So Aldi have been given planning permission for their new store on Lisle Lane opposite the new Sainsbury store. Glancing through the news article about the approval I noticed there are only 8 cycle parking spaces to be provided on the site.
Given the non-existent cycle parking at Waitrose and the pathetically small provision at Tesco it seems the City’s cyclists are going to have to contend with yet another food store with far too few parking spaces.
Not only that it seems ECDC has approved this low level of provision despite it going against the council’s own strategy document.
Here is the relevant section from the planning proposal: (thanks Tom for the link)
2.9 Car and cycle Parking Provis¡on
2.9.1 In consideration of the car parking standards that are applicable to the proposed development. These are set out in Appendix 3 of East Cambrldgeshire District Council’s Core Strategy, adopted October 2009. The standards set out a maximum standard or 1 space per 14sq.m. or GFA for A1 retail (food).
2.9.2 This equates to a maximum provision of 116 spaces (1,630/14 = 116 spaces) for the proposed development. On this basis, the proposed parking provision or 85 spaces falls within the maxlmum parking standards.
2.9.3 The parking standards also require a minimum disabled parking provision of at least 5% of car park capacity, the proposed provision of 4 spaces for disabled users thererore falls within the minimum requirement.
2.9.4 East Cambrldgeshire District Council’s Core Strategy requlres that a cycle parkinq provision of 1 cycle space per 25sq.m. of GFA for A1 retail (food). This equates to a minimum provision or 65 spaces (1,630/25 = 65 spaces) for the proposed development.
2.9.5 A provision of 65 spaces for the proposed development is excessive as it implies that cycling is likely to contribute a very large percentage of trips to the site which is unlikely to be the case.
2.9.6 It is therefore proposed that 8 cycle parking spaces be provided. Should the cycle parking spaces prove popular; the level of cycle parking wlll be increased to suit demand.
2.9.7 Cycle parklng wlll be provided in the form of Sheffield cycle loops located adjacent to the store entrance.
Note, there is no justification that the required provision under the core strategy of 65 spaces is “excessive” it is merely stated as a matter of fact. Also by providing only 8 spaces it will indeed mean that cycling to the store is unlikely to be popular as there will be nowhere to lock your bike when you arrive.
Why has ECDC approved this blatant disregard for their own core strategy?
Full planning proposal can be read here – http://anitepa.eastcambs.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/00062487.pdf