Parking Provision in Planning Applications
Understand parking requirements for planning applications, including local standards, parking shortfalls, CPZs, car-free development and the latest NPPF.
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Andrew Ransome
9/3/20265 min read
Parking is one of the most common issues raised when new development is proposed.
Neighbours may be concerned about additional cars on the street. Planning officers may question whether a scheme provides enough spaces. Developers may also want to reduce parking to make better use of land.
The answer is rarely as simple as applying a fixed number of spaces.
Parking provision must be considered in the context of the site, the development and its accessibility.
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has also changed. The current NPPF, published in August 2026, contains a new approach to parking standards under Policy TR2.
What does the NPPF say about parking?
Policy TR2 requires development plans to set local parking standards.
Those standards should reflect:
the accessibility of the site;
access to employment and everyday services;
opportunities for walking, wheeling and cycling;
public transport provision;
local car ownership levels and travel patterns;
provision for disabled users;
cycle parking;
electric vehicle charging; and
the type and mix of development.
This means parking should not be considered in isolation.
A highly accessible town-centre site may justify a different approach from a suburban or rural site with limited public transport.
The NPPF also allows local authorities to use maximum parking standards in appropriate circumstances. This can help promote sustainable transport, make better use of well-connected sites and manage pressure on the local road network.
Minimum and maximum parking standards
It is important to establish what the local planning policy actually requires.
A parking standard can operate as a:
minimum requirement – the development should provide at least a specified number of spaces; or
maximum requirement – the development should not normally exceed a specified number of spaces.
The distinction is important.
A maximum standard can be particularly relevant in highly accessible locations. Providing more parking than necessary may undermine wider planning objectives.
Local policies should therefore be checked carefully before a scheme is designed around a particular parking figure.
Does a parking shortfall mean an application will be refused?
Not necessarily.
A proposal may provide fewer spaces than the adopted standard. That does not automatically mean planning permission must be refused.
The planning authority should consider the circumstances of the site.
Relevant factors may include:
the accessibility of the location;
the availability of public transport;
local car ownership;
the availability of on-street parking;
the character of the surrounding streets;
the type and size of the proposed dwellings;
cycle parking and storage;
the availability of alternative transport options; and
the likely effect of displaced parking.
The quality of the evidence is important.
A well-supported parking strategy can therefore be more persuasive than simply pointing to the number of spaces shown on a plan.
On-street and off-street parking
It is useful to distinguish between the two.
Off-street parking is provided within the development. This could include:
driveways;
garages;
communal parking areas;
private car parks; or
parking courts.
On-street parking is generally controlled by the highway authority.
Different restrictions can apply. These may include yellow lines, residents' parking schemes, permit parking and time restrictions.
The existence of nearby on-street parking does not necessarily mean that it can absorb additional demand.
Its capacity and regulation should be considered.
Controlled Parking Zones
Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) are particularly relevant to developments in urban areas.
A CPZ can restrict parking to permit holders or control when and where vehicles can park.
However, the planning system does not itself create a right to obtain a parking permit.
Parking controls are normally implemented through traffic regulation arrangements controlled by the relevant highway authority.
This distinction can become important where a development is proposed with little or no on-site parking.
A planning strategy should establish whether future occupiers can realistically rely on surrounding streets.
Parking surveys
A parking survey may be appropriate where there is a potential shortfall. The survey should provide reliable evidence of existing parking demand.
Timing matters.
Parking demand can vary significantly between:
weekdays and weekends;
daytime and evening;
school term and school holidays; and
normal and peak periods.
A survey taken at a quiet time may not provide a reliable picture of parking pressure.
The scope of the survey should therefore reflect the circumstances of the site.
Parking and highway safety
Parking and highway safety are related, but they are not the same issue.
A shortage of parking does not automatically amount to a highway safety problem.
However, displaced parking can create safety concerns in some circumstances.
For example, additional on-street parking could:
obstruct visibility at a junction;
restrict pedestrian movement;
interfere with cycle routes;
narrow the usable carriageway;
obstruct access for emergency vehicles; or
result in unsafe parking close to bends or junctions.
These impacts need to be assessed on their merits.
The current NPPF also makes clear that development should address significant adverse impacts on the transport network and highway safety. Policy TR6 requires refusal where a proposal would have a severe adverse impact on the transport network or an unacceptable impact on highway safety, taking account of mitigation and wider network improvements.
Can parking standards be applied flexibly?
Yes.
The new NPPF recognises that parking requirements should reflect the circumstances of the location.
This is particularly relevant where a rigid application of a parking standard would conflict with wider planning objectives.
For example, a well-connected urban site may have:
frequent public transport;
good pedestrian connections;
nearby shops and services;
good cycle infrastructure; and
lower levels of car ownership.
In such circumstances, a lower level of parking may be appropriate.
Conversely, a site with poor accessibility and high levels of car ownership may require a more conventional level of provision.
The important point is that the planning case should be evidence-based.
Car-free and low-car development
Some developments seek to provide very little or no car parking. This can be appropriate in highly accessible locations.
However, a car-free strategy needs to be credible.
Simply removing parking from a plan does not remove the demand for parking.
A successful low-car strategy needs to demonstrate how the development will function in practice.
A practical checklist
Before submitting a planning application, it is worth asking:
1. What does the local parking policy require?
Check whether the standard is a minimum, maximum or guideline.
2. How accessible is the site?
Consider walking, cycling and public transport.
3. What is local car ownership like?
Local evidence can help establish realistic demand.
4. Is there existing on-street parking?
Consider both availability and restrictions.
5. Could additional parking cause problems?
Look at highway safety, pedestrian movement and neighbouring amenity.
6. Does the proposed layout work?
Check the size and usability of every parking space.
7. Is technical evidence required?
A parking survey or transport assessment may be appropriate for some schemes.
8. Can a lower level of parking be justified?
If so, the planning case should explain why the proposed provision is appropriate for the site.
Getting the parking strategy right
Parking issues are often easier to resolve before a planning application is submitted.
A good parking strategy should respond to the characteristics of the site. It should also support the wider design and transport objectives of the development.
The starting point should not simply be “How many spaces does the policy require?”
The better question is:
“What level of parking is appropriate for this development in this location?”
That approach is consistent with the current NPPF and can help avoid unnecessary disputes during the planning process.
Need advice on parking provision?
Parking issues can have a significant impact on the design and planning prospects of a development.
I can advise on the planning strategy for your proposal and assess how parking requirements should be approached.
Where specialist technical input is required, I work with a team of experienced transport and highway consultants who can provide parking surveys, transport assessments and other technical evidence.
This allows parking to be considered as part of the wider planning strategy.
If you are considering a development where parking provision is an issue, get in touch to discuss your site and the planning options available.
Andrew Ransome MRTPI - Email: andrew@andrewransome.co.uk
About me
Andrew Ransome is a Planning Director and a Chartered Member of the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI), with more than two decades of experience in town planning.
He specialises in delivering strategic planning solutions for complex developments across both rural and urban environments, helping clients navigate planning challenges and unlock development opportunities. Connect with Andrew on Linkedin.
Planning Application Information
Get in touch for planning advice: Email: andrew@andrewransome.co.uk
© 2026. All rights reserved.
The content on this website is provided for general information purposes only and does not constitute planning or legal advice. Planning policy, legislation, and case law change over time, and every planning matter should be assessed on its own merits. No responsibility is accepted for any loss or action taken in reliance on the content of this site. The projects, planning applications and appeals presented on this website reflect professional work undertaken by, or involving me, throughout my career, including work undertaken in both my current and previous employment positions.