On 19 Feb, 18:21, Adrian wrote:
If to do so would cause an obstruction, yes. Absolutely. You think that's
a bad thing?

No , but in that case they should be allowed to park in their gardens
if they want, dropped kerb or not.

Who's saying that people can't park in their drives? Nobody. This isn't
about whether people can park in their drives or not - but whether they
can park in their front gardens which they'd like to call drives but
haven't actually got vehicular access to.

If its their property they can call it and do with it what they like ,
its none of the councils business so long as they don't cause a public
nuisance or break planning laws. This damage to pavements argument is
a load of old tosh since kerbstones are pretty damn tough and even
with a dropped kerb the car still has to drive over normal paving
anyway potentialy causing exactly the same damage so whats the
difference? Its just another way for petty officials to extort more
cash out of people.

Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think

Some village streets are even narrower.

Or, perhaps, they could get vehicular access so they can park in their
driveway perfectly legally... Not difficult...

No , just expensive and knowing how councils operate probably with a 6
month waiting list. And for what? To remove a couple of kerbstones and
lower some slabs.

B2003