Another Parking Issue.

[Planner1 438]

14 hours ago, Ashcroft said:

My issue with parking in the Lansdown estate (bottom of Sharrow) We have to buy a permit for parking wich is fair enough. BUT There are 76 spaces for 980 homes. I know not every home will own a car but a hell of a lot do.  In those limited spaces there are usually council vehicles parked in them and for most anyone can park if they pay and display.  Some residents have to park a 20 minute walk away from home and sometimes still have to pay and display ontop of the permit which dont apply in other areas. It seems unfair to me for permit holders in the area and the council are just not interested. There are lots of grass verges that could be turned into parking bays but the council would just rather issue pcn's. Surely they would get the revenue back from extra bays.

Are you in the Landsdowne flats?

 

As I understand it from the Council website, flats permit holders can park in the adjacent Landsdowne permit zone, but Landsdowne permit holders can’t park in the flats.

 

In very built up areas like yours, green space is at a premium and some people value it very highly, many are therefore likely to object to any proposal to tarmac it over for parking,  so I would doubt very much whether your suggestion would get anywhere.

 

When the on-street permit zone was originally introduced it was much bigger and permit holders could park anywhere within it. The parking within the flats and permits for it were entirely separate from the wider on street permit zone. However when the Lib-Dems were in power they decided to split it into several smaller areas and restrict where each zones permits were valid. From memory I recall that there were issues with permit holders from the outer areas of the zone using the streets in the zone near the city centre for commuter parking, which prompted complaints.

 

These areas are difficult for the council due to the high demand for permits. They normally allow one or two per household, but only give more than that if it is identified that there is enough space to accommodate the extra parking. 
 

The council don’t do any of this just to generate income ( it wouldn’t be lawful).  The permit zones were put in at local people’s request, to try to give some priority for local residents and businesses and to control commuter parking. Nothing they can do will satisfy everyone and for some it isn’t ideal. This is made clear to the locals in the consultation when the zones are being planned.

 

I really don’t think there’s much the council could realistically do to resolve your issue with the current setup.

47 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Get in touch with Council and get a planters licence for the verge outside your property and plant up some barrels

It trains car owners to park inline enabling more cars to park and speeds up journeys as their bad parking creates 'chicanes'.

I think the OP is referring to the grassed areas around the Landsdowne  flats, not verges on-street.

[Ashcroft 19]

11 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Are you in the Landsdowne flats?

 

As I understand it from the Council website, flats permit holders can park in the adjacent Landsdowne permit zone, but Landsdowne permit holders can’t park in the flats.

 

In very built up areas like yours, green space is at a premium and some people value it very highly, many are therefore likely to object to any proposal to tarmac it over for parking,  so I would doubt very much whether your suggestion would get anywhere.

 

When the on-street permit zone was originally introduced it was much bigger and permit holders could park anywhere within it. The parking within the flats and permits for it were entirely separate from the wider on street permit zone. However when the Lib-Dems were in power they decided to split it into several smaller areas and restrict where each zones permits were valid. From memory I recall that there were issues with permit holders from the outer areas of the zone using the streets in the zone near the city centre for commuter parking, which prompted complaints.

 

These areas are difficult for the council due to the high demand for permits. They normally allow one or two per household, but only give more than that if it is identified that there is enough space to accommodate the extra parking. 
 

The council don’t do any of this just to generate income ( it wouldn’t be lawful).  The permit zones were put in at local people’s request, to try to give some priority for local residents and businesses and to control commuter parking. Nothing they can do will satisfy everyone and for some it isn’t ideal. This is made clear to the locals in the consultation when the zones are being planned.

 

I really don’t think there’s much the council could realistically do to resolve your issue with the current setup.

I agree with that. But it is still frustrating because the permits and parking zones only came into force in February.  Some residents are thinking in doing away with the permits and pay and displays simply by removing the signs - the only thing enforcing the charges. I have disagreed with them doing that but it would make the council do a bit of thinking. Oh yes, Im in the Lansdown flats.

Edited July 28, 2022 by Ashcroft
Forgot the 1st question.

[nikki-red 308]

36 minutes ago, Bargepole23 said:

Grass verges are useless?? How bizzare. Standard motorist, thinks the world revolves around them and their car.

Where has any of this stuff that you've made up been mentioned, apart from in your head?

When my son was in primary school there were a lot of issues with parents parking on the long grass verges outside, making it a real mess.

There was a meeting with the Headteacher etc  and one of the questions asked was why couldn’t it just be concreted over.

Apparently a number of verges have to be left as grass for easier access for utilities companies.

 

I have absolutely no idea if this is actually the case tho.

[Mr Bloke 1,445]

12 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

When the on-street permit zone was originally introduced it was much bigger and permit holders could park anywhere within it. The parking within the flats and permits for it were entirely separate from the wider on street permit zone. However when the Lib-Dems were in power they decided to split it into several smaller areas and restrict where each zones permits were valid. From memory I recall that there were issues with permit holders from the outer areas of the zone using the streets in the zone near the city centre for commuter parking, which prompted complaints.

 

These areas are difficult for the council due to the high demand for permits. They normally allow one or two per household, but only give more than that if it is identified that there is enough space to accommodate the extra parking. 
 

The council don’t do any of this just to generate income ( it wouldn’t be lawful).  The permit zones were put in at local people’s request, to try to give some priority for local residents and businesses and to control commuter parking. Nothing they can do will satisfy everyone and for some it isn’t ideal. This is made clear to the locals in the consultation when the zones are being planned.

 

I really don’t think there’s much the council could realistically do to resolve your issue with the current setup.

You're getting too good at this, Mr Planner!

You couldn't manage to blame the Government for this one...

... but managed to blame the Lib-Dems instead!

[Planner1 438]

2 hours ago, Mr Bloke said:

You're getting too good at this, Mr Planner!

You couldn't manage to blame the Government for this one...

... but managed to blame the Lib-Dems instead!

Credit where it’s due…….

[The_DADDY 3,475]

7 hours ago, Bargepole23 said:

Would be a disgrace if they did. We've paved wore than enough of the world to accommodate cars as it is.

 

Times change. The fact is we need more parking spaces.

[Planner1 438]

2 hours ago, Ashcroft said:

I agree with that. But it is still frustrating because the permits and parking zones only came into force in February.  Some residents are thinking in doing away with the permits and pay and displays simply by removing the signs - the only thing enforcing the charges. I have disagreed with them doing that but it would make the council do a bit of thinking. Oh yes, Im in the Lansdown flats.

So is there pay and display in the flats car parks?

 

What exactly is it the residents want the council to think about? There are only so many parking spaces, they aren’t going to provide any more.

 

Presumably the permit system is there because residents want it and the pay and display is to promote some turnover and availability of visitor spaces.

 

If the signs were removed and the restrictions weren’t enforceable, you might find commuters parking there, meaning even less space for residents.

 

If the signing for the restrictions has been included in the Amey highway maintenance contract, it won’t trouble the council at all if someone removes the signs, as Amey will be contractually obliged to put up new ones within a very short time of the problem being reported and it costs the council nothing. They can also use anti-tamper fittings, which make it more difficult to remove them.

 

If those flats were built now, it would be a planning condition that the occupants would not be eligible for permits in the on-street scheme, so perhaps residents should be grateful that there’s any permit entitlement at all.

 

 

[Bargepole23 337]

4 minutes ago, The_DADDY said:

Times change. The fact is we need more parking spaces.

The fact is we need less cars.

[Planner1 438]

3 minutes ago, The_DADDY said:

Times change. The fact is we need more parking spaces.

Where do “we” need more parking spaces exactly? And what shall “we” demolish/pave over to make way for them?

 

The city centre certainly doesn’t need more parking, there’s been an over supply for years. Many of the parking issues in the areas surrounding the city centre are caused by commuters who want to avoid paying to park.

 

Encouraging people to use cars by making it easier to park is the absolute opposite of current government and local policy across the country. If we are ever going to meet the carbon reduction targets that all councils and the government have adopted, they need to get drivers out of cars and get them walking, cycling and using public transport. Across the country councils are reallocating road space and removing parking to achieve this. The only additional parking that’s on anyone’s agenda is park and ride.

9 minutes ago, Bargepole23 said:

The fact is we need less cars.

I think I’d put it as we need to make people use cars less. 
 

Having a car is fine ( if you’ve got somewhere to park it) but the car is just one of several options that most people have for their journeys. What we need to do is make walking, cycling and public transport more of a natural choice for some of those journeys.

[Planner1 438]

3 hours ago, nikki-red said:

When my son was in primary school there were a lot of issues with parents parking on the long grass verges outside, making it a real mess.

There was a meeting with the Headteacher etc  and one of the questions asked was why couldn’t it just be concreted over.

Apparently a number of verges have to be left as grass for easier access for utilities companies.

 

I have absolutely no idea if this is actually the case tho.

It is true that some utilities use verges to house their plant in some places. For one thing, it’s cheaper to dig up and reinstate a verge than footway.
 

If it is going to be paved and driven / parked on, that might mean the buried ducts / pipes etc need to be protected or moved, which can be extremely expensive. 

[The_DADDY 3,475]

6 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Where do “we” need more parking spaces exactly? And what shall “we” demolish/pave over to make way for them?

 

 Lansdown estate (bottom of Sharrow) ?

 

My bold.

Apparently there are some grass verges doing nothing.

Edited July 28, 2022 by The_DADDY

[Ashcroft 19]

6 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Where do “we” need more parking spaces exactly? And what shall “we” demolish/pave over to make way for them?

 

The city centre certainly doesn’t need more parking, there’s been an over supply for years. Many of the parking issues in the areas surrounding the city centre are caused by commuters who want to avoid paying to park.

 

Encouraging people to use cars by making it easier to park is the absolute opposite of current government and local policy across the country. If we are ever going to meet the carbon reduction targets that all councils and the government have adopted, they need to get drivers out of cars and get them walking, cycling and using public transport. Across the country councils are reallocating road space and removing parking to achieve this. The only additional parking that’s on anyone’s agenda is park and ride.

I think I’d put it as we need to make people use cars less. 
 

Having a car is fine ( if you’ve got somewhere to park it) but the car is just one of several options that most people have for their journeys. What we need to do is make walking, cycling and public transport more of a natural choice for some of those journeys.

We need more parking on Lansdown estate and the verges are a good place for them to be.  The issue is not in the city centre its in the estate where people pay for parking and not able to a lot of the time.  I would like to help reach the carbon reduction target by not spending extra half of hour finding somewhere to park and it would also make me use the car less.