Rother resists parking limit diktat

Rother cabinet on Tuesday voted to recommend the full council that the guidelines should not be accepted in their present form

The recommendation from Rother chief planning officer Leslie Robinson is for Rother to undertake local consultation.

The county's aim is to encourage authorities like Rother to restrict the amount of off-street parking allowed with new development in a bid to encourage use of public transport.

Cllr Brian Kentfield said: "When I read this (the county guidelines) I was horrified." People living in rural Rother in particular were totally dependent on private transport. Many areas suffered from inadequate parking.

Why should anyone dictate to residents how many vehicles they could park on their own land?

He told Rother cabinet: "I think we should make as much parking facilities available as residents who wish to have cars require.

"If you don't all you are creating is mayhem on roads with on-street parking and increased vandalism."

Leader of the council Cllr Graham Gubby said he had "some disquiet" about county guidelines produced without consulting the feelings of the districts.

"There are some presumptions which are quite ridiculous..."

The Rother planning officer lists criticisms of the county document including:

l Inadequate consultation:

l Reduced parking provision being introduced before any sign of public transport improvements

l Lack of flexibility in a proposed "zoning" system for commercial applications

l Lower standards for smaller and "affordable" housing

He says: "The availability of alternatives to the car is pivotal to the application of what is effectively parking restraint in certain areas.

"The council has said that it was not prepared to support the document in its current form as it considered the proposed new standards to be over-restrictive and could not be introduced appropriately unless and until public transport is dramatically improved.

"The council's position has been that whilst care should be taken not to over-provide for car parking in new development, it would be folly to under-provide, particularly where public transport is inadequate and/or where care ownership levels are likely to be higher than the car parking provision."