Access and Movement

Please Note : Policies that are highlighted by strikethrough have not been 'saved'.

More information regarding Saved Policies can be found here.

Introduction

5.1. The Government’s White Paper ‘A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone’ (1998) advocates an integrated approach to transport and land use planning. PPG13: Transport provides guidance on delivering the White Paper’s objectives to extend choice in transport, reduce the need to travel and secure mobility in a way that supports sustainable development

5.2. RSS8 2005 incorporates a Regional Transport Strategy which aims to reduce the need to travel and travel growth, promotes a step change in the quantity and quality of public transport and only develop additional highway capacity when all other means have been eliminated. The Central Leicestershire Local Transport Plan (LTP), sets out the local transport strategies and investment proposals for this area

5.3. This Plan has been prepared in parallel with the first and second LTPs and the Replacement Structure Plan in order to provide a long term planning framework to allow the implementation of a better, more efficient, integrated transport and land use planning system in the City.

Access and Movement Aims

5.4. The policies of the Local Plan will seek to influence access and movement by:

•  promoting the integration of transport and land use planning by complementing the strategies and proposals set out in the Local Transport Plan and Structure Plan;

•  encouraging and developing walking, cycling and public transport and improved transport interchanges to reduce reliance on the car ;

•  directing major and travel intensive uses to locations where they can be reached by means of transport other than the car in order to encourage sustainable patterns of development;

•  safeguarding sites and routes which could be essential in developing infrastructure to widen transport choices and providing a well connected transport network;

•       implementing travel demand management measures, such as parking restraint, to encourage people to modify their travel behaviour and reduce the need to travel.

PROMOTING ALTERNATIVES TO THE CAR

Walking

5.5. Walking is a particularly sustainable form of transport, it requires little infrastructure and has a negligible impact on the urban environment. Research in Leicester has established that road safety, traffic, pollution and excessive journey distances are all key barriers to walking; but planning policies can assist in the breaking down of these barriers. The City of Leicester Walking and Cycling Strategy 2002, superseded by the Local Transport Plan, set targets on encouraging walking by, for example, seeking to increase the percentage of children walking to schools, through linking with the Safer Routes to School Strategy.

5.6. The specific needs of disabled people such as dropped kerbs and enhanced safety measures, can benefit pedestrians as a whole and be incorporated at the design stage at little cost. The City Council, in its pursuit of equal opportunities requires the needs of disabled people, as well as others with limited mobility (e.g. people with children), to be given due consideration, as does the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. More specific information regarding requirements can be obtained from the City Council’s Disabled Persons’ Access Officer and the City Council’s design guide ‘Paving the Way’.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

Cycling

5.7. As with walking, cycling is a particularly sustainable form of transport. In Leicester the majority of journeys are less than 5 miles (8 km), a distance suitable for travel by cycle.

5.8. In addition to the overwhelming environmental benefits, cycling also has some practical advantages over the car. In peak periods journey times can be comparable; cycling is also a door to door form of transport with parking provision often being closer to the end destination than a car parking space.

5.9. The City of Leicester Walking and Cycling Strategy, superseded by the Local Transport Plan, has set targets which seek to increase the proportion of total journeys made by cycle.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

Citywide Pedestrian and Cycle Route Networks

5.10. The City of Leicester Walking and Cycling Strategy, and subsequently the LTP promotes walking and cycling as genuine modes of transport. The pedestrian route network forms an integral part of the road network and is also catered for on the cycle route network. The cycle network includes routes along major transport corridors (e.g. bus lanes); off street routes such as Great Central Way; quieter suburban routes and certain bridleways and towpaths.

5.11. Part of the cycle route network in Leicester is included within the National Cycle Network, arranged by the charity Sustrans. The Sustrans north - south Inverness to Dover route passes through the City and connections will also be made with the eastern route to Peterborough.

5.12. Safer routes for pedestrians and cyclist will become an integral part of the road network as reduced speeds are designed into new development, as outlined in Policies UD03 and AM10.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.13. There is a need to ensure that new development does not significantly add to the dangers of these more vulnerable highway users. Concern about personal safety is also a deterrent to use of walking, cycling and public transport facilities and this should be considered.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.14. The Green Ringway is an orbital cycle/pedestrian route around Leicester using routes through parks and open spaces to link schools and hospitals with the City and National Cycle Network. Where possible opportunity will be taken to enhance the character and green ambience of the route. Much of the Green Ringway has already been implemented by the City Council. When complete the full route will form Sustrans Regional Route 77 linking together schools, hospitals, workplaces and community facilities to National Cycle Network Routes 6 and 63 that already cross Leicester. The extent of the route is shown diagrammatically on Map 04 but the route will be kept under review.

Travel by Bus

5.15. In Leicester, research has determined that a high quality bus based public transport system is essential if maximum effectiveness is to be made of the road network and people are to be offered alternatives to the car. Buses can convey large numbers of people and take up relatively little road space yet their effective operation is often hampered by congestion. Buses, therefore, must be given priority so that journey times can be reduced thus making them a more attractive option.

5.16. Many bus journeys, particularly at peak periods when congestion is at its worst, start or finish in the City Centre. Moreover, it is anticipated that this trend will continue over the plan period as the City Centre becomes the focal point for developments that attract a large number of visitors.

5.17. Bus services are provided by private bus companies. The City Council can provide financial support for non-profitable services which are deemed essential but which would otherwise not be provided. The main role of the City Council, in conjunction with the County Council in the Central Leicestershire area, is to provide infrastructure to improve bus service efficiency, facilitate interchange, provide waiting facilities for passengers and provide information. The City Council has entered into a Quality Bus Partnership with the operators.

5.18. Many of the development proposals likely to come on stream during the plan period will be well related to the existing urban fabric and can be readily absorbed into the existing and proposed network of bus services. There are, however, a number of larger developments where the needs of public transport users and operators should be accorded a high priority at the design stage. An agreed minimum standard of service will be required (see paragraph 5.49) linking key destinations, connecting to the wider bus network and passing in close proximity to where people live. Policy AM05 seeks to ensure that development is laid out so that walking distances to bus stops are close enough to encourage bus travel as an alternative to the car.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.19. Large scale development in the context of this policy is development larger than 100 dwellings; 1,000m² gross floorspace of retail, B1 or D2 development; 5,000m² B2 Industry and 2,500m² Higher and Further Education.

Strategic Park and Ride

5.20. The public transport needs of most Leicester City residents can be met by conventional bus services. Leicester, however, is a sub-regional centre and many people travel into the City for the purpose of work, shopping and recreation. Due to the widespread origins of many of these longer trips into Leicester, it is not always possible for conventional bus services to be a viable alternative. Bus or rail based park and ride sites can reduce the overall length of car journeys to the City Centre.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.21. Leicester’s first purpose built park and ride at Meynells Gorse became operational in 1997.and a second site is planned at Birstall in the County. Further appropriate sites will be investigated during the plan period. The criteria outlined below will be used to determine the most appropriate locations, in conjunction with other relevant policies to ensure the local setting and environment are fully considered

 Goto top/Contents/Glossary

Travel by taxi

5.22. Hackney carriages and Private hire vehicles are considered to be a part of the public transport system and can be particularly important for people with mobility problems. The operation of this service can be facilitated by the provision of hackney carriage ranks in key locations such as the City Centre, defined shopping centres, public transport interchanges, hospitals and other major developments (e.g. National Space Centre).

5.23. The LTP recognises the importance of this service and the Council aims to improve the provision of taxi ranks in the City.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

Rail Services and Infrastructure

5.24. Despite the fact that most of the immediate public transport needs of Leicester’s citizens can be addressed by bus services, passenger rail services are still an integral part of the Leicester and Central Leicestershire Transport Policy. Rail can provide a viable alternative to the car for inter-urban and longer distance journeys.

5.26. The City Council, in conjunction with the County Council, other Leicestershire District Councils, rail authorities and train operating companies will keep the case for Phase 2 of the Ivanhoe Line between Leicester and Burton on Trent under review. Land, infrastructure and trackbeds will need to be safeguarded accordingly.

5.26. Leicester is also served by the Midland Main Line between London and Sheffield and Central Trains cross country services, including connections between East Anglia and Wales. Connections to the Channel Tunnel via St. Pancras are scheduled during the plan period.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT

Development and Measures to Reduce the Need to Travel

5.27. Transport Assessments (TA) should be prepared and submitted, alongside planning applications for development that will have significant transport implications, in accordance with PPG13. The assessment of traffic flows and conditions must take into account the cumulative impact of all existing and known proposed development and any particular local traffic problems. The City Council as Highway Authority will identify the sensitive areas, including areas susceptible to congestion, when specifying the parameters of the Transport Assessment.

5.28. At Hamilton developers should take account of the impact on roads such as A563, A607, Victoria Road East and Keyham Lane. At Ashton Green the impact on roads such as Bennion Road, Beaumont Leys Lane, A563 and Greengate Lane should be taken into account. For these and other major development sites developers should consider necessary improvements that may include public transport improvements, highway improvements, and other sustainable transport infrastructure.

5.29. Where a Travel Plan is required, it should incorporate measures to reduce travel to and from the site that should be worked up in consultation with the City Council and local transport providers. The measures might be designed for the applicant only or be part of a wider initiative, involving other existing or proposed developments in the City.

5.30. Developers will be expected to provide contributions in accordance with Circular 5/2005 to support the modal split targets and measures to reduce car use from their development. The contributions and measures will be secured by planning conditions and, where appropriate, by means of a planning obligation negotiated with developers. The likely nature and scope of the contributions to be sought towards transport improvements are outlined in Appendix 04. Also the Travel Plan should identify any further remedial measures or commuted sums that the developer could be expected to provide to mitigate the impact of the development if regular monitoring shows that the development does not achieve the travel plan objectives, including modal split targets.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.31. On smaller scale developments, where a TA is not required, if it is judged that the traffic generated would impact on the highway network adjacent to the site, the developer would be expected to contribute towards off-site highway improvements to mitigate the impact of the development. Measures to reduce the need to travel in smaller scale development up to the standards required in large scale or travel intensive development would also be required.

Road Safety and Vehicle Speed Restraints

5.32. Government Guidance on highway layout is contained “Places, Streets and Movement” (1998); “By Design: Urban design in the Planning system”(2000) and the Road Safety Strategy “Tomorrow’s Road –Safer for Everyone” (2000).

5.33. The main change in emphasis in the new guidance is using design to reduce the impact of the car in the street, as set out in policy UD03. All new housing/mixed use developments should be designed as connected street networks to provide maximum accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists. People should be able to travel safely (both in terms of road safety and personal security) whatever their chosen mode of transport.

5.34. Vehicle speeds, particularly in new residential development, must be managed by the arrangement of buildings and space, with physical traffic calming (e.g. speed humps) being used only as back-up measures. The City Council generally expect to see all new roads in residential areas designated as 20 mph zones, to reduce speeds and thus accident rates. Speed tables at key junctions and changes in the surface material and the width of the carriageway can also be used to reduce vehicle speeds. The home zones concept will be encouraged, where considered appropriate.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.35. The Council’s priority for vehicle speed management is to focus its own resources in areas with high accident rates and where they can complement Area Safer Routes Schemes. A more detailed list of priorities is contained in the LTP. Within new developments, developers will be required to incorporate or fund the appropriate measures to reduce road danger within the overall street layout.

Parking Standards

5.36. Government guidance in PPG13 advises that the availability of parking has a major influence on people’s travel choice. It therefore recommended that maximum amounts of car parking should be specified with new development and in areas accessible by other modes, to encourage more sustainable travel behaviour and release land for more productive purposes.

5.37. Parking standards are set out in Appendix 01 and further guidance is given in the supplementary planning guidance (SPG): Vehicle Parking Standards 2002. These standards are based on the findings of the University of Westminster ‘East Midlands Joint Car Parking Study’ as well as RSS8 and advice contained in PPG13.

5.38. The capacity of the road system and the availability of alternative modes of transport to the private car vary considerably throughout the City so that uniform car parking levels are not appropriate. Therefore a number of parking zones were derived from the PPG6 (now PPS6) sequential test definition of contours within easy walking distance of the City Centre (e.g. Central Commercial Zone) and the initial findings of the joint ACCMAP study, undertaken by the City and County Councils on public transport accessibility in Leicester.

5.39. The Central Pedestrian Zone (CPZ) is identified in the City as Zone 1 where the highest level of parking restraint is adopted in accordance with the advice outlined in RSS8. It forms the central core of the city centre where pedestrian measures preclude access to vehicles and parking spaces. The boundary to Zone 1 is shown on Map 1 in Appendix 01.

5.40. The Central Commercial Zone (CCZ) outlined in the Proposals Map is identified in the City as Zone 2 where high levels of parking restraint are adopted. Parking standards within Zone 2 will remain more restrictive due to the abundance of alternative means of transport and public car parking provision. The boundary to the CCZ is shown on the Proposals Map.

5.41. In areas outside the CCZ less restrictive parking restraint is adopted. Two zones are identified in this area where different targets for reduction of car parking standards will apply according to the “transport accessibility” of each zone. The boundary to Zone 3, which is immediately adjacent to the CCZ, is based on the ACCMAP modelling work. The ACCMAP profile boundary has been further refined to remove any anomalies by reviewing the bus service frequency and land uses in the area. The boundary to Zone 3 is shown on Map 2 in Appendix 01.

5.42. Zone 4 contains the remaining parts of the City, where public transport accessibility is lowest. The boundary to Zone 4 is shown on Map 2 in Appendix 01.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.43. The City Council will take account of factors such as regeneration needs and viability when it considers the application of these standards. If a development is expected to generate a higher level of car usage than can be accommodated by the maximum parking standards, the applicant should submit a Travel Plan, that incorporates complementary measures designed to reduce the need for parking and encourage users to travel by modes of transport other than the car to access the site (see Policy AM09).

5.44. Parking provision that exceeds the maximum standards will only be granted in exceptional circumstances, where it is demonstrated through a TA and Travel Plan that a lower level of parking is not achievable through the implementation of measures to minimise the need for parking and car travel, and that a serious road safety or amenity problem would otherwise arise.

5.45. A restrictive approach to parking provision with development will be counter productive if it displaces parking pressures elsewhere. Complementary controls need to be implemented, particularly through the LTP. Within Leicester progress has been made towards ‘decriminalising’ on-street parking. Residents parking schemes will complement these on-street controls.

5.46. It is recognised that people with disabilities often have no alternative but to travel by the private car, therefore spaces will be reserved for them in accordance with need, rather than subject to restraint.

Car Parking Provision in Residential Development

5.47. The requirements for off-street parking provision is a major determinant in the amount of land required for residential development and can thus reduce residential density and be incompatible with the principle of making the best use of urban land. PPG3 requires local authorities to review their car parking standards, to allow for significantly lower levels of off-street parking in highly accessible locations.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.48. The City Council will take account of factors such as regeneration needs and viability when it considers the application of these standards. In some instances maximum vehicle parking provision will be acceptable to making the housing offer attractive. Alternatively, the nature and location of dwellings may lead to a significantly reduced level of parking provision being acceptable. The City Council will encourage Car Free Residential Areas in locations which are well served by other means of transport or where they are in close proximity to everyday facilities.

5.49. Locations with good public transport are defined in the Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland Structure Plan 2005 as locations served by bus services at 15 minute intervals during the working day (Monday to Saturday, 7.00 am to 7.00 pm) and half hourly during evenings and Sundays.

Communal and Shared Parking Provision

5.50. Parking layouts for developments should encourage shared uses of parking, particularly in the CCZ or as part of major developments. In some instances, where a site is developed to accommodate a variety of users, rather than providing dedicated car parking for individual developers, communal parking may lead to a considerable saving in land. Development briefs will be used to specify where this is appropriate, such as within the PDAs identified in Chapter 2.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

New Public Car Parks

5.51. In the CCZ public car parking provision, both on and off-street, is adequate to meet anticipated demand. This is particularly apparent when coupled with the ongoing public transport improvements and planned park and ride facilities. It is appropriate, therefore, that no additional public car parking is permitted. This applies equally to permanent and temporary provision. It does not apply, however, to parking provision associated with new development, where the levels of car parking will be considered in accordance with the requirements of Policies AM11and AM12. Nor does it apply to the redevelopment of existing car parking

5.52. In the past, permission has been granted for the use of semi-derelict/derelict sites within the CCZ for temporary car parks. This often hampered regeneration efforts as the site was not available or there was little incentive for a developer to regenerate it when there was a ready income stream from parking fees.

5.53. Outside of the CCZ, there may be more justification for additional public car parking capacity where accessibility by more sustainable means is not as good. Provision, however, will only be considered in exceptional circumstances, when alternative solutions have been exhausted. Provision outside the CCZ will not be permitted to meet the needs within the CCZ.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

The Design of Car Parking Provision

5.54. Car parks have created problems in the past by their appearance, their misuse and the lack of safety and security of both vehicles and people. In line with Central Government direction, car parks should be designed to comply with the Association of Chief Police OfficersSecured Car Park AccreditationScheme.It is also apparent that car park layouts can lead to misuse in terms of accommodating vehicles in undesignated areas such as verges and access routes; such practice runs counter to using car parking as a travel demand management tool.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

Re-Use of Existing Car Parking Provision

5.55. During the plan period it is envisaged that Leicester’s residents and visitors will become less car reliant over short distances, this applies particularly to journeys to and from the Central Area.

5.56. Given that land is a scarce resource, proposals for development on existing public or private car parks will be considered provided that a shortage of provision will not lead to problems with safety, on-street parking and local amenity. If such problems are likely to arise, replacement provision should be made elsewhere or other measures implemented to accommodate travel demands such as Travel Plans.

5.57. In the longer term, as other more sustainable transport options come forward, it is intended that car parking provision will not be increased in the City Centre. This will lead to no net increase in the stock of parking provision and will release land for more productive purposes.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

Servicing Requirements

5.58.Adequate servicing provision is imperative, both in terms of businesses functioning effectively and local highway safety and amenity being maintained. As needs vary, servicing requirements will be considered for each development on merit. The City Council, however, will only permit what it considers to be justifiable servicing requirements. Excessive provision must be avoided as it may be used for non-operational purposes thus undermining other travel demand management policies.

5.59. In some instances, it is possible for loading bays and manoeuvring space to be shared by a number of users. Although widely utilised in the Central Area, there is scope for such practice to be considered elsewhere.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

FREIGHT MOVEMENTS

Rail Freight

5.60. The Regional State of Freight Study 2002 highlighted the need for modal switch away from road based transport in the manufacturing, retail, waste disposal and freight industries. This is supported by policies in the Regional Freight Strategy (July 2005). Network Rail has identified the Felixstowe-Peterborough-Leicester-Nuneaton lines for upgrading for freight traffic growth and the potential for upgrading the Midland Mainline. There is a need to safeguard land and trackbed along these routes, wherever practical, to promote rail as an alternative to the car and HGV’s.

5.61. The City Council will seek to protect land with existing operational or non-operational rail freight facilities such as Leicester Sidings, as well as potential rail freight connections from non-rail development. The Humberstone Goods Yard (see Table 7.2 in Chapter 7) is still rail connected and is identified by Network Rail as a strategic priority for future use.

5.62. Rail freight connections will also be considered at other appropriate employment sites and the, City Council will support applications for grant aid under the 1993 Railways Act.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

Water freight

5.63. Leicester’s Inland waterways, the River Soar and Grand Union Canal offer some potential for freight movement, although the structure and size of many bridges and canal locks poses a major constraint to the carriage of large freight by boat. The City Council will work with British Waterways and other agencies in considering potential low key freight uses and waterside freight connections, including initiatives by local canal side firms to transport bulk raw materials,

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

Road Freight

5.64. The majority of freight movements in Leicester will be still be undertaken by road. To minimise the adverse environmental impacts, the City Council will work with the Leicester and Leicestershire Freight Quality Partnership to facilitate consultation with the freight industry on the sustainable distribution of goods by road, as well as rail or water transport whenever feasible.

5.65. The City Council will prevent development which may impede the movement of high or abnormal loads on the route outlined in Policy AM20. The northern section provides a through route for heavy traffic and requires protection, although it is not suitable for all abnormal loads. Routes in the southern section provide access for abnormal loads within the City (see Map 05).

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.66. In order to protect residential amenity and Central Area access, there will be restrictio, n on development which creates an unacceptable number of freight movements in residential or other sensitive areas. These include the Central pedestrian area, routes to schools and around community/leisure facilities (see also Policy PS10). The City Council will invoke powers under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to make Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO’s) and other management measures to prevent the use of certain highways by unsuitable traffic.

5.67. It is also vital that new or expanded commercial vehicle operating centres do not cause environmental problems. Goods vehicle depots, associated traffic and overnight parking in environmentally sensitive locations will be controlled through the development co, ntrol process and through representation to the Traffic Commissioner, who is responsible for granting licences to goods vehicle operators. The introduction of higher maximum lorry weights (i.e. 44 tonnes on six axles for all trips), will have implications if such uses are not sited appropriately.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.68. The Proposals Map defines a B8 exclusion zone (see Employment Policy E07). In transport terms, this restricts large warehousing and distribution development in locations where Central Area access may be impeded and directs it to more suitable locations. However it is not only B8 warehousing and distribution type developments which can generate a large number of freight and goods movements. The overall impact of such proposals and its resultant acceptability will be determined in accordance with Policy AM09.

TRANSPORT SCHEMES AND IMPROVEMENTS

5.69. Although the basis of the new policy agenda is to improve public and non-motorised modes of transport, it appreciates that the car remains an important means of transport for a large number of people. The road network, however, in Leicester is largely complete and priority will be given to the maintenance of existing roads and management of the network rather than building new roads.

5.70. Whilst it is no longer practicable to accommodate ever increasing traffic growth by new road construction, there are some instances where no other option is available and land will need to be safeguarded. Similarly, there are instances where former alignments intended for road schemes will need to be safeguarded for alternative transport schemes.

5.71. The City Council advocates road building only when all other options have been considered and when the following circumstances apply:

•  long term safeguarding of land to complete the major transport network

•  development roads to open up major sites and

•  access roads within new developments and/or redevelopment/regeneration areas.

5.72. The long term transport strategy covering Leicester is currently being developed in parallel with the second Central Leicestershire Local Transport Plan. New development will be required to make allowance for the transport schemes that have been identified as part of these processes.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary

5.73. The proposed new bus route in the city centre will replace the High Street/ Belgrave Road route and will enable a high quality pedestrian environment to be provided in the vicinity of the Clock tower. Further support for this proposal is provided by Policy SPA07.

5.74. Junction improvements on the outer ring at Groby Road will be carried out in accordance with the conditions of the outline planning consent for the expansion of Glenfield Hospital. Improvements of the Uppingham Road and Melton Road junctions are required in connection with development at Hamilton.

5.75. In accordance with the Structure Plan, land for the EDDR will be safeguarded until a review can be undertaken to ascertain whether the scheme as originally planned should be built.

Goto top/Contents/Glossary