Development Intent
AtlasBromleyPolicy30
Planning Atlas›Bromley›30
PolicyPoliticalCommitteeOfficersAgents & developersViabilityMapAppeals
Bromley · Local Plan · Policy

30 — Parking.

How Bromley actually applies 30: who leans on it, where it bites hardest, and how often it's invoked. The policy text is the rule; this is the behaviour.

30 is a published Bromley planning policy. This page records where it appears in the council's published planning decisions.

Cited under: Bromley Local Plan (adopted)

Bromley · 30
Where 30 is quoted — by ward
Fewer ~0
More citations ~18
Showing
re-scopes the headline figures and the trend
182
times cited
in parsed decision notices
—
appeal survival
no PINS appeal decisions cite it
2 of 2
officer reach
100% of officers recorded in this period
Bromley Town
top hotspot ward
18 citations
What this policy is about

Policy 30 requires new residential developments to provide off-street parking spaces according to Table 1, and other developments to follow London Plan standards. It also requires designated blue badge parking, cycle parking, electric vehicle charge points, and car club provision. The Council will support new parking proposals near public transport interchanges if they don't undermine walking, cycling and public transport use.

Plain-English summary of the adopted policy text below. The full text is the rule; this is the gist.

The policy — as adopted

Parking

The Council will normally require off-street parking spaces to be provided in new residential development in accordance with Table 1 set out below: Table 1: Residential Parking Standards Bromley Residential Parking Standards (per unit) PTAL 1-2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 0-2* Minimum of 1 Minimum of 1.5 Minimum of 2 2*-6a 0.7 (min) - 1 (max) 1 (min) - 1.5 (max) 1.5 (min) - 2 (max) Parking for all other types of development is to be provided at levels set out in London Plan (LP) Table 6.2. In addition to the above, developments must: a provide designated blue badge parking as per LP Table 6.2; b meet minimum cycle parking standards as per LP Table 6.3; c ensure 1 in 5 spaces have provision (both active and passive) for electric vehicle charge points; and d make provision for a car club, if above the minimum Transport for London (TfL) threshold. Where parking pressures are identified at and around key public transport interchanges, new parking proposals will be supported on the basis that they do not undermine policies to encourage walking, cycling and public transport use. For development where servicing problems may arise, the Council will normally require off-street/rear servicing facilities.

Verbatim from the adopted Bromley plan · source document. The council's published plan is the authoritative version.

How it lands
96% in approvals · 2% in refusals
182 citations in the selected period
The approval/refusal split is subscriber intelligenceUnlock →
Where it bites
Bromley Town18
Chislehurst16
Orpington11
What cites it — application types
all years on record · click a slice to filter
What it means in practice

Not filled in yet. This will hold how officers actually argue 30 case by case, classified from their decision reports — the classification pass hasn't run. Nothing is paraphrased in its place.

What the published record shows

30 appears most often in Bromley Town, Chislehurst, Orpington. It appears across 2 of 2 officers recorded in this period. The map shows the pattern for the selected period.

Who cites it — case-officer spreadfrom parsed decision notices · click an officer
Who leans on this policy — and how often — is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Why it is cited — and what follows
96%
in approvals
175 citations
2%
in refusals
4 citations

This shows the decision reports in which 30 appears. It does not yet claim that the policy caused those outcomes; 3 citations sit outside the approval/refusal split.

Reason · role · consequence

Not filled in yet — the classification pass over the citing passages hasn't run. When it has, this shows why 30 was used, whether it supported approval or refusal, and what changed as a result. No conclusion is shown until that classification has been checked.

Why this policy is cited, and what follows, is subscriber intelligenceSubscribe to unlock →
Does it hold up? — appeal performance

No Planning Inspectorate appeal decisions on record cite 30. When one lands (the appeals table refreshes each weekday), the dismissed/allowed record appears here — never estimated.

Related — follow the thread
Bromley
Back to the borough policy record
Open →
Committee record
What reaches members, and what they do with it
Open →
Case officers
Bromley's decision-makers
Open →
Citations, officer spread, ward and application-type counts parsed from published Bromley decision notices (high-confidence parses, approvals and refusals), joined to the canonical application record. One citation = one decision citing the policy. See the policy overview for every policy cited.

Atlas intelligence summarises patterns and observations from published planning records. Past decisions do not indicate how any future application will be determined. Every application is assessed on its own merits, having regard to the proposal, site, evidence and policies applying at the time. This information is provided for general information only and is not planning, legal, financial or professional advice.