Parking Permits in Hillsborough.

[satman2222 10]

I used to visit Hillsborough to go to the shops and parked in this area as I won't use the Iceland camera hotspot car park. Due to these new parking regs I won't bother now and will take my custom elsewhere.

[Lucy-Lastic 10]

I used to visit Hillsborough to go to the shops and parked in this area as I won't use the Iceland camera hotspot car park. Due to these new parking regs I won't bother now and will take my custom elsewhere.

 

What about using the COOP car park which is still free at the moment then?

[TheGuy 10]

If the road markings are wrong, you ARE parking legally, and the council is effectively committing fraud if they issue a ticket.

 

Oh come off it, you're advising those that parked where they should'nt have to do all they can to get off on a technicality. You little tinker

Edited March 4, 2012 by TheGuy

[laingui 10]

Couldnt be much worse than it is already. Not when you have a road of terraced houses and loads of 2 car families, plus people who bring their work vans home.

 

Sorry for having job. The van is taxed as well as my car and has as much right to park on the road as any other car. What do you sugust i do travel to nottingham everyday to pick up my van then travel back to sheffield or give up my job and get on the rock and role or do you have a problem with that.

[matsalleh 10]

Care to specify where? If you don't wish to do so on this forum, you could e-mail transport@sheffield.gov.uk and let themknow

 

Hawkesley rd,Cannock st.

[Phil.N 10]

On my way into work yesterday, I noticed that a parking services vehicle had parked in the bay on Taplin Road (9am or thereabouts, bay "arms" at 8am).

 

I've no idea why, but there was egg all over the windscreen of said vehicle.

[andyofborg 11]

I've no idea why, but there was egg all over the windscreen of said vehicle.

 

probably an overexcited chicken

[BoroB 10]

The tram gates have been enforced with fines since the day they were introduced. It's just that up to the installation of camera enforcement, it was the Police who administered the penalties.

 

Have you read every word of that adjucication?

 

I have and I know exactly what it says.

 

The adjudicator said he wanted an additional roadmarking, because he considered it would be fairer.

 

He could not say that the signing was inadequate. It was fully legally authorised by the DfT and complied with all legal requirements. He acknowledged that fact in his adjudication.

 

He wanted an addditional roadmarking because he considered it would be fairer. Having to provide the roadmarking necessitated changing the signing.

 

 

The fees haven't increased overall. In fact they have reduced. The initial permit costs were £35 for a first residential permit. They are now going to be £20. How is that "ever-increasing"?

 

Reading every word of the adjudication several times does not change the outcome.

 

The adjudicator said 'jump' - the council jumped.

 

Signs inadequate/incorrect/not suitable. Result = Signs changed.

 

How much were initial permits in Hillsborough?

 

Nothing - there weren't any.

 

The right to park in the area has gone up.

[Planner1 431]

R

The adjudicator said 'jump' - the council jumped.

 

Signs inadequate/incorrect/not suitable. Result = Signs changed.

The adjudicator said he wanted an additional roadmarking, which was not specified in the signing regulations, which is what all highway authorities work to. The adjudicator made no suggestions that any of the signing which was originally installed was wrong or inadequate in any way, in fact he confirmed that it was perfectly legal.

 

The requirement for a roadmarking meant that not all the categories of vehicles which were previously exempt could continue to be exempt, which had knock on-effects on the rest of the signing, that's why it was changed.

[retep 68]

The adjudicator said he wanted an additional roadmarking, which was not specified in the signing regulations, which is what all highway authorities work to. The adjudicator made no suggestions that any of the signing which was originally installed was wrong or inadequate in any way, in fact he confirmed that it was perfectly legal.The requirement for a roadmarking meant that not all the categories of vehicles which were previously exempt could continue to be exempt, which had knock on-effects on the rest of the signing, that's why it was changed.

 

 

5.1 The Adjudicator acknowledgement that the Hillsborough bus/tram gate Traffic Regulation Order was valid and that the signs were legal (although in his opinion unclear), means that there are no specific legal implications arising from the decision.

[BoroB 10]

The adjudicator said he wanted an additional roadmarking, which was not specified in the signing regulations, which is what all highway authorities work to. The adjudicator made no suggestions that any of the signing which was originally installed was wrong or inadequate in any way, in fact he confirmed that it was perfectly legal.

 

The requirement for a roadmarking meant that not all the categories of vehicles which were previously exempt could continue to be exempt, which had knock on-effects on the rest of the signing, that's why it was changed.

 

You did your best Planner1.

 

The adjudicator said it wasn't good enough.

[FORE 12]

Now that parking in some streets of Hillsborough is chargeable.

Did I read somewhere on these 89 pages that parking was free for a stay of 15 mins or less?