# Cycle Storage for new flats and houses - planning law?



## sheddy (7 Feb 2010)

Are UK Local Authorities required to provide secure/covered cycle storage for new developments ? 

I guess if a new house has a garage one can argue that that is sufficient, but what about flats and smaller houses ? 

Also as a comparison, what are the best practice requirements in Denmark/Holland ?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (7 Feb 2010)

I'd put money on Dellzeqq knowing the answer to this one....


----------



## marinyork (7 Feb 2010)

Nope (I think).


----------



## chap (7 Feb 2010)

It is increasingly popular however, especially in London.


----------



## marinyork (7 Feb 2010)

chap said:


> It is increasingly popular however, especially in London.



Planners here always say this but when you look in detail it turns out to be far more variable than they think. They always tend to focus on the best that has been put in - you know some of it is great - and ignore the plethora of brand spanking new developments which have nothing (I looked at two today that apparently have zilch).


----------



## style over speed (8 Feb 2010)

was some information on real cycling the other day about that:

http://realcycling.blogspot.com/2010/02/flat-feeling-not-enough-bike-parking-in.html


----------



## marinyork (8 Feb 2010)

style over speed said:


> was some information on real cycling the other day about that:
> 
> http://realcycling.blogspot.com/2010/02/flat-feeling-not-enough-bike-parking-in.html



It's nowt new. In 2006 I lived in a house where the landlord was planning a super double extension to get the house from 4 to 6 people. One of the conditions of planning permission was that he had to have "adequate" cycle parking. Before build there was an indoor shed that could just, just, squeeze in 3 bicycles by the narrowest of margins. There was also a small wooden shed that was 9 inches too small to fit my bike in and similar for other bikes. The moronic council agreed that the tiny shed was "adequate" cycle parking for six people even though it was a retrograde step. The council prides itself on being a "cycling city" and generally clued up, it's not.


----------



## Davidc (8 Feb 2010)

Council actions can be bizarre.

About 10 years ago my son was in a shared house in Newcastle. They originally used an old coal store for bikes, but after it was half demolished to steal 3 bikes the landlord decided to get an useable entrance from outside into the cellar* put in. He also had the floor near the entrance concreted and some metal stands set in it, for locking up the bikes. (Origin unknown and no questions asked ....)

5 people had secure parking for 6 bikes.

The council decided it wasn't allowed and made him block up the entrance door again.

*in practice just the void under the suspended floor, which was 1.7 metres deep at the front!


----------



## dellzeqq (8 Feb 2010)

sheddy said:


> Are UK Local Authorities required to provide secure/covered cycle storage for new developments ?
> 
> I guess if a new house has a garage one can argue that that is sufficient, but what about flats and smaller houses ?
> 
> Also as a comparison, what are the best practice requirements in Denmark/Holland ?


the answer to your question comes in four parts - no, possibly, no, and no. And the real answer is be careful what you wish for....

No - Local authorities do not provide cycle storage for new developments. They may insist that the developer provides cycle parking and/or cycle storage, and that may be by way of an amendment to the approved drawings, or by way of a planning condition. Occasionally there may be a legal agreement, without which the development may not go ahead. Additionally a local authority can require the developer to produce a travel plan, which will be designed to encourage sustainable travel, or to make a financial contribution to cycling infrastructure, which is usually some pony bit of cycle lane going nowhere.

Possibly - All local authorities have to produce a Local Development Framework, which has to have sustainability written all the way through it. You might want to enquire of your own LA whether the LDF has clear stipulations on sustainable transport. A decent LDF will put cycling at the centre of their strategy. 

No - cycle parking doesn't have to be covered or secure, although most LAs will insist on some kind of cover. But be careful what you wish for. There is one cycling officer in a south coast city who insists on individual stainless steel lockers, which turn housing developments in to oversized locker rooms and are ideal for the storage of drugs.

No - garages are not neccessarily good enough. Some local authorities require cycle parking in addition to garages.

And now for the reverse argument! By and large cycle parking for new residential developments is a bad thing. It is far, far preferable to design flats and houses in such a way that you can take bikes in to the flat and house hallways. Put it this way - if the lifts aren't big enough to take a bike, and the hallways aren't big enough to take a bike, what chance do you stand of getting a pram in there? And here's the rub - it's actually cheaper to supersize the lift and give space for storage inside the flat -and this is the strategy recommended by TfL BUT local authority employees need to show results by numbers, and some windswept cycle shed, or a corner of an underground car park is far more to their liking than a decent sized lift - even if the bike isn't really secure, or the underground car park is an invitation to crime.

As for Holland and Denmark - dunno, although it's apparent wandering round Holland that there are bike racks a-plenty


----------



## Bollo (8 Feb 2010)

Not adding to the discussion much, but a year or two ago I noted some Sheffield stands installed in a small public courtyard of a new development of flats in Winchester. The stands had been nicely screwed into some 1/2inch wooden battens with some wood screws, which in turn had been screwed into rawlplugs embedded into the paving stones. Nice little brass wood screws they were as well.

I popped along a few days later with a camera to get some pictures for CC, but all that was left was one of the battens. I hope nobody was daft enough to attach a bike to the things.


----------



## sheddy (8 Feb 2010)

Oh bum. I was hoping by now (the 21st century) that there would be a minimum provision that all developers had to comply with


----------



## marinyork (8 Feb 2010)

sheddy said:


> Oh bum. I was hoping by now (the 21st century) that there would be a minimum provision that all developers had to comply with



If you kick up a fuss about a particular scheme, it usually makes a difference, how large a difference...

It's also good to have a list of precedents elsewhere locally in the city - council people are very good at saying well that's not how we do things and then you can then say well this pharmacy, pub, multistorey car park, block of flats that was built has such and such and then they have to think up another excuse .


----------



## dellzeqq (8 Feb 2010)

sheddy said:


> Oh bum. I was hoping by now (the 21st century) that there would be a minimum provision that all developers had to comply with


there isn't, but any council worth its salt would be applying 110% - and if they were really good they'd be looking for storage in flats.

There's something we tend to forget here. Cars make a mess of developments - if they are housed at ground floor level then they ruin street vitality, and if they are held underground then the cost of excavation is enormous - it makes the drainage of the flats above tricker, and can bring the building a lot closer to the water table. The intelligent developer working anywhere near the centre of town will look at the cost of providing car parking, and then at the price he or she can sell it at, and most likely come to the conclusion that it would be better not to bother. Far better to provide cycle parking at a small fraction of the cost. For years I used to go in to bat for the greediest men in London because it was they, and not planners, who wanted to reduce car parking.

Is this a planning application? If it is you want to e-mail me the drawings on simon_legg 'at' yahoo.co.uk I'll formulate an objection - but bear in mind that the consultation period is very, very short. Three weeks is standard.


----------



## sheddy (9 Feb 2010)

Thanks for the offer, things seem to have moved on, and this development of 200 flats and houses is now the subject of a Public Enquiry.
I seached the Council website this morning and the planning application has been removed from the Database (possibly as their immense file wouldn't even load up.....)


----------



## dellzeqq (9 Feb 2010)

if it's going to a Public Inquiry you have the right to attend and to speak - and writing as someone who suffered a reverse at the hands of non-professional interlopers in to what should have been a quiet discussion between professionals (bah, humbug) I would have thought it would be worthwhile finding out about it and making your point.


----------

