 The Plan’s objectives in terms of transport are as follows:

(a) To reduce significantly the number and length of trips that are made by private car;

(b) To work towards a major improvement in the quality, coverage and co-ordination of public transport services in town and countryside, including ensuring that these are fully accessible to disabled and older people, those with children and lower-income families;

(c) To develop a safe and high quality environment for cyclists in each major urban area of the Borough together with well-located and sufficient cycle parking facilities;

(d) To facilitate journeys on foot along an attractive pedestrian route network to a variety of locally based and more centralised retail, community, leisure, educational and workplace centres;

(e) To continue to work towards reducing the number and severity of road accidents, especially among the most vulnerable road users, including cyclists, pedestrians and horse riders;

(f) To ensure a level of parking provision compatible with achieving a reduction in the number of trips made by private car;

(g) To secure adequate and convenient parking facilities for disabled people at all public and private facilities;

(h) To decrease levels of noise and air pollution generated by traffic, especially for diesel-engined vehicles;

(i) To investigate and make provision, if appropriate, for park and ride services as part of an integrated public transport system;

(j) To ensure that flows and volumes of traffic do not exceed the environmental carrying capacity of built-up areas or open countryside, especially in respect of the Dedham Vale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Countryside Conservation Areas and Conservation Areas;

(k) To discourage “rat-running”;

(l) To encourage that transport of commercial freight by rail and water rather than by road and to ensure that commercial freight facilities are sited in sustainable locations.

Policies

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL CONSIDERATIONS

11.4 It is important to note that all policies contained within this chapter must be read alongside the overall Development Control Policy (DC1). This policy sets out the standard planning criteria applicable to all forms of development. The relevant criteria will be used to assess the suitability of any proposal in addition to the following detailed policy guidance.

PROVISION FOR WALKING

11.5 Walking is a very natural and appropriate way of making short trips, either from the home to local facilities, or in a whole variety of other situations, such as shopping in the Town Centre of Colchester. However, the needs of pedestrians have tended to be neglected in relation to the attention given to meeting the needs of those travelling by motorised means. The Council has established a topic group through its Transport Forum to develop its approach to walking and cycling.

11.6 In this context, the Council is anxious to promote more and safer opportunities for walking in urban parts of Colchester District, particularly along key desire lines linking residential areas to local retail and community facilities, the public transport network, open spaces, workplaces, the Town Centre, the countryside and the greenlinks network (see Policy UEA14 above).

11.7 Pedestrian routes will be characterised by a high standard of facilities providing safer, more frequent road crossings, traffic calming, improved lighting, signposting, seating, dropped kerbs, tactile paving and minimum pavement widths and will be free of obstructions (such as parked cars) and maintained in a good state of repair. Such a network would meet the needs of particularly vulnerable groups of pedestrians, such as the disabled, parents with very young children and individual walkers at night.

11.8 Within different areas of established development, varying levels of attention have been paid to the needs of pedestrians. For example, in the Town Centre of Colchester, there is an extensive semi or totally pedestrianised core. In some residential areas, traffic- calming schemes have been implemented. On the other hand, in retail warehouse parks and local shopping centres, the needs of pedestrians have been far less recognised. In most residential areas, the needs of car drivers take precedence over those of pedestrians.

11.9 There is therefore a real need to give a much higher priority to pedestrians in these areas, taking every available opportunity to achieve this. It is likely that the most appropriate measures will involve a mix of:

(a) a general reduction of the maximum speed limit for motorised traffic (down to around 20mph or less in some cases);

(b) a reduction of conflict in cross-flows of motorised and pedestrian traffic;

(c) extension of pedestrianised areas (at the expense of areas available to motorised traffic).

This will be particularly important in residential areas, where the living environment should be deliberately designed to give automatic precedence to pedestrians (eg children at play or crossing the road). The designation of Home Zones, once the necessary legislation is passed, has great potential and the Borough Council is keen to explore such designations.

11.10 Equally important are the needs of people on foot in the rural parts of the District, either residents or visitors. These needs are very similar to those of pedestrians in the towns, but any practical measures to meeting them will be far more constrained in scope by a general requirement to harmonise with existing village-scapes or countryside environments.

11.11 However, in the villages, where space and environmental considerations permit it, footpath networks will be extended and improved to allow for safer pedestrian journeys, particularly to local shops and community facilities. In the countryside, consideration will be given to traffic-calming measures that do not urbanise the rural environment, such as speed limits, and reinforcement of embankments with natural materials to prevent road-widening by their erosion.

11.12 There are first-class opportunities in areas of new residential development to create a high quality pedestrian environment which allows people on foot to walk safely and in attractive surroundings to their chosen destination. One of the main aims in creating such new pedestrian networks must be to make short journeys to local retail and community facilities more attractive, or, at least, as attractive on foot as going by car. This, in part, means making journey times as short as possible by laying out the pedestrian network to give the most direct access possible to such facilities from all parts of the development concerned. The means of achieving a safe, attractive, direct access pedestrian network are set out in the “Essex Design Guide” (1997).

11.13 There are similar opportunities that can be exploited in larger areas of new commercial development (retail, office, industrial, leisure). There is a real requirement to make the walking experience as pleasant and safe as possible in all such areas of development, ensuring that links to the public transport network and other regular destinations are as short and direct as possible.

 

T1 In areas of new development, pedestrian networks will be secured to provide safe, direct and attractive passage to people on foot, especially where this can be a real alternative to the same purpose journey by car.

PROVISION FOR CYCLING

11.14 Parallel to the Council’s concern to give a much higher priority to addressing the needs of pedestrians is its determination to meet the needs of cyclists in as comprehensive a fashion as possible. To this end, in March 1994 the Council decided on the concept of a cycle route network to cover the main urban area of Colchester/Stanway. The current network relies heavily on lengths of shared-use cycle/pedestrian paths alongside the busiest main roads (eg Ipswich Road), supplemented by shorter lengths of cycle/ pedestrian paths away from the main street network (eg Wivenhoe Trail) and sections of reserved cycle lanes on some main radial routes (eg Lexden Road). Cyclists are additionally given some measure of priority on main carriageways by the use of advanced stop lines at traffic lights (eg at Middleborough) and by being permitted to use bus lanes (eg Osborne Street).

11.15 The Council’s own cycle route network will be complemented by sections of the National Cycle Network, which is being promoted by the voluntary sector agency Sustrans. Some stretches of National Route 1 will be off the standard road network, but the rest will follow the line of existing highways. The Borough Council is working in partnership with Sustrans and others to implement cycle proposals and has established a Topic Group to review its policies.

11.16 The Council will be seeking to make selective improvements and extensions to the existing cycle network – for example, by facilitating access to it by feeder extensions or by links to the emerging greenlink network (see paragraph 6.65 and Policy UEA14 above). On the other hand, where the existing cycle network shares footpaths with pedestrians, the Council will endeavour to remove such joint use wherever possible and where alternative provision can be made, as this is seen as unsatisfactory to both sets of user. However, more and more of the Council’s energies will be focused on making every road in the Borough safe for cycle use, mainly through overall reduction of speed limits, aiming ultimately for 30mph on main routes in the towns and villages and 20mph on other streets in built-up areas, and lower speeds, as appropriate, on country roads. This latter approach will be pursued in respect of all new development where there are clear opportunities to design in restraints on vehicle speeds from the outset. In addition, there is the chance to design layouts that offer cyclists as direct access as possible to regularly used facilities inside or outside the new development, thus making trips by bike more attractive than those by car within a safe and attractive riding environment. The Council would refer prospective applicants to the Arup/Sustrans publication “The National Cycle Network: Guidelines and Practical Details” (issue 2).

11.17 If cycling is to be encouraged as a significant mode of transport, it requires not only a comprehensive network of safe routes for cyclists but also convenient and secure places to park bikes at the end of each trip. It will therefore be a central task of the Borough Council to provide progressively more bike parking facilities at key areas, such as within the Town Centre, at retail warehouse parks, at major leisure facilities and at the larger local shopping centres. The parking facilities should comprise Sheffield-type stands of a suitable design in prominent places for short-term use, and secure cycle parking in lockers or in a building for medium and longer-term parking. All such facilities should be integrated into the affected environment in a visually satisfactory manner.

11.18 It has been a long-established requirement that new developments outside Colchester Town Centre and its fringes should include an adequate amount of car parking. In October 1995, the Council extended this basic requirement to the provision of parking facilities for cyclists. The relevant Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) sets down cycle parking standards for all categories of development requiring planning permission.

11.19 The Council recognises, however, that, as with car parking provision, it may well not be feasible or desirable to provide cycle parking facilities on-site in new developments within Colchester Town Centre. In such circumstances, applicants will be expected to sign a Unilateral Planning Obligation (UPO), which will require them to pay the appropriate commuted sums in respect of short or long-term parking spaces, so that these can be provided at public sites.

 

T2 In areas of new development, a convenient and safe cycle environment will be secured to provide direct and attractive access by cycle. Within development sites, appropriate priority for cyclists and the provision of appropriate cycle parking facilities will be required. Where on-site provision is not feasible and/or not desirable, applicants will be required to sign a legal agreement to ensure equivalent provision at a public site.

PROMOTION OF NON-CAR MODES OF TRAVEL

Safe Routes to Schools

11.20 It is considered that up to 20% of peak-hour traffic flows are caused by parents taking their children to school in the morning or picking them up in the afternoon. On a national scale, the trends are alarming: in 1990, 35% of school-children travelled to school by car compared to around 10% in 1971. Over the same period, the number of children walking to school fell by around 20% and the number of children travelling to school by bus was more than halved.

11.21 There are a number of reasons for these trends: parents cite fear of traffic and fear of assault on their children as the two principal motivations. Apart from this, greater car availability per household and more choice in the school that their child attends can encourage parents to choose a more distant school, and hence lead to use of the car for school journeys.

11.22 The Council is concerned to reverse this increasing reliance on the car for pupils’ journeys to and from school and to encourage a much greater proportion of such trips by bus, cycle or on foot. In this regard, the Council, in conjunction with the County Council and the national cycling charity Sustrans, is in the process of introducing traffic management and safety measures that should induce less reliance on the car for pupils attending the Gilberd School in Highwoods and Philip Morant School in Lexden. This approach will be progressively extended to other schools in the District as and when funds can be secured through new LTP process, in partnership with the schools. This policy issue is being dealt with in more detail in the Council’s development of its Transportation Strategy.

11.23 In addition, proposals for the location and siting of new schools must take careful account of site accessibility by pupils and staff arriving or departing on foot, by bike or by scheduled bus services in relation to the schools’ likely catchment areas. This consideration would be equally relevant at existing schools where significant expansion of the teaching area or allied community facilities was being proposed. Facilities for buses and coaches at schools, eg turning circles, may need to be provided.

Travel Plans

11.24 According to the 1991 census, no fewer than 60% of those both resident and working in Colchester travelled to work by car. The second most popular mode was by foot for nearly 14% of workers. Only 9.3% went by bus, 6.5% went by bike, a further 2% by motorcycle and a tiny percentage, 0.53%, by rail.

11.25 As with the journey to school, the Council wishes to see far less reliance on the journey to work by car. A principal means of achieving this aim is through the production and implementation of Travel Plans, which seek to provide financial and other incentives for employees to change to a non-car mode of transport for the journey to work. In other parts of the country, such plans have been markedly successful in changing travelling habits.

11.26 The Council will require applicants for major new commercial or community developments to formulate Travel Plans as an integral part of the process of seeking planning permission. In this regard, it should be noted that:

- “major” refers to all developments of over 1,500 sq m (16,000 sq ft) or those which would generate employment for more than 30 people;

- “commercial or community developments” refers to new, or extensions to existing, development such as industry, offices, educational establishments and hospitals.

11.27 Where appropriate, the Council will require applicants for planning permission to sign an S106 Agreement which will ensure the production of a fully implementable Travel Plan to the Council’s satisfaction before any new buildings (including extensions) are occupied. The Council will be willing to assist such applicants in both formulating and implementing these Plans within its powers and means, including bringing together a number of employers to produce a joint Plan. It will also wish to give the strongest encouragement to major existing commercial and public establishments to institute and execute such Plans.

 

T3 Applicants seeking planning permission for major commercial or community development will be required to draw up and implement Travel Plans secured by a Section 106 Agreement.

Car-Free Residential Areas

11.28 As has been made explicit above, the Council is continually seeking ways to reduce people’s dependence on the car as a principal mode of transport, either generally or in respect of particular types of journey. It is therefore inclined to give sympathetic consideration to the concept of car-free residential developments at locations that can be well served by public transport services and are closely related to safe and attractive street networks for cyclists and pedestrians.

11.29 The Council is well aware that there are very few car-free developments in existence at present, and that therefore there is no track record of successful experience with these schemes to date. Nevertheless, the Council is keen to promote this concept at any suitable location in the District. However, it will need to be satisfied that the main issues arising from keeping a residential area car-free have been properly addressed. These issues would include, for example, adequate and ready access to all parts of the development for emergency vehicles and imaginative measures such as the establishment of a community car hire/use scheme. Car-free residential areas will need to contain or be in close proximity to a range of retail and community facilities.

 

T4 Proposals for car-free residential developments must be for sites that are located close to Colchester Town Centre or that are along or close to transport corridors that are well served by public transport services and are closely related to high quality pedestrian and cycle routes.

PROVISION OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT

11.30 An effective, efficient, affordable and attractive network of integrated public transport services within and outside Colchester District is the essential central feature behind the Council’s major aim of getting local people to place considerably less reliance on the car in making their different types of trip. Ideally, there should be a seamless public transport service suitable for customers that is based on close co-ordination of routes, timetables and frequencies. The Council recognises that this is difficult to achieve, particularly in the short term, among the number of private companies involved in service provision.

11.31 In particular, the Council would wish to see public transport operators, as a minimum, retaining existing levels of service and the present extent of their respective networks. More ambitiously, the Council would want to see appropriate extensions to networks and/or raised service levels as well as improvements in linkages between different public transport services.

11.32 In addition, special attention needs to be given to the requirements of people with disabilities, those on low incomes, those living in remoter parts of the District and cyclists.

11.33 In the case of disabled people, this means achieving the minimum distance possible to travel from the car park or between modes of transport, and the ability to get on or off public service vehicles easily. Low income households will particularly benefit from fare increases kept at or below the rate of inflation or through special concessionary fare packages. Those living in more remote parts of the District will benefit from both subsidised public transport services and specially tailored services geared to low volumes of demand in relation to specific trip needs. Cyclists require either proper secure and sheltered cycle parking facilities at the public transport terminal or stop or the opportunity to take their bikes with them to their destinations.

11.34 To achieve any or all of the above aims will require the closest co-operation and co- ordination of effort between the Borough Council (who provide financial support towards public transport provision), the County Council (with its powers to subsidise socially necessary services in the context of its Passenger Transport Plan, PTP) and public transport service operators. An example of this is Quality Bus Partnerships, whereby bus operators provide a better quality service level or standard of vehicle (eg easily accessible by all, especially disabled people) in return for the Local Authority improving road conditions for the bus service (eg bus-only lanes or gates). A similar example is park and ride, as and where this is appropriate. In addition, the Council is keen to see the retention of the Sudbury branch railway line and assists in promoting the summer Marks Tey Sunday Service as a member of the Essex and South Suffolk Community Rail Partnership. (The role of Colchester Town Station is referred to in Chapter 15, “Town Centre and Shopping”.)

11.35 In this context, it is well known that it has been a long-established practice for Local Planning Authorities to require that applicant developers should meet the costs of off- site highway works made necessary by the scale and nature of their proposed developments. In the new era of sustainable development, it is essential that such major developments are as well served as possible by public transport services (bus and/or rail).

11.36 The Council will therefore expect any applicant seeking permission for a major residential or commercial development to produce a package of suitable proposals that will ensure that the proposal site can be properly accessed by public transport where this is not already the case. In this context:

- “major residential development” means 100 units or more;

- “major commercial development” is defined as in paragraph 11.26 above.

11.37 No particular sets of measures can be prescribed, as each relevant package of proposals will possess its own spatial and other context (see reference to Travel Plans for individual developments under Policy T3 above). However, examples of appropriate measures will include financial contributions to the establishment of bus priority systems, the provision of real-time information systems and the initial underwriting of dedicated bus services. Any requirements will need to meet the test of Circular 1/97.

11.38 The Council wishes to see the rail network having a greater role in the movement of freight in relation to that transported by road. In this regard, the Council will need to co- operate with Network Rail and the rail freight operators in identifying suitable sites that may need to be safeguarded as a future base for rail freight operations. Where a site is no longer viable for rail freight, the Council will work with Network Rail in identifying appropriate alternative uses, possibly through the production of a planning brief. The Council will also play its part in the Essex Rail Freight Forum.

11.39 However, in assessing specific proposals for rail freight operations at a particular site, the Council must be satisfied that there will be no undue adverse impact on the local environment and the amenities of neighbouring land users. See also Policy DC1.

 

T6 The Council will work with Network Rail and freight operators towards the aim of getting a greater proportion of total freight transported by rail, in particular safeguard sites which are considered operationally, technically and commercially viable. In assessing proposals for rail-freight development, the Council will nevertheless require: (a) good access from the primary road network or direct links with the source of the freight; and (b) the availability of sufficient land to provide for adequate sidings and any associated buildings and other infrastructure. Where continued freight activity cannot be justified, alternative uses will be sought.

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

11.40 One of the most significant policy trends in managing urban traffic flows in recent years has been a shift from building new roads, often for the benefit of commuters, to a more efficient and fairer use of existing road space for the benefit of all road users. This trend is underpinned by increasing concerns about traffic-derived air pollution; the level of road accidents, particular those involving pedestrians or cyclists and children or older people; the continuing phenomenon of rat-running; the general degradation of the physical environment along road corridors; the constraints on the efficient running of bus services and other essential services caused by general road congestion; and the erosion of road surfaces, road edges and the general roadside environment by increasing lorry traffic, particularly on the narrower and more minor parts of the urban and rural highway network.

11.41 Traffic-calming schemes, in particular, have been conceived and implemented by the Council – especially in some of the older, higher density housing areas in Colchester with a history of higher accident rates – so as to try to give the streets concerned back to the residents. In the light of successful experiences in the Netherlands, Germany and other parts of England, it has been realised, for example, that the right of young children to play in safety in the street is as important as car drivers gaining reasonably quick access to their homes at the end of a journey. In furtherance of the aim of creating a safe street environment in residential areas, the Council is keen to experiment at the earliest opportunity with the idea of Home Zones. Taking in one or several streets, in these Zones priority is given to pedestrians and cars travel at little more than walking pace. The use of “green niches” is another traffic management concept worth further exploration. In order for these to be truly effective, community involvement is crucial in designing and introducing schemes.

11.42 There are particular concerns in rural areas, given the increase in traffic volumes generally and the localised issues of heavy goods vehicles. There are also problems with leisure related car traffic. This affects the quality of life of rural residents as well as that of those using country lanes for quiet recreation, such as walking, cycling and horse riding. The concept of “Quiet Lanes” has been used successfully elsewhere. The Council will be pursuing this within the Borough, possibly as part of an overall package of rural transport measures.

 

T7 Traffic management schemes will be introduced where these would serve to: (a) increase the level of safety for all road users, particularly pedestrians, cyclists, and disabled people; and/or (b) reduce levels of ambient air pollution; and/or (c) exclude through-traffic unnecessarily passing through local streets; and/or (d) provide benefits for the operation of local public transport services; and/or (e) improve the quality and physical appearance of the local environment, particularly in Conservation Areas, housing areas, local shopping centres and near tourist attractions; and/or (f) assist in meeting the mobility needs of people with disabilities; and/or (g) make more efficient use of available road space. In particular, a programme of traffic-calming schemes will be implemented in a visually satisfactory manner.

NEW ROAD SCHEMES

11.43 In terms of new road building in urban areas, Government guidance, as set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 (PPG13), states that it is recognised that “forecast levels of traffic growth, especially in urban areas, cannot be met in full, and that new road-building ... will in some cases be environmentally unacceptable. It is already Government policy not to build new trunk or local roads simply to facilitate commuting by car into congested urban centres.” Furthermore, development within urban areas should be promoted at locations highly accessible by means other than the private car.

11.44 The Government’s White Paper “A New Deal for Transport” proposes to change the focus of road investment to reflect the needs of all road users, giving top priority to maintaining and managing the existing road networks and getting them to work better. PPG13 is also likely to be re-published.

11.45 In similar vein, Policy T9 of the Essex and Southend-on-Sea Replacement Structure Plan states that “major new highway construction and improvement schemes within urban areas will not be permitted, except where they are essential to:

(i) facilitate major new development, comprehensive redevelopment or major urban regeneration;

(ii) implement a package of measures to support passenger transport, cycling and pedestrians, and to improve road safety;

(iii) support local environmental improvement schemes.

Minor improvement schemes will be implemented primarily to improve road safety, improve conditions for cyclists, pedestrians and the mobility impaired, assist passenger transport movement, and improve the environment of a town centre or residential areas.”

11.46 The Plan identifies the major road schemes to be implemented during the Plan period:

• The Northern Approaches

• Western By-Pass, Stanway

The purposes of these schemes are set out in Chapters 18 and 19, “Mile End” and “Stanway”, respectively. In addition, a scheme to link Oakwood Avenue and Colchester Road at Glebe Corner, West Mersea, has been proposed but is unfunded. When funds become available, the Council will undertake further consultation before any scheme proceeds.

11.47 The Council recognises that travellers using the main road network (A12 and A120) will expect to find roadside facilities at regular intervals, where they can rest, eat or buy essential items like petrol.

11.48 However, the Council is equally of the view that there are distinct dangers either of the over-provision of such facilities along particular stretches of the network or, alternatively, that such facilities will not integrate well in terms of their effect on the local environment and road safety. It therefore considers that proposals for roadside facilities should meet the policy criteria set out in the overall Development Control Policy (DC1).

11.49 Proposals for petrol filling stations will be judged against Policy TCS14 in Chapter 15, “Town Centre and Shopping”, and Policy DC1.

11.50 The Council feels that the optimum location for new haulage depots is near the A12/ A120 in an industrial or mixed use zone. However, rather than tightly circumscribing the areas of search for new depot sites, the Council has set down criteria that need to be met in any proposals for this kind of facility. The following policy sets out the locational requirements for such a use. Issues of road safety, the ability of the road network to accommodate additional traffic movements arising from the proposal and the impact on local amenities are addressed in Policy DC1.

 

T8 Proposals for the expansion or establishment of haulage depots will be acceptable only if the proposed location is closely and effectively related to the A12/A120 road network.

CAR PARKING

11.51 The Borough Council has the following aims in respect of its strategy for parking provision outside the central area of Colchester, namely:

(i) to encourage a gradual shift in transport mode from car to non-car, as the latter are improved and made more attractive as options for travelling about – for example, consideration is being given to a park and ride facility as part of development at Severalls Hospital/Cuckoo Farm;

(ii) to limit parking provision for all new non-residential developments to that absolutely essential for the normal functioning of the user concerned. This involves the setting of maximum, rather than minimum, parking standards, as has been the case in the past. These standards are set out in “Vehicle Parking Standards” August 2001, adopted by the Council as SPG. In the case of employees, this relates to a definition of operational need, which would include only vehicles bringing goods to and from the development concerned, and the vehicles of personnel whose main work involves continuous use of that vehicle. In this regard, firms will be expected to consider the use of pool vehicles (as part of Travel Plans under Policy T3), obviating the need for such employees to drive to and from work each day. In the case of customer parking, it relates to the quality of service of, or provision for, non-car modes of transport in the local area;

(iii) to look after the interests of disabled people in providing the easiest access possible to buildings from the parking place;

(iv) to ensure that residents without space to park their own vehicles within their property curtilage are not competing with non-residential traffic for on-street parking space. Such schemes will be introduced following consultation with residents and businesses affected.

11.52 It will be essential to look at the newer concept of maximum parking standards on a county and regional basis in order to ensure consistency and fairness of approach by each LPA concerned. A zonal system for standards is favoured, which will take account of access to public transport services. Prior to introducing new standards which will cover residential development, a countywide consultation will be undertaken.

 

T9 A strategy for car parking provision outside the central area of Colchester will be based on the following principles: (a) A gradual reduction in the general demand for car parking facilities based on steady, phased improvements in public transport services and levels of provision for cyclists and pedestrians; (b) The introduction of regional and county maximum car parking standards for all non-residential forms of new development, including redevelopment of existing sites or extensions to existing establishments related, inter alia, to: (i) in the case of employees, a maximum provision for operational needs; (ii) in the case of visitors, the levels of accessibility by non-car modes of transport. Applicants will be expected to agree a commuted sum of money to help meet the costs of further improvements to facilities for non-car modes of transport in the locality of the proposal site; (c) Parking facilities for disabled people will be located within new developments so that they are the minimum distance possible from the most appropriate entry point of the site building(s); (d) Further residents-only parking schemes will be established to resolve any remaining outstanding conflicts of interest between residents and non- residents.

11.53 In applying that part of clause (b) of the policy relating to applications being required to pay commuted sums of money, the Authority will have regard to applicants’ written commitments to produce and fully implement a Green Communter Plan (under Policy T3). It is clear that such Plans will in themselves greatly help to assist the promotion of non-car modes of transport. Any commuted sum will need to be agreed at a level consistent with the guidance in Circular 1/97.

11.54 The Council wishes to ensure adequate provision for public off-street car parking at local shopping centres, railway stations and holiday resorts in the season in order to avoid haphazard on-street parking, which can be both injurious to visual amenity and to the interests of neighbouring land users, including particularly local residents. In this regard, the most serious problems currently exist at Tiptree shopping centre, Marks Tey railway station and, seasonally, in West Mersea. Further details on the parking issues at these sites will be gathered in transport policy work through the “Future Moves” initiative.

11.55 However, while such provision must be adequate, the Council wishes to encourage journeys to shops and to railway stations to be made by non-car modes of transport in line with Policy T9 above. In addition, the interests of disabled people must always be given careful consideration in the detailed planning of such provision in line with legislative requirements.

 

T10 Provision will be made for adequate public off-street car parking at: (a) local shopping centres (Tiptree shopping centre will be given priority); (b) local railway stations (Marks Tey Railway Station will be given priority); (c) West Mersea (seasonal parking). Special consideration will be given to the requirements of disabled people.