 |
|||
| 9. TRANSPORT | |||
|
|
|||
| Introduction | |||
| 9.1 | An efficient and effective transportation system is essential to meet the needs of people and businesses. It is vital to the local economy and to an area's prospects for investment and job creation. | ||
| 9.2 | However it is no longer acceptable or practicable to try and cater for current and projected levels of growth in private traffic through further road building and car parking provision. This approach has resulted in a dispersal of development, in people undertaking more and longer journeys, and those without a car facing mounting difficulties in reaching many facilities. It has also been at the expense of a deteriorating environment, reduced energy efficiency, and declining public health and safety. | ||
| 9.3 | It is now widely acknowledged that a new approach is required which addresses these problems. Government now accepts that development needs to be planned in a way which reduces journey lengths and reliance on private transport (PPG13). Public transport services also need to be improved to the point where they offer an attractive alternative to the private car. This represents one of the most important challenges for the Local Plan. | ||
| 9.4 | Success will depend upon influencing the choices people make about the journeys they undertake. This, in turn, will depend upon wider comprehensive measures beyond the remit of the plan and include action by central government. | ||
| The Local Situation | |||
| 9.5 | Preston's location adjacent to the M6 motorway and on the west coast Inter-City railway line has played an important part in its success as a shopping, business and administrative centre. However traffic levels in the urban area are already at a level which causes congestion and delay to road-users. This detracts from the quality of life enjoyed by many residents, including those who benefit from car ownership. | ||
| 9.6 | Some of Preston's traffic passes through the urban area en route to other destinations and historically various schemes have been proposed to reduce this through traffic, including the abandoned Preston Southern and Western By-Pass. The widening of the M6 may, at least for a time, reduce the number of occasions when delays result in motorway traffic diverting through Preston. The new motorway junction at Preston East has reduced the need for industrial traffic to pass through residential areas on its way to the employment areas east of the motorway. Nevertheless, even with such schemes high growth predictions forecast traffic levels to increase by up to 50% from 1991 by the year 2006 unless new measures are introduced to prevent this. The environmental cost of attempting to cater for such growth through additional road building and parking provision, would be immense and, to most people unacceptable. | ||
| 9.7 | Both Preston City Council and Lancashire County Council (the highway authority) recognise the need for a different approach. The two Councils together with South Ribble Borough Council have been examining ways in which transport facilities could be developed so that traffic levels within the wider Preston Urban Area might, by the year 2006 be stabilised at 1991 levels. Improvements to the road network should optimise existing operation, whilst not producing facilities which will encourage additional car use. This work resulted in the publication of the Preston South Ribble Transportation Study (PSRTS) in 1993. The conclusions of that study received strong public support and form the basis of the transport policies now included in the Lancashire Structure Plan and the measures proposed in this Local Plan. The key recommendations of the study can be summarised as follows: | ||
|
|||
| 9.8 | The County Council has been successful in attracting "package funding" from government to begin to develop this approach through investment in new transport facilities. The Local Plan sets out a long term package of proposals and policies drawing not only upon such funding but also upon much broader support from the public and private sector. | ||
| 9.9 | The Department for Transport (DfT) is the highway authority for the trunk road network (including motorways) in England. The Highways Agency, an executive agency of the DfT is responsible for the management and maintenance of the network and delivery of the Secretary of State's programme of trunk road and motorway improvements. | ||
| Policy Context | |||
| 9.10 | The approach set out in PSRTS received government endorsement with the publication in March 1994 of Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 on Transportation, and subsequent revision in 2001. This states that local authorities should carry out their land-use policies and transport programmes in ways which help to: | ||
|
|||
| 9.11 | The necessity for this change of direction has been further emphasised by the findings of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution which highlighted the threat posed by vehicle emissions to public health and to the local and global environment. | ||
| 9.12 | Strategic guidance on the location of development and on transport and parking policy within Preston is contained within the Lancashire Structure Plan whose policies largely reflect the findings of the PSRTS. However the precise manner in which Structure Plan policies and proposals are to be implemented is for the Local Plan to determine. | ||
| Objectives: | |||
|
|||
| Plan No: 4 - Transport Infrastructure | |||
 |
|||
| Click image for larger version | |||
| (A) Transport Infrastructure Policies | |||
| Public Transport- Park and Ride Bus Services | |||
| 9.13 | If private traffic growth is to be controlled to the extent necessary to prevent worsening congestion and associated environmental problems, more people must be encouraged to use public transport. This will only be achieved if it becomes an attractive alternative to the car. Shorter journey times and a frequent comfortable service are essential elements in making public transport competitive with private transport. | ||
| Policy T1 | |||
 |
|||
| Planning permission will be granted for the development of park and ride car parks (bus-based) at the following sites as shown on the proposals map: | |||
| Preston East; Riversway. |
|||
| 9.14 | The PSRTS concluded that "Park and Ride is seen as the best alternative to private car drivers bringing their vehicles into the City centre, especially for those travelling from outside the study area". | ||
| 9.15 | It is important that this choice be available to all motorists entering the urban area. The provision of sites at the locations listed together with the development of other sites south of the Ribble (in South Ribble) will provide this choice. | ||
| Public Transport - Bus Priority Measures | |||
| 9.16 | Measures to afford priority to buses over general traffic are essential in encouraging motorists to consider traditional stage carriage or park and ride bus services, as an alternative to the private car. | ||
| 9.17 | The success of the Portway Park and Ride Service has been based upon the much quicker and more direct access into City afforded to buses by the Fishergate Hill contraflow bus lane. | ||
| 9.18 | Measures are proposed to afford similar advantages to public transport on other major routes into the City and to provide convenient boarding and alighting points within the City centre. The form of such measures will vary from dedicated bus lanes to more limited priority for buses at junctions. It is anticipated that specific proposals should be in the form of management of existing highway space rather than highway widening. Any highway widening proposals which may arise will be judged against other relevant policies of the Local Plan. | ||
| Policy T2 | Public Transport: Bus Priority Measures | ||
|
|||
| The Council will support the introduction by the County Council of traffic management measures to give priority to buses over private cars. Routes to be considered as being subject to the principle of such bus priority measures include: | |||
| Church Street/ Fishergate/
Fishergate Hill; London Road; Garstang Road/ North Road; Strand Road/ Fishergate Hill; Brockholes Brow/ New Hall Lane; Fylde Road/ Friargate; Ribbleton Lane; Deepdale Road. |
|||
| Public Transport: Railway Lines and Stations | |||
| Policy T3 | Public Transport: Railway Lines and Stations | ||
|
|||
| A new railway station will be developed at Tom Benson Way, Cottam as indicated on the Proposals Map. | |||
| The Council will protect the following railway lines from development and, in conjunction with the County Council and other agencies, explore their potential for the development of new bus, rail or guided public transport services: | |||
| Grimsargh to Preston (disused); Bamber Bridge to Preston (disused section in Preston); Riversway to Preston. |
|||
| 9.19 | The station at Tom Benson Way, Cottam will provide a service into Preston for both City centre visitors and for those travelling further afield by rail. The congestion and delay involved in driving through the City centre to reach Preston station must tempt many travellers to use the motorway network as well as contributing to City centre traffic and environmental problems. | ||
| 9.20 | Probably the greatest potential for attracting people to public transport lies in the development of new services which are not subject to the inevitable delays involved in sharing road space with other traffic. There are major cost and other difficulties in developing such services but, in the longer term, the development of new guided transport systems along the former Preston to Longridge, Bamber Bridge to Preston lines and possibly the Preston/Riversway railway line, could provide attractive services without involving any further restrictions in the road space available to private traffic. | ||
| 9.21 | In implementing the new station proposals, care must be taken to minimise the impact on the natural environment. In particular, consideration will be given to ensuring the safeguarding of wildlife sites, in accordance with Policy DC7 of the Local Plan. | ||
| Rail Freight | |||
| Policy T4 | Freight Transport by Rail | ||
|
|||
| Proposals for the use of rail transport for freight and the re-use of existing rail sidings for freight purposes will be supported. Existing freight facilities will be protected where there would be potential for their re-use for freight purposes in the future. | |||
| 9.22 | There are rail sidings within Preston at Fletcher Road in Deepdale, Riversway (former Preston Docks) and the Christian Road Depot. The former were in use until 1995 for the transportation of coal, but are currently disused. The branch line to the former Preston Docks was used for the transportation of petroleum fuel until March 1995. The rail lines to these sites are protected under policy T3 of the plan. | ||
| 9.23 | There are substantial environmental benefits to be gained by removing the transport of freight from the road network. Direct access to the rail network from potential industrial sites can enhance their attractiveness to businesses. As there are existing facilities available in Preston, consideration should be given to their re-use as part of development proposals. | ||
| Highway Improvements - Broughton Bypass | |||
| 9.24 | Broughton Bypass is the only proposed improvement to a primary road within Preston included by the County Council in Policy 34 of the Lancashire Structure Plan. The passage of heavy volumes of traffic through Broughton results in severe congestion, delay and environmental problems. The provision of a bypass around the village has long been a proposal of the County Council. | ||
| 9.25 | At the Local Plan Inquiry the Inspector considered issues relating to the need for the bypass, its environmental impact and the potential environmental advantages of the proposal, as well as other options to resolve the traffic problems. It was concluded that the question of the need for the bypass had been justified in full at the Examination in Public into the Structure Plan and that there was no further evidence before the Local Plan Inspector which would justify rejecting those conclusions. | ||
| 9.26 | In considering the environmental impact of the proposed bypass, it was concluded that whilst there would be some adverse impact as a result of building the road, this would not be so harmful as to justify not conforming to the Structure Plan policy. Further, the adverse environmental effect of existing and forecast traffic levels (including noise and pollution) on road users and the local community are such that they could not be overcome by means other than the bypass. | ||
| Policy T5 | Highway Improvements - Broughton Bypass | ||
|
|||
| Alignments for the Broughton Bypass and the D'Urton Lane/Eastway link road, as proposed by the Highway Authority, will be safeguarded in the location shown on the Proposals Map. | |||
| 9.27 | Provision of the bypass and reduction of traffic within Broughton will enable a package of measures to improve the environment of the A6 within the village and provide better conditions for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport. | ||
| 9.28 | Although the need for the bypass is justified by the level of existing and forecast traffic flows through Broughton, the bypass is also required before the potential strategic growth at Goosnargh/Whittingham, identified in Structure Plan Policy 6, can be fully developed. | ||
| Lancashire County Council approved a planning application for the bypass in July 2001. The Whittingham Hospital development will contribute to the cost of constructing the bypass. The planning permission for the redevelopment of the hospital site is subject to a condition which limits the amount of development that can take place before construction of the bypass commences. | |||
| 9.29 | The Council reserves its right to make representations on the design and phasing of any detailed proposals that come forward for the development of the proposed bypass. | ||
| Motorway Junction | |||
| Policy T6 | Completion of Motorway Junction 31A | ||
|
|||
| The Council, in conjunction with the County Council and English Partnerships, will seek to achieve the completion of junction 31a on the M6 by the addition of north-facing slip roads. | |||
| 9.30 | The provision of a full motorway junction would provide direct motorway access to/from existing and proposed employment sites to the east of the M6 replacing the existing circuitous access through the urban area. It would also improve motorway access to/from the North Preston Business Area which would encourage the take up of land and the creation of job opportunities. An additional significant benefit of such a junction relates to the provision of easier access to the proposed park and ride site at Preston East. | ||
| 9.31 | Such a junction would eliminate the necessity for goods vehicle movements to/from employment sites east of the M6 to pass through the Preston urban area to travel to/from the motorway, either to Junction 31 via Longridge Road, Ribbleton Avenue, Blackpool Road and Brockholes Brow, or to Junction 32 via Longridge Road, Watling Street Road and Eastway. With the exception of Eastway all of these roads have housing fronting the highway and heavy traffic both detracts from residential amenity and contributes to traffic congestion and associated environmental problems. Whilst the half junction has addressed the problems of vehicle movements between these employment areas and the origins and destinations south of Preston, it has not done so for those to the north where significant congestion problems exist at the M55/A6 and Eastway A6 junctions. | ||
| Highway Improvements: Distributor Roads | |||
| 9.32 | An important element of the package of measures put forward in PSRTS are improvements and amendments to the network of distributor roads which cater for local movements, including public transport, and provide links to primary and main routes. Significant changes are proposed within the City centre which will in conjunction with traffic management measures, facilitate bus and pedestrian priority schemes. | ||
| Policy T7 | Highway Improvements - Distributor Roads | ||
|
|||
| The following improvements are proposed, as shown on the Proposals Map: | |||
| (a) | Improvements to the junctions of Eastway with: | ||
| (i) | D'Urton Lane | ||
| (ii) | Sherwood Way/ Oliver's Place | ||
| (iii) | Pittman Way | ||
| (iv) | Anderton Way | ||
| (v) | Watling Street Road | ||
| (b) | Improvements to the following City centre junctions: | ||
| (i) | Stanley Street/ Church Street/ Ribbleton Lane | ||
| (ii) | Queen Street/ London Road/ New Hall Lane | ||
| (c) | Tithebarn Street/ Avenham Lane Link. | ||
| 9.33 | Scheme (a)(i) to (v) are proposed by the Environment Director at the County Council to relieve the congested Eastway/A6 and M55/A6 junctions of northbound traffic generated by the Broughton Business Park and the Preston East Employment Area. | ||
| 9.34 | Proposals (b) and (c) are essential components in tackling congestion and associated environmental problems within the principal retail core of the City centre, and in the introduction of bus and pedestrian priority measures. | ||
| 9.35 | Improvements to the 2 junctions to the east of the City centre are required in order to provide priority to buses and make them a more attractive alternative for City centre workers and shoppers coming into the City from the south and east. | ||
| 9.36 | The proposed link between Tithebarn Street and Avenham Lane (c) will, in conjunction with extended vehicle access restrictions on Church Street/Fishergate, enhance conditions for buses, cyclists and shoppers/pedestrians at the eastern end of the City centre. | ||
| Cyclists and Pedestrians | |||
| 9.37 | Walking and cycling are healthy, low cost, energy efficient, pollution free modes of transport which need to be made safer by the provision of facilities which lessen conflicts with motor traffic. Better facilities plus greater awareness by motor vehicle drivers will provide the basis for more journeys to be made on foot and by bicycle. | ||
| 9.38 | Pedestrian improvements can be achieved through access restrictions, traffic calming, and associated environmental improvements (e.g. lighting), wider pavements, narrower carriageways and pedestrian-friendly road crossings. These steps could be complemented by other measures to reduce traffic and vehicle speeds. | ||
| 9.39 | The level of cycling in the UK is significantly lower than that in many other European countries which have taken steps to make cycle use attractive as a day to day means of travel. Whilst this can, in part be explained by factors such as climate and terrain, there is much that could be done to encourage cycling in Britain, particularly by establishing safe and direct cycle routes and secure cycle parking facilities. | ||
| 9.40 | Preston already has an extensive network of public footpaths spanning both the urban and rural areas. Their existence makes a significant contribution in reducing reliance on car transport. In many cases, they also provide an invaluable recreational resource which should be maintained and improved. | ||
| Policy T8 | Cyclists and Pedestrians | ||
|
|||
| The Council, in conjunction with the highway authority, will develop a local cycling strategy and take the following measures to improve facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, and to enhance highway safety: | |||
| (a) | the incorporation into all new highway schemes of appropriate measures to facilitate access on foot and by bicycle; | ||
| (b) | the extension, where practicable, of footways and pedestrian priority areas within the City centre, at local centres, and at other locations where conflict occurs between pedestrians and vehicles; | ||
| (c) | the protection, improvement and extension of the public footpath network; | ||
| (d) | the introduction of traffic calming measures; | ||
| (e) | the improvement and extension of cycle routes and lanes including: | ||
| 1 | extensions to the former Preston - Longridge railway footpath/ cycleway to run from Grimsargh to Skeffington Road; | ||
| 2 | extension of the Bamber Bridge to Preston cycleway to provide a direct and level route to the rear of the Fishergate Centre; | ||
| and new cycle routes between: | |||
| 3 | Garstang Road & Sharoe Green Lane; | ||
| 4 | Cottam & Tulketh High School; | ||
| 5 | Tulketh High School to Walker Lane; | ||
| 6 | Walker Lane to Belton Hill/ Janice Drive; | ||
| (f) | the provision of additional priority facilities for cyclists at junctions; | ||
| (g) | the provision of additional secure cycle parking facilities in public areas and at public facilities; | ||
| (h) | the introduction of a package of environmental measures on the A6 through Broughton, to introduce traffic calming and assist pedestrians and cyclists. | ||
| 9.41 | Detailed proposals for the improvement of cycle routes and lanes will be considered with regard to development control criteria in Policy T19. | ||
| 9.42 | A package of traffic management and environmental measures in Broughton should be implemented to improve the village for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport, following the development of the Broughton Bypass. Specific proposals for these measures should be prepared as part of an environmental capacity study for Broughton to be undertaken prior to determining the long term growth of the village. | ||
| City Centre Traffic Management | |||
| Policy T9 | City Centre: Traffic Management/Pedestrian Priority Proposals | ||
|
|||
| The Council, in conjunction with the Highway Authority, will introduce road closures and traffic management measures as shown on the proposals plan to reduce, and where practicable, remove general traffic on Fishergate and Church street and to give priority to the passage of pedestrians, and buses. | |||
| 9.43 | The proposals map shows a package of measures to reduce general traffic on Church Street (West of Church Row) and on Fishergate. | ||
| 9.44 | Various vehicle access restrictions already apply to Fishergate between Glovers Court and Lune Street. These measures afford benefits in terms of the comfort and safety of shoppers and the passage of buses, whilst providing for essential vehicle access for deliveries and other purposes. However scope exists for further reduction and rationalisation of vehicle movements in this central section of Fishergate and for vehicle access restrictions and road closures to be extended along Church Street to the east and as far as Corporation Street to the west. The principle of such measures received strong public support during public consultation on the Preston South Ribble Transportation Study (1993) and on the Consultation Draft Local Plan (1995). | ||
| 9.45 | The measures proposed under this policy as shown on the Proposals Plan fall into 3 parts. From the East to West these can be summarised as: | ||
| 1. | The closure to general traffic of Church Street and Fishergate between Church Row and Glovers Court by the introduction of Vehicle Access Restrictions at Church Row. This will eliminate the current use of Church Street - Fishergate - Glovers Court as a through vehicle route to Avenham Car Park and other destinations. These through movements considerably detract from the environmental quality of this area which takes in important parts of Preston's cultural heritage, including the Parish Church, the historic Stoneygate area; and listed buildings including the Bull and Royal and Miller Arcade. Furthermore, the western end of Church Street where it runs into Fishergate is within the defined Principal Retail Core. A reduction of traffic will improve ease of movement and safety for pedestrians and considerably improve the attractiveness of the area to shoppers, other visitors and investors/developers. | ||
| 2. | A rationalisation of existing vehicle access restrictions on Fishergate between Glovers Court and Lune Street. This section of Fishergate and adjoining streets to the south are currently subject to various forms and levels of vehicle access restriction including access only (Cannon Street); bus/taxi lane (Fishergate between Cannon Street and Guildhall Street) and physical closure (Guildhall Street 11 am to 6.30 pm). Two short sections of Fishergate remain two-way to allow egress from Cannon Street (in tandem with a contraflow bus lane) and to allow access/egress to a car park behind the National Westminster Bank via Winckley Street. The latter arrangement is particularly unsatisfactory and alternative access/egress will be required in order for proposals for the closure of Winckley Street (see 3 below) to proceed. The bank have restricted car park use to permit holders and smart card controlled access via Guildhall Street may provide a solution to this problem. | ||
| 3. | Restricted vehicle access onto Fishergate from Winckley Street; Chapel Street and Mount Street, to reduce vehicle traffic on the western end of Fishergate. Since the development of the Fishergate Centre in the mid-1980's the western end of Fishergate, between Lune Street and Corporation Street, has become one of the most buoyant shopping areas of the City centre. However it suffers from heavy volumes of vehicle traffic which use Fishergate as an egress route from the St. George's Car park (using Lune Street) and from the busy office/residential area around Winckley Square and Avenham (using Chapel Street, Mount Street and Winckley Street). | ||
| 9.46 | The deposit draft of the Local Plan proposed road closures and traffic management measures to close these adjoining streets, confining vehicle movements to buses and other essential vehicles using Fishergate. | ||
| 9.47 | The traffic management study undertaken by the highway authority, Lancashire County Council, has revealed serious obstacles to the closure of Lune Street and other Streets to the north of Fishergate and these proposals have now been removed from the Local Plan. However the closure of Chapel Street and Winckley Street to the south and the limiting of vehicle egress from Mount Street is achievable. These measures would significantly reduce vehicle traffic on Fishergate and improve conditions for pedestrians and buses. | ||
| 9.48 | The study advocates that closures initially be off-peak only and on an experimental basis. The scope for peak hour closure will be investigated after an assessment has been made of the traffic impact of these measures. Peak hour closures will not be pursued until other schemes in the Preston and South Ribble Transport Package have been shown to be achieving their aim of reducing private vehicle trips into the City Centre. | ||
| 9.49 | It is not proposed that vehicle access onto or along this section of Fishergate be restricted outside shopping hours. Experience of existing City centre pedestrian priority areas shows that relaxing restrictions on evening access and car parking can help the evening economy, need not pose a serious conflict to pedestrians and can serve a useful security purpose. | ||
| 9.50 | All of the road closures/vehicle access restrictions proposed under paragraph 9.45 (1 - 3) above will be undertaken as Traffic Regulation Orders and be the subject of detailed public consultation prior to their implementation. | ||
| Traffic Management | |||
| 9.51 | The Proposals Map sets out a road hierarchy. Traffic management measures and associated physical works, e.g. traffic calming, are essential in ensuring that through vehicular traffic does not switch from primary and other main routes to distributor roads or from the latter to local roads, to the detriment of public/highway safety and the quality of the local environment. This is particularly important in the context of introducing bus priority measures on primary and main routes because they could prompt motorists to take alternative, less appropriate roads. It is also desirable that unnecessary traffic be removed from other areas such as the City centre in order that pedestrian/vehicular conflict can be reduced and the character and attractiveness of these important areas enhanced. | ||
| Policy T10 | Traffic Management | ||
|
|||
| The Council will apply traffic management measures to secure appropriate use of the road network in accordance with the following defined road types and functions as indicated on the Proposals Map: | |||
| Primary routes - linking major centres of population and providing for regional movements and comprising trunk roads and the more important Class A roads. | |||
| Other main routes - good quality roads which act as links into Preston and between Preston and other Cities and primary routes. | |||
| Distributor roads - distribute traffic within Preston and to rural villages. They should cater for movements from locality to locality and link these areas to the primary and other main routes. | |||
| Local roads - provide access to adjoining land uses. | |||
| In particular, the Council will undertake measures to: | |||
| (a) | prevent or deter the use of local roads by through motor traffic; | ||
| (b) | remove non-essential vehicle traffic from the principal retail core of the City centre. | ||
| Off Street City Centre Parking | |||
| 9.52 | Convenient public car parking will remain an important ingredient in maintaining the vitality and viability of Preston City Centre. However, if the plan is to be successful in reducing the need to travel, particularly by private car, a more selective approach to parking provision needs to be applied than hitherto. | ||
| 9.53 | In this area, there must be restrictions on additional public car parking in order to minimise damage to the local and global environment; and to provide the conditions necessary for the successful development of alternatives to the private car, in particular, park and ride. Congestion and associated environmental problems are particularly acute in the peak periods. | ||
| 9.54 | Structure Plan policies require that the level of long stay/contract parking within the City centre is progressively reduced. Preston City Centre has a considerable stock of private parking facilities which are unlikely to diminish significantly in number. Long-stay car parking in public car parks can be significantly reduced through the development of attractive park and ride services for commuters thereby releasing spaces to meet increases in short-stay/shopper parking demand. The co-ordination of car park pricing policy can assist this switch from long stay to short stay parking in City centres. | ||
| 9.55 | However, long stay car parking within the City centre could continue to increase if additional car parking capacity is created through approval of new facilities. Even if such facilities are restricted to short-stay use their availability could have the effect of releasing spaces in existing car parks, which are not subject to such restrictions, and are made available for long-stay/contract car parking. | ||
| 9.56 | With park and ride schemes likely to release City centre spaces for short-stay use and also provide an alternative facility for shoppers, there is not considered to be a long term need for major, permanent new car parking facilities in the City centre. It is vital that the best use be made of existing facilities and that they are convenient and attractive to the short stay parker. Improved signs directing visitors to available space will be essential together with other improvements to provide more attractive and secure facilities. | ||
| Policy T11 | City Centre: Public Off-Street Car Parking | ||
|
|||
| Within the City centre, as defined on the Proposals Map, proposals for public long-stay and contract car parking will not be permitted. | |||
| Proposals for short-stay public car parking will be permitted where: | |||
| (a) | they are a replacement for existing facilities affected by development; or, | ||
| (b) | they are required to meet a temporary shortfall in short-stay provision pending the development of park and ride car parks and services, and would not be likely to result in additional long-stay car parking in the City centre through the release of other short-stay facilities for such use; | ||
| and provided that: | |||
| (c) | vehicular access and traffic generation can be accommodated without detriment to the safe and convenient passage of all highway users or to local environmental conditions. | ||
| Proposals meeting criteria (b) will be permitted for a temporary period only. | |||
| 9.57 | The Council will seek by negotiation to enter into an agreement with the developer to restrict parking to short stay use through charging and other management controls. | ||
| On Street City Centre Parking | |||
| 9.58 | An integrated approach to the provision and management of City centre car parking is essential to the wider environmental and economic objectives of the Local Plan. Where it does not conflict with highway safety or environmental considerations, City centre on- street car parking can provide a vital supplement to off-street facilities, in meeting the needs of people with reduced mobility, City centre residents and local businesses. | ||
| 9.59 | However, where spaces are free they can cause a "honey pot" effect resulting in additional vehicle mileage, congestion and associated environmental problems as motorists seek to avoid car parking charges, only to find in many instances that on-street spaces are already occupied. | ||
| 9.60 | It is essential that such facilities are either reserved to meet special needs, or, if they are made available to the general public, that they are charged for on a basis commensurate with off-street facilities. The latter policy will also have the beneficial effect of generating income which can be used to improve the enforcement of on-street waiting restrictions and to reduce the serious level of abuse which currently occurs in some City centre locations. | ||
| Policy T12 | Public On-Street Car Parking | ||
|
|||
| Within the City centre as defined on the Proposals Map, the Council, in conjunction with the Highway Authority, will introduce restrictions whereby daytime on-street parking is: | |||
| (a) | reserved for local residents or disabled orange badge holders, or; | ||
| (b) | managed and charged for as short-stay facilities on a basis commensurate with off-street surface short-stay facilities a similar distance from the main shopping area. | ||
| Elsewhere the council, in conjunction with the highway authority, will introduce access and waiting restrictions, or reserve on-street space for local residents or disabled orange badge holders' vehicles where such measures are necessary to serve one or more of the following purposes: | |||
| (i) | to ensure highway safety and/or the convenient passage of highway users; | ||
| (ii) | to provide short-stay shopper/visitor parking close to local facilities; | ||
| (iii) | to protect residential amenity; | ||
| (iv) | to facilitate access by disabled people. | ||
| 9.61 | Areas outside the City centre may be subject to car parking pressures, particularly in residential areas where non residents may be seeking to park in order to avoid City centre parking charges, or in other areas close to local shops and facilities. In these circumstances there can be a detrimental effect on the local amenity, highway safety and accessibility. The Council and the Highway Authority, in consultation with local residents will introduce restrictions and parking measures as appropriate. | ||
| City Centre - Private Non-Residential Car Parking | |||
| 9.62 | Structure Plan Policy 27 requires that steps be taken to reduce the stock of public long-stay and private non-residential car parking within Preston City Centre. The Council supports this initiative. | ||
| Policy T13 | City Centre - Private Non-Residential Car Parking | ||
|
|||
| Within the City centre, as defined on the Proposals Map, proposals for private non-residential car parking will not be permitted other than in accordance with policy T22. | |||
| 9.63 | It is anticipated that specific proposals should be in the form of management of existing highway space rather than highway widening. Any highway widening proposals which may arise will be judged against other relevant policies of the Local Plan. | ||
| Other off Street Parking | |||
| 9.64 | Many older premises and facilities outside the City centre have insufficient levels of parking to accommodate the number of car-borne workers, customers and visitors which they attract. This can give rise to serious economic and environmental problems. | ||
| 9.65 | As a result the viability of businesses may be affected; residents may be unable to park because of commuters' and shoppers' vehicles; vehicles may be fly-parked to the detriment of peoples' safety, pedestrian access and the local environment. Car parking should not be provided in situations and on such a scale that it increases reliance upon and use of private transport. However there are many instances where convenient alternative forms of transport cannot be provided and in such instances car parking provision may offer considerable benefit. | ||
| Policy T14 | Public Off-Street Car Parking outside the City Centre | ||
|
|||
| Outside the City centre the development of public off-street car parks will be permitted: | |||
| (a) | in conjunction with the development of bus and rail based park and ride facilities, or | ||
| (b) | where all the following criteria are satisfied: | ||
| 1 | Existing parking facilities are inadequate giving rise to significant local problems; | ||
| 2 | Convenient access cannot be provided by other means; | ||
| 3 | Vehicular access and traffic generation can be accommodated without detriment to the safe and convenient passage of all highway users or to local environmental conditions. | ||
| Accessibility | |||
| 9.66 | The Council is committed to an equal opportunities policy. The special needs of those with reduced mobility must be properly considered and catered for if their mobility and opportunities in employment and other activities are not to be unnecessarily restricted. | ||
| 9.67 | A wide spectrum of the population at some time experience mobility difficulties of a temporary or permanent nature. These need not be related to physical disability, illness, age or infirmity, but can, for example, include the difficulties associated with transporting young children in prams and pushchairs. | ||
| Policy T15 | Access for People with Reduced Mobility: Buildings and Premises | ||
|
|||
| Applications for the development or change of use of buildings open to the public or used for employment or education purposes should, wherever practicable, provide suitable access and facilities for people with reduced mobility, as customers, visitors and employees. | |||
| In particular the Council will require that appropriately positioned parking places, adequate in size and number, shall be provided for people with reduced mobility duly issued with orange badges. The size of each parking space and the level of provision shall be in accordance with the Council's adopted standards. | |||
| 9.68 | The internal layout of buildings is not normally a material consideration in determining a planning application. The Council's commitment to equal opportunities to ensure convenient access within new buildings will be met through the application of building regulations. | ||
| 9.69 | As part of the Council's broad commitment to equal opportunities it is essential that new buildings should be conveniently accessible to people with reduced mobility and that provision also be made for "orange badge" parking. Published guidance is available from the City Council on how this can best be achieved. | ||
| Policy T16 | Access for People with Reduced Mobility: Disabled Badge Holders and Community Transport Services | ||
|
|||
| Applications for development or proposals for traffic management should take full account of the need to provide convenient access by, and parking, boarding and alighting facilities for, vehicles conveying people with reduced mobility. | |||
| 9.70 | Traditional stage carriage bus services, and off- street car parks do not cater for the needs of many disabled people. Reserved on and off- street car parking facilities and Community Transport Services are essential to meet the needs of this group. | ||
| Policy T17 | Access for People with Reduced Mobility: Pedestrian Environments | ||
|
|||
| In considering development and other proposals, the Council will require that pedestrian environments are designed to meet the needs of people with reduced mobility, and pay particular attention to: | |||
| (a) | the layout and dimension of footways and footpaths; | ||
| (b) | the choice and positioning of street furniture; | ||
| (c) | the layout and construction of pedestrianised areas; | ||
| (d) | the layout and construction of crossing facilities including dropped kerbs suitable for blind people and people in wheelchairs; | ||
| (e) | parking for the vehicles of orange badge holders; | ||
| (f) | the provision of unisex, wheelchair accessible public lavatories; | ||
| (g) | lighting; and, | ||
| (h) | signing. | ||
| 9.71 | The design of the pedestrian environment is critical in ensuring that people with reduced mobility, whether this be through physical disability, sensory impairment, or for other reasons (for example, parents with a pram or pushchair), are able to enjoy the same opportunities and facilities that are available to the rest of the population. The Council will have regard to the standards laid down in Lancashire County Council's 'Code of Practice on Mobility'. | ||
| Motorway Service Areas | |||
| 9.72 | Policy 74 of the Lancashire Structure Plan establishes general criteria for the provision of motorway service areas (MSA). The council has considered these criteria and in the light of the available guidance concludes that there is limited scope for the provision of such facilities within the City boundary. | ||
| 9.73 | The area is currently served by motorway service areas at Forton and Charnock Richard (M6) and Rivington (M61). Highway considerations which require a minimum of 2km between motorway junctions and other accesses prevent further access to the motorway alongside the urban area of Preston. | ||
| 9.74 | The possibility of locating a MSA directly accessed from the M6 or M55 is limited within the City to short stretches of motorway where level differences present problems. However, it may not be necessary to construct a separate junction when a MSA can be provided adjacent to an existing motorway junction. | ||
| 9.75 | The development of a MSA in conjunction with a full junction 31A on the M6 is subject to the Highways Agency agreeing to the provision of that junction. | ||
| Policy T18 | Motorway Service Areas | ||
|
|||
| The development of a motorway service area will be permitted on the eastern side of the M6 in conjunction with the development of a full junction 31a, provided that | |||
| (a) | a need for such facilities is established in the context of other existing and proposed motorway service area provision; and, | ||
| (b) | development is confined to areas allocated for built development in the Local Plan; and, | ||
| (c) | there is no unacceptable impact on the local environment, the character of the landscape and nature conservation interests; and, | ||
| (d) | the development does not result in a shortage of land for the purposes for which the site is allocated in the Local Plan. | ||
| Transport Policies for New Developments | |||
| 9.76 | To accord with Structure Plan Policies and PPG13 and to ensure that safe and convenient access is afforded to all sections of the community, it is essential that new development reduces rather than increases dependence on private motor transport and does not lead to worsening environmental conditions. | ||
| 9.77 | With increasing traffic levels and congestion, it has become commonplace for developers to undertake or fund highway and junction improvements which are required to increase local highway capacity and prevent highway and safety problems in the vicinity of the development site. With acceptance of the need to reduce reliance on private transport and associated environmental problems, it is essential that a wider view is taken and the full impact of proposed developments on all highway users, is considered. | ||
| Policy T19 | General Transport Considerations | ||
|
|||
| Development in accordance with other Local Plan policies will be permitted provided that: | |||
| (a) | road safety and the efficient and convenient movement of all highway users (including bus passengers, cyclists, pedestrians and equestrians) is not prejudiced; | ||
| (b) | appropriate provision is made for vehicular access; off-street servicing and vehicle parking in accordance with the Joint Structure Plan Authorities adopted standards as set out in Appendix 2; | ||
| (c) | appropriate provision is made for public transport services; | ||
| (d) | appropriate measures are included to facilitate access on foot and by bicycle ( to include the provision of secure parking); | ||
| (e) | wherever practicable, existing pedestrian, cycle and equestrian routes are protected and extended; | ||
| (f) | the needs of disabled people are fully provided for, including those reliant on community transport services; | ||
| (g) | corridors which could be developed as future transport routes (e.g. disused railway lines) are not prejudiced. | ||
| Where development is proposed which involves significantly increased levels of motor vehicle traffic the Council will require the submission of a Transport Assessment demonstrating that criteria (a) can be satisfied. | |||
| Where the above criteria can only be satisfied through the undertaking of off-site works or the provision of particular services, the cost of these shall be borne by the developer and the development shall not be brought into use until such time as they have been completed, or in the case of service provision, appropriate funding provided. | |||
| 9.78 | Transport Assessments should be submitted in support of major proposals, in accordance with guidelines by the Institution of Highways and Transportation and guidance given in PPG 13: Transport. | ||
| 9.79 | The requirement that developments incorporate measures to encourage and assist access by foot, bicycle and public transport is an essential element in reducing reliance on motor transport. Improved access and facilities for cyclists and pedestrians will be required where appropriate, either directly or by the provision of funding. Locational policies for specific forms of development that attract many trips, require that they be located where they are accessible by existing or proposed public transport services. However commercial considerations will often dictate that levels of public transport service are insufficient to provide convenient access for those dependent upon such services or to persuade car-users to desert their vehicle. In such instances, convenient access by public transport may only be achieved through the developer also contributing to the provision of non-commercial services. For example many disabled people are dependent upon community transport services and, in the case of a major public facility; contributions will be sought towards the cost of providing such services to and from the development. | ||
| Traffic Generation | |||
| 9.80 | The following policy accords with provisions of PPG 13 and the Lancashire Structure Plan which stipulate that transport considerations should be an important consideration in the location of development. | ||
| 9.81 | If increasing dependence upon and use of private transport is to be checked, developments which attract large numbers of workers, customers or other visitors must be located where public transport can offer a realistic alternative to car use. | ||
| 9.82 | Similarly uses which generate large volumes of heavy goods traffic need to be located close to primary and main routes. | ||
| Policy T20 | Traffic Generation | ||
|
|||
| Development for uses that employ and/or attract large numbers of employees, customers or other visitors will only be permitted in locations which are conveniently accessible by existing or proposed public transport services. | |||
| Development for uses that involve high volumes of commercial vehicle movements will only be permitted where they are located close to junctions on the primary routes and other main routes. | |||
| The Council will refuse development which generates excessive or inappropriate traffic on local roads. | |||
| 9.83 | Where necessary the Council will seek developer contributions in respect of public transport, walking and cycling facilities, in order to increase access to developments by alternative modes of transport to the private car. | ||
| Trunk Roads | |||
| 9.84 | The Department for Transport (DfT) and the Highways Agency has a strict policy of not allowing direct access from private development to motorways or motorway slip roads, unless the development relates to a motorway service area, road junction or motorway service compound. It is necessary in general to restrict the formation of new accesses to all purpose trunk roads if these roads are to perform their function as routes for the safe and expeditious movement of long distance through traffic. | ||
| 9.85 | Where it is shown that development could be accommodated through highway improvements conditions will be imposed on any planning permission to ensure that those improvements are implemented prior to the development. Any costs of road improvements associated with a land use proposal will be borne by the developer and constructed by an agreement under section 278 of the Highways Act 1980. | ||
| Policy T21 | Development in relation to Trunk Roads | ||
|
|||
| Development proposals involving the formation of a direct access onto a motorway or motorway slip road will not be permitted other than where the development comprises a new or improved junction, a motorway maintenance compound or a motorway service area. The formation of new accesses onto trunk roads will be strictly controlled. | |||
| Where development is likely to generate a material increase in traffic which would directly or indirectly affect the national all purpose trunk or motorway system Transport Assessments (TA's) will be required to be submitted to the Highways Agency, the format and content of which should be agreed with the agency at an early stage. Developments which would result in the access or the main line of the trunk road becoming overloaded will not be permitted. | |||
| Subject to satisfying other plan policies, development will be permitted where: | |||
| (a) | the TA indicates that the increase in traffic attributable to the development can be satisfactorily accommodated without improvements to provide additional capacity to the existing or proposed access or to the trunk road; or, | ||
| (b) | improvements to the trunk road could be designed to provide the additional capacity to the existing or proposed access sufficient to accommodate satisfactorily projected traffic levels for 15 years after completion of the development and to leave conditions no worse on the main line of the trunk road upon completion of the development than they were previously. | ||
| In respect of (b) above conditions will be imposed upon any permission requiring that the development should not occur unless or until those improvements have been carried out and that the costs of such improvements should be borne by the developer. | |||
| Private Car Parking | |||
| 9.86 | If the total supply of parking is not strictly controlled it will not be possible to achieve the aims of enhancing the environment, improving conditions for pedestrians and cyclists, restraining traffic growth and providing a public transport system which gives a real choice of mode of transport. | ||
| 9.87 | Congestion is inefficient in economic as well as in land use and environmental terms. It adversely affects business efficiency, creates a bad image and may discourage investment by the private sector. PPG13 requires the Local Plan to set maximum levels of parking for broad classes of development. | ||
| City Centre | |||
| 9.88 | Lancashire Structure Plan policy aims at a reduction in long stay commuter and private non-residential car parking in Lancashire's major central areas, including Preston. Such an approach is particularly important in Preston which has a very substantial stock of private non-residential parking in and around the City centre core. Tight restrictions upon additional parking provision are essential in order to encourage the use of alternatives to the private car and to facilitate essential improvements to public transport. | ||
| Policy T22 | Private Non-Residential Car Parking: Preston City Centre | ||
|
|||
| Within the City Centre, as defined on the proposals map (inset 2), the quantity of private non-residential parking permitted within new development will be severely limited in accordance with the provisions of PPG13. | |||
| 9.89 | Parking provision on the basis set out above and in Appendix 2 will not significantly compromise the Structure Plan policy of securing a gradual reduction in City centre long-stay car parking but will enable legitimate requirements e.g. operational or on-site disabled parking to be accommodated. It may also encourage investment in the City centre which, without such provision, might look to other less sustainable development locations. | ||
| Inner Urban Areas | |||
| 9.90 | The extent to which public transport can provide a convenient alternative to the private car for destinations outside the City centre becomes progressively more limited the further the distance from that centre. | ||
| Policy T23 | Private Non-Residential Car Parking: Inner Urban Area | ||
|
|||
| Within the inner urban area (that area between the City centre and the boundary of the inset map 2) the quantity of private non-residential parking within new development will be limited to reflect the spirit of PPG13. | |||
| In determining the overall level of PNR parking provision which is appropriate in accordance with PPG13, particular consideration will be given to: | |||
| (a) | the scale and type of development proposed | ||
| (b) | the location, and the availability of, or potential for, access by transport other than the private car | ||
| (c) | the potential for environmental harm and adverse effect on road safety arising from parking demand being met elsewhere | ||
| (d) | the extent and nature of parking restrictions in force on highways in the vicinity | ||
| (e) | the extent to which parking provision at the level proposed is consistent with other policies of the plan. | ||
| 9.91 | A ceiling on provision of private staff parking within the inner urban area is considered reasonable. This limit recognises that these areas are subject to severe traffic congestion and associated problems, and offer much greater potential for workers to use public transport or car share than do more peripheral employment areas. | ||
| 9.92 | This approach will complement the plan's policies on the location of development and developer contributions. The Council will seek to negotiate developer contributions towards the provision of public transport, walking and cycling facilities. This approach will assist in combating the long established trend towards increased reliance on the private car. | ||
| Outer Urban Areas | |||
| 9.93 | Current public transport services converge almost entirely on the City centre and cater very poorly for movements around or across the urban area. PPG13 requires that parking provision at peripheral office, retail or similar developments is not set at high levels which significantly disadvantage more central areas. | ||
| 9.94 | However it also recognises that a certain level of parking provision may be necessary to enable a development to proceed without causing traffic and parking problems. | ||
| 9.95 | The scope to develop new public transport "nodes" other than the City centre is limited and it is not considered practicable to apply blanket maximum parking standards substantially below current levels to development locations beyond the defined inner areas. In many cases such a policy would result in development not proceeding or in traffic and parking problems within and around the development site. | ||
| Policy T24 | Private Non-Residential Car Parking: Outer Urban and Rural Areas | ||
|
|||
| Within the outer urban area and rural areas (as defined on the proposals map) the Council will determine the quantity of private non-residential parking (PNR) to be permitted within new development in a flexible manner by negotiation to reflect the spirit of PPG13. | |||
| In determining the appropriate level of PNR parking, in accordance with PPG13, particular consideration will be given to: | |||
| (a) | the scale and type of development proposed; | ||
| (b) | the location, and the availability of, or potential for, access by transport other than the private car; | ||
| (c) | the potential for environmental harm and adverse effect on road safety arising from parking demand being met elsewhere; | ||
| (d) | the extent and nature of parking restrictions in force on highways in the vicinity; | ||
| (e) | the extent to which parking provision at the level proposed is consistent with other policies of the plan. | ||
| 9.96 | The approach proposed will complement the plans policies on the location of development and developer contributions. The Council will seek to negotiate developer contributions towards the provision of public transport, walking and cycling facilities. This approach will assist in combating the long established trend towards increased reliance on the private car. | ||
| Residents Parking | |||
| 9.97 | Although plan proposals are designed to reduce reliance on the private car, the trend towards mass car ownership and, in particular households owning more than one car, is likely to continue. PPG13 accepts this and concentrates its attentions on encouraging less reliance upon and use of cars rather than seeking to restrict car ownership. It is important that car-owning households be given the opportunity to live in locations where they are able to reduce their reliance upon and use of the car (e.g. in or close to the City centre). | ||
| 9.98 | This will not be achieved without a flexible approach towards the provision of residents parking facilities. This recognises that, regardless of where they live, more and more households are likely to have a car and that very few car owning households will choose to dispense with one. | ||
| 9.99 | In the same way that a flexible approach to car parking is necessary to encourage housing development in the City centre, the availability of convenient secure overnight parking may be critical to the development of hotel accommodation. Without such facilities hotel developers will look to edge of town and out of town development sites to the detriment of City centre vitality and viability. | ||
| Policy T25 | Car Parking for Residents | ||
|
|||
| In accordance with the spirit of PPG 13, the Council will adopt a flexible approach towards the provision of on-site residential parking facilities in connection with the development of housing and other uses which include overnight accommodation. The level of such parking will be considered with reference to the Joint Structure Plan Authority's adopted standards and the following other factors: | |||
| (a) | the scale and type of development proposed; | ||
| (b) | the location, and the availability of, or potential for, access by transport other than the private car; | ||
| (c) | the potential for environmental harm and adverse effect on road safety arising from parking demand being met elsewhere; | ||
| (d) | the extent and nature of parking restrictions in force on highways in the vicinity; | ||
| (e) | the extent to which parking provision at the level proposed is consistent with other policies of the plan. | ||
 |
|||
|
|
|
|
| Top | |||