Parking provision is inadequate given the site’s low Public Transport Access Levels score (0-1b), poor cycling opportunities, and the limited access to jobs and essential services.

Given the small size of the site, Berkeley propose just 89 parking spaces, with 18 of these blue badge spaces. They are only committing to 3 car club spaces. It is unclear where visitors are supposed to park. All of this for 586 homes.

The unit mix suggests Berkeley view this development as ‘starter homes’, and they estimate 240 residents will be children. Imagine being a parent here and not owning a car so far from services.

The London Plan (Policy T6 Residential Car parking) states:

“10.6.2 Maximum standards for car parking take account of PTAL as well as London Plan spatial designations and use classes. Developments in town centres generally have good access to a range of services within walking distance, and so car-free lifestyles are a realistic option for many people living there.

10.6.4 When calculating general parking provision within the relevant standards, the starting point for discussions should be the highest existing or planned PTAL at the site, although consideration should be given to local circumstances and the quality of public transport provision, as well as conditions for walking and cycling.”

With an extremely low Public Transport Access Level (PTAL) score, as well as poor conditions for walking and cycling, Berkeley seems to have got this wrong. The London Plan allows up to 1.5 parking spaces per home for new developments in PTAL 0-1 zones in outer London. This development provides 0.15.

Ignored alternatives: When challenged to explore reasonable alternatives – such as underground or under croft parking, as used at The Hamptons – Berkeley dismiss this with vague talk of ‘site difficulties’. Odd, given they’re happy to dig deep for drainage tanks, but apparently not for residents’ cars.