Pavement parking ban!

[Dorset Bob]

Originally Posted by jackatesme

Can't you get the Butler to take them in.

I did ask him but he is too busy, on the buses, to earn enough money to pay his Council Tax, too.

[Lancpudn]

I see this hot potato is back on the agenda again! They've just launched a consultation period starting 31st August & ending 22nd November about how it can stop pavement parking. https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/com...nt-parking-ban

[HarryM1BYT]

Originally Posted by Lancpudn

I see this hot potato is back on the agenda again! They've just launched a consultation period starting 31st August & ending 22nd November about how it can stop pavement parking. https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/com...nt-parking-ban

Good, about time it was sorted out with some proper rules/laws, rather than the absolute mess it is now.

Some drivers see it as completely right and proper to park totally blocking pavements, without any consideration for anyone other than other road users. My street has narrow pavements, with a low kerb, yet a normal width of road - more than wide enough for two HGV's to pass. Almost everyone has a drive. There is no reason nor does it offer anyone any advantage by their parking on the pavement, yet most do this, some completely blocking what little width of pavement there is and NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD- anyone who might be blind, on a mobility scooter, pushing a pram etc..

Added to that, there are the overgrown hedges taking up half the footpath and sometimes for days on end, the bins abandoned there, by the people too lazy to take them in after they have been emptied.

Looking out the window now, four hours after they were emptied, there are still five such bins unclaimed by people who are at home and perfectly able to take their bin in - Plus one LWB Transit, parked completely blocking the pavement. The owner has parked it thus for the past couple of weeks during the day, whilst attending to do some work on one of the houses. Why has he seen the need to park like that? Only the driver knows. It offers absolutely no advantage to the one driver/vehicle needing to pass it every ten minutes, if two moving vehicles happen to meet there, one still has to slow down to let the other pass, just as it would if the Transit were parked where it belongs fully on the road.

There are many more people passing on foot, than in vehicles, walking dogs, pushing prams and with kids - yet they have to pass the Transit by going out in the road causing much more disruption to traffic flow.

[HarryM1BYT]

Originally Posted by Lancpudn

I see this hot potato is back on the agenda again! They've just launched a consultation period starting 31st August & ending 22nd November about how it can stop pavement parking. https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/com...nt-parking-ban

Good, about time it was sorted out with some proper rules/laws, rather than the absolute mess it is now.

Some drivers see it as completely right and proper to park totally blocking pavements, without any consideration for anyone other than other road users. My street has narrow pavements, with a low kerb, yet a normal width of road - more than wide enough for two HGV's to pass. Almost everyone has a drive. There is no reason nor does it offer anyone any advantage by their parking on the pavement, yet most do this, some completely blocking what little width of pavement there is and s#d anyone who might be blind, on a mobility scooter, pushing a pram etc..

Added to that, there are the overgrown hedges taking up half the footpath and sometimes for days on end, the bins abandoned there, by the people too lazy to take them in after they have been emptied.

Looking out the window now, four hours after they were emptied, there are still five such bins unclaimed by people who are at home and perfectly able to take their bin in - Plus one LWB Transit, parked completely blocking the pavement. The owner has parked it thus for the past couple of weeks during the day, whilst attending to do some work on one of the houses. Why has he seen the need to park like that? Only the driver knows. It offers absolutely no advantage to the one driver/vehicle needing to pass it every ten minutes, if two moving vehicles happen to meet there, one still has to slow down to let the other pass, just as it would if the Transit were parked where it belongs fully on the road.

There are many more people passing on foot, than in vehicles, walking dogs, pushing prams and with kids - yet they have to pass the Transit by going out in the road causing much more disruption to traffic flow.

[steve-45]

My pet hate is people who get their integral garages converted into another room, then not needing a driveway have it made part of the front garden.
They will then park their 2 or 3 cars on the road taking up more than the width of their property.
This then happens on both sides of the road and your very lucky if you can then squeeze a Transit size vehicle down the middle.
In most urban residential streets there are just too many car owners!

[macafee2]

What may work in one road will not perhaps work well in another road, there is no an easy answer but :-
If a garage is turned into another room then another parking space must be made at the property.
New estates must have parking for 3-4 cars per household, be it on the drive or on the road within the width of the property. If there is a house opposite then the road must be wide enough for 3 large vehicles, two parked and one passing.

It is not as clear cut as may seem at first glance and in some places there are markings on the pavement for cars to park half on the pavement and half on the road

macafee2

[HarryM1BYT]

Originally Posted by macafee2

What may work in one road will not perhaps work well in another road, there is no an easy answer but :-
If a garage is turned into another room then another parking space must be made at the property.

Agreed!

New estates must have parking for 3-4 cars per household, be it on the drive or on the road within the width of the property. If there is a house opposite then the road must be wide enough for 3 large vehicles, two parked and one passing.

Agreed!

It is not as clear cut as may seem at first glance and in some places there are markings on the pavement for cars to park half on the pavement and half on the road

macafee2

The really daft part is that they are allowing homes to be built, with absolutely no private space for parking. No where to park apart from the public road, should mean no ability to own a car.

It is not unreasonable to allow parking on the pavement, but only where pavements are wide enough to safely permit it. Wide enough is only where it is wide enough to cope with the reasonable use of pedestrians. Pedestrians should never, ever be forced out into the road to get past vehicles abandoned on the pavement.

[steve-45]

My road has 38 houses, all semi detached. I think there is only one household that has only 1 car, most others have 2 or 3 and a couple of houses have 4!

Parking at weekends is always a problem when most people are home.

[wraymond]

Surely pavements are designated pedestrian walk ways, and only that.

We have streams of cyclists (the latest woke mobile brigade) dressed like cartoon characters with those backward facing caps and ever-so pretty multi-coloured pantaloons, sailing along - none of them possessing a simple thing like a bell. They all have a mental image of themselves in an Alpine Pass with 50 followers singing Valdereeee, Valderaaaa.

I'm afraid the theory that pavement parkers do it with thought for road users is just not true. They try to avoid the risk of scrapes from other speeding vehicles and the inevitable loss of door mirrors (happened to me twice).

We have grass verges that are ploughed into an urban mess with ruts 8" deep and, where there are no verges, pavement parking leaving only 30" space. We used to mow those verges ourselves and look after each others' patch, now one stripe and you are done. It used to be illegal to ride your bike on the pavement, has that actually been reprieved? Oh, of course, no more beat bobbies.

[RobSun]

Originally Posted by HarryM1BYT

The really daft part is that they are allowing homes to be built, with absolutely no private space for parking. No where to park apart from the public road, should mean no ability to own a car.

.

I have read that the reasoning behind this is that younger people are reducing their use and need for cars. Authorities are encouraging this and this is part of the scheme as private vehicle ownership is expected to fall in the future as EVs and autonomous self drive takes over. We are expected to hire a car when we need it to take us to our destination, then off it goes to pick up someone else. New homes and city planning is already taking this into consideration.