| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Councils block in illegit driveways
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7251333.stm
Brutal but effective. If Brent and Harrow council really did attempt to contact the offending residents - and did so at least more than once - then I approve! Cars driving over pavements, in particular paving slabs, really do mash them up. Whether the councils are charging too much for installing the proper ramp access across the pavement does come into this whole issue, but if they are just passing on the legitimate costs of so doing then that's fair enough. The article says Brent has done this in 33 locations, whilst no figures are provided for Harrow. I expect the counter argument to anyone suggesting that this action has further damaged the pavement is that the pavement was so damaged in the first place it makes little difference, as the council were going to have to fix it up anyway. It will certainly make for an effective deterrent. I have to say that, in some streets, it does sadden me to see so many driveways in place of front gardens (i.e. places were a conversion has been done). Of course this really does depend upon the context - size of the front garden/driveway area, how busy the street is, indeed whether the house/street was designed like this in the first place. However I think at some locations introduction of a controlled parking zone (CPZ), so residents could have a fair degree of certainty they could park nearby, would have been (indeed could still be) a preferable solution. I am however very much aware that in Harrow and Brent, much of the (often interwar) housing was built with a driveway in the first place, so even though the properties targeted by the councils' actions might originally have had gardens and only recently had driveway conversions, they could well simply be changing to fit in with the surrounding/nearby housing. Nonetheless if you want to have a driveway you need to pay up for the appropriate access to get across the pavement. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7251333.stm Brutal but effective. If Brent and Harrow council really did attempt to contact the offending residents - and did so at least more than once - then I approve! Cars driving over pavements, in particular paving slabs, really do mash them up. Whether the councils are charging too much for installing the proper ramp access across the pavement does come into this whole issue, but if they are just passing on the legitimate costs of so doing then that's fair enough. As they say "hundreds of pounds". People really have no idea of the real cost of things if they think that this is excessive. tim |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On Feb 18, 7:08*pm, Mizter T wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7251333.stm Interesting - I thought the problem du jour was that asphalting your front garden to park the car was causing much faster run-off of heavy rain, contributing to increased flooding - and that therefore councils were thinking of requiring planning permission. This business of providing access is news to me. Tim |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 18 Feb, 19:17, TimB wrote:
On Feb 18, 7:08 pm, Mizter T wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7251333.stm Interesting - I thought the problem du jour was that asphalting your front garden to park the car was causing much faster run-off of heavy rain, contributing to increased flooding - and that therefore councils were thinking of requiring planning permission. This business of providing access is news to me. Tim That's a separate, albeit connected issue. Take a look at the access to driveways across pavements - so called "dropped kerbs" - they will generally have a lowered curb to match the level of the road and a purpose built non-paved (concrete or asphalt) surface across the pavement, so that cars don't have to mount the curb and then drive over paving stones, breaking them as they go. However you will see some that don't have this - these are the illegitimate ones, and in such instances people often just use a big length of chunky timber shoved in the crevice of the kerb so as to allow vehicles to mount the kerb more easily. If the pavement is made from paving stones then they'll often be cracked and uneven - if however it is an asphalt surface then it obviously won't be thus damaged. I don't know the details but it may well be the case that asphalt pavements can get damaged by prolonged abuse in this manner. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Seems relevant.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....html?t=669655 Though ISTR the figure round here (Cambs) is closer to £1000. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On Feb 18, 9:15 pm, Mark W wrote:
Seems relevant.http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....html?t=669655 Though ISTR the figure round here (Cambs) is closer to £1000. I am pretty sure that near me, on Lavender Avenue, Mitcham, the council altered the pavement of every house to a slipway, so that cars could be parked in peoples' front gardens rather than on the pavement. I'm a pedestrian and I thought that was a good idea - and the pavement does seem a lot clearer now than a year ago, although I suppose some people have simply taken the opportunity to buy a second car. One thing that really bugs me, especially if I'm pushing a pushchair, is when I have to use the road because cars are using the pavements. Where can I get those "Pavements are for people" stickers? |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 18 Feb, 19:08, Mizter T wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7251333.stm Brutal but effective. If Brent and Harrow council really did attempt to contact the offending residents - and did so at least more than Another small minded petty victory for a bunch of little hitlers. Why shouldn't people park in on their own property if they want to or is that a priviledge reserved for the middle classes with proper drives? If it was my car I'd be off down the plant hire shop for an angle grinder and dump the bollards in front of the councils offices along with an invoice for the grinder hire plus any lost income from not having a car available and lost working hours. once - then I approve! Cars driving over pavements, in particular paving slabs, really do mash them up. Only if they're badly made in the first place. Also some suburban roads are so narrow that if people don't park in their drives or on the pavements the road would be effectively blocked to anything on 4 wheels larger than a go kart. .. B2003 |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Boltar wrote:
If it was my car I'd be off down the plant hire shop for an angle grinder and dump the bollards in front of the councils offices along with an invoice for the grinder hire plus any lost income from not having a car available and lost working hours. Oooh, an invoice, they must be shaking in their boots. ;) -- Michael Hoffman |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying: Brutal but effective. If Brent and Harrow council really did attempt to contact the offending residents - and did so at least more than Another small minded petty victory for a bunch of little hitlers. Why shouldn't people park in on their own property if they want to or is that a priviledge reserved for the middle classes with proper drives? It's a right reserved for those with vehicular access to their drives. Which is signified, legally, by a drop kerb. Which must be installed by the council. If it was my car I'd be off down the plant hire shop for an angle grinder and dump the bollards in front of the councils offices along with an invoice for the grinder hire plus any lost income from not having a car available and lost working hours. Cool. They'll have plenty of evidence for the criminal damage case against you. Only if they're badly made in the first place. Also some suburban roads are so narrow that if people don't park in their drives or on the pavements the road would be effectively blocked to anything on 4 wheels larger than a go kart. Then parking in the road is illegal, as it would cause an obstruction. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Adrian (Adrian ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying: Another small minded petty victory for a bunch of little hitlers. Why shouldn't people park in on their own property if they want to or is that a priviledge reserved for the middle classes with proper drives? It's a right reserved for those with vehicular access to their drives. Which is signified, legally, by a drop kerb. Which must be installed by the council. Bad form etc, yeh, I know. Sue me... But I should add that there may well be planning implications in the installation of additional vehicular accesses - some neighbours wanted an in-and-out drive as part of a house refurb. Planning permission was specifically refused for the second vehicular access on "road safety" grounds. God knows why, but there y'go. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 19 Feb, 10:15, Michael Hoffman wrote:
Boltar wrote: If it was my car I'd be off down the plant hire shop for an angle grinder and dump the bollards in front of the councils offices along with an invoice for the grinder hire plus any lost income from not having a car available and lost working hours. Oooh, an invoice, they must be shaking in their boots. ;) If it was backed up with the threat of no-win-no-fee legal action they just might be. B2003 |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 19 Feb, 10:44, Adrian wrote:
It's a right reserved for those with vehicular access to their drives. Which is signified, legally, by a drop kerb. Which must be installed by the council. And which particular law is the specified in then? Cool. They'll have plenty of evidence for the criminal damage case against you. Willful obstruction is also a crime. It would be interesting to see it played out in a court. Then parking in the road is illegal, as it would cause an obstruction. So they can't park on the road and they can't park off it. Do you work in a council by any chance? B2003 |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying: It's a right reserved for those with vehicular access to their drives. Which is signified, legally, by a drop kerb. Which must be installed by the council. And which particular law is the specified in then? I'd strongly suspect it's the RTA, since you'd be looking for a specific exception to the general rule that you ain't allowed to drive on the pavement. If and when the server gets out of bed, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/ acts1988/ukpga_19880052_en_1 Cool. They'll have plenty of evidence for the criminal damage case against you. Willful obstruction is also a crime. It would be interesting to see it played out in a court. Wouldn't it just? Still, I'm sure somebody's daft enough to try it. Then parking in the road is illegal, as it would cause an obstruction. So they can't park on the road and they can't park off it. Correct. Do you work in a council by any chance? No. Are you an awkward sod who thinks he's got a god-given right to park immediately outside his front door? |
Councils block in illegit driveways
In message
, at 04:21:12 on Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Boltar remarked: If it was my car I'd be off down the plant hire shop for an angle grinder and dump the bollards in front of the councils offices along with an invoice for the grinder hire plus any lost income from not having a car available and lost working hours. Oooh, an invoice, they must be shaking in their boots. ;) If it was backed up with the threat of no-win-no-fee legal action they just might be. If you know of a no-win-no-fee firm who will take on a *defended* debt action in the County Court, then I have a new client for them... -- Roland Perry |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 19 Feb, 12:37, Adrian wrote:
Then parking in the road is illegal, as it would cause an obstruction. So they can't park on the road and they can't park off it. Correct. Do you work in a council by any chance? No. Are you an awkward sod who thinks he's got a god-given right to park immediately outside his front door? Are you the type of awkward sod who wouldn't let people park on the road or off it on their own drives but expects them to park in the next street? Or course too bad if the next street is full too with the cars of people who live in it. Perhaps everyone should just sell their cars and get the bus. Oh wait , county councils can't be arsed to fund those anymore so outside major cities there arn't many... B2003 |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 19 Feb, 07:18, Offramp wrote:
On Feb 18, 9:15 pm, Mark W wrote: Seems relevant.http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....html?t=669655 Though ISTR the figure round here (Cambs) is closer to £1000. I am pretty sure that near me, on Lavender Avenue, Mitcham, the council altered the pavement of every house to a slipway, so that cars could be parked in peoples' front gardens rather than on the pavement. I'm a pedestrian and I thought that was a good idea - and the pavement does seem a lot clearer now than a year ago, although I suppose some people have simply taken the opportunity to buy a second car. One thing that really bugs me, especially if I'm pushing a pushchair, is when I have to use the road because cars are using the pavements. Where can I get those "Pavements are for people" stickers? Does all this mean that all people have to do is ask (and pay) and they can potentially get an entire kerb dropped so that the whole length of the pavement can be driven over? I would have thought that there would be a limit. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying: Then parking in the road is illegal, as it would cause an obstruction. So they can't park on the road and they can't park off it. Correct. Are you an awkward sod who thinks he's got a god-given right to park immediately outside his front door? Are you the type of awkward sod who wouldn't let people park on the road If to do so would cause an obstruction, yes. Absolutely. You think that's a bad thing? or off it on their own drives 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. but expects them to park in the next street? If that's the nearest, yes. Or course too bad if the next street is full too with the cars of people who live in it. Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think that absolutely every London resident should be free to park wherever they like, with no controls or regard to obstruction, in the street they live in? How's that going to work, then? Or, perhaps, they could get vehicular access so they can park in their driveway perfectly legally... Not difficult... Perhaps everyone should just sell their cars and get the bus. Oh wait , county councils can't be arsed to fund those anymore so outside major cities there arn't many... Perhaps you'd like to tell me Which bits of the London Borough of Harrow and the London Borough of Brent are outside "major cities"? |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 19 Feb, 18:21, Adrian wrote:
Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: Then parking in the road is illegal, as it would cause an obstruction. So they can't park on the road and they can't park off it. Correct. Are you an awkward sod who thinks he's got a god-given right to park immediately outside his front door? Are you the type of awkward sod who wouldn't let people park on the road If to do so would cause an obstruction, yes. Absolutely. You think that's a bad thing? or off it on their own drives 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. but expects them to park in the next street? If that's the nearest, yes. Or course too bad if the next street is full too with the cars of people who live in it. Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think that absolutely every London resident should be free to park wherever they like, with no controls or regard to obstruction, in the street they live in? How's that going to work, then? I am wondering what legislation allows street parking anyway. I mean, you can't store other furniture in the street that you can't fit in your house, so parking cars seems to be a special case, which must be well defined somewhere. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On Feb 19, 6:27 pm, MIG wrote:
On 19 Feb, 18:21, Adrian wrote: Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: Then parking in the road is illegal, as it would cause an obstruction. So they can't park on the road and they can't park off it. Correct. Are you an awkward sod who thinks he's got a god-given right to park immediately outside his front door? Are you the type of awkward sod who wouldn't let people park on the road If to do so would cause an obstruction, yes. Absolutely. You think that's a bad thing? or off it on their own drives 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. but expects them to park in the next street? If that's the nearest, yes. Or course too bad if the next street is full too with the cars of people who live in it. Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think that absolutely every London resident should be free to park wherever they like, with no controls or regard to obstruction, in the street they live in? How's that going to work, then? I am wondering what legislation allows street parking anyway. I mean, you can't store other furniture in the street that you can't fit in your house, so parking cars seems to be a special case, which must be well defined somewhere. I've thought that there must be a market for "motorized sheds" that you could just park outside your house. Obviously there would be costs involved, at the very least, VED, insurance and MOT. But presumably they could be electric vehicles with very little range so probably no VED. Given that they're going to be very low mileage there's probably the opportunity for a cheap specialist insurance. And surely it can't cost all that much to get them through an MOT each year given that they're hardly ever driven. Tim. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
In message
, Mizter T writes The article says Brent has done this in 33 locations, whilst no figures are provided for Harrow. It is not just local councils that are tightening up on this. Neighbours just round the corner on the South Circular have been told by TfL that they are not to park on their forecourts without a dropped kerb being installed. No threats of bollards, though - TfL are simply moving their bus shelter in front of the property in question instead. :( -- Paul Terry |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 19 Feb, 19:08, Paul Terry wrote:
In message , Mizter T writes The article says Brent has done this in 33 locations, whilst no figures are provided for Harrow. It is not just local councils that are tightening up on this. Neighbours just round the corner on the South Circular have been told by TfL that they are not to park on their forecourts without a dropped kerb being installed. No threats of bollards, though - TfL are simply moving their bus shelter in front of the property in question instead. :( Is this just a threat or a definite plan of action then? |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On Feb 19, 6:16 pm, MIG wrote:
On 19 Feb, 07:18, Offramp wrote: On Feb 18, 9:15 pm, Mark W wrote: Seems relevant.http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....html?t=669655 Though ISTR the figure round here (Cambs) is closer to £1000. I am pretty sure that near me, on Lavender Avenue, Mitcham, the council altered the pavement of every house to a slipway, so that cars could be parked in peoples' front gardens rather than on the pavement. I'm a pedestrian and I thought that was a good idea - and the pavement does seem a lot clearer now than a year ago, although I suppose some people have simply taken the opportunity to buy a second car. One thing that really bugs me, especially if I'm pushing a pushchair, is when I have to use the road because cars are using the pavements. Where can I get those "Pavements are for people" stickers? Does all this mean that all people have to do is ask (and pay) and they can potentially get an entire kerb dropped so that the whole length of the pavement can be driven over? I would have thought that there would be a limit. I dunno what happened, except that EVERY house on Lavender Ave in Mitcham, in a few months, all got dropped kerbs. I assumed that the council did it to rid the streets of parked cars (which has happened). |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On Feb 19, 6:45 pm, "
wrote: On Feb 19, 6:27 pm, MIG wrote: On 19 Feb, 18:21, Adrian wrote: Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: Then parking in the road is illegal, as it would cause an obstruction. So they can't park on the road and they can't park off it. Correct. Are you an awkward sod who thinks he's got a god-given right to park immediately outside his front door? Are you the type of awkward sod who wouldn't let people park on the road If to do so would cause an obstruction, yes. Absolutely. You think that's a bad thing? or off it on their own drives 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. but expects them to park in the next street? If that's the nearest, yes. Or course too bad if the next street is full too with the cars of people who live in it. Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think that absolutely every London resident should be free to park wherever they like, with no controls or regard to obstruction, in the street they live in? How's that going to work, then? I am wondering what legislation allows street parking anyway. I mean, you can't store other furniture in the street that you can't fit in your house, so parking cars seems to be a special case, which must be well defined somewhere. I've thought that there must be a market for "motorized sheds" that you could just park outside your house. Obviously there would be costs involved, at the very least, VED, insurance and MOT. But presumably they could be electric vehicles with very little range so probably no VED. Given that they're going to be very low mileage there's probably the opportunity for a cheap specialist insurance. And surely it can't cost all that much to get them through an MOT each year given that they're hardly ever driven. Tim. Fantastic idea!! Extremely tall vehicules with 49cc engines! How clever is that?! |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Offramp (Offramp ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying: I've thought that there must be a market for "motorized sheds" that you could just park outside your house. Obviously there would be costs involved, at the very least, VED, insurance and MOT. But presumably they could be electric vehicles with very little range so probably no VED. Given that they're going to be very low mileage there's probably the opportunity for a cheap specialist insurance. And surely it can't cost all that much to get them through an MOT each year given that they're hardly ever driven. Fantastic idea!! Extremely tall vehicules with 49cc engines! How clever is that?! Bloody brilliant. http://www.it.vtl.piaggio.com/prodotti/ape/index.htm |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Are you an awkward sod who thinks he's got a god-given right to park
immediately outside his front door? What's even worse than that is people who are "visiting" another house and don't want to block the drive of the house they are visiting, so park right across YOUR drive instead. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 18 Feb, 19:08, Mizter T wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7251333.stm Brutal but effective. If Brent and Harrow council really did attempt to contact the offending residents - and did so at least more than once - then I approve! Cars driving over pavements, in particular paving slabs, really do mash them up. Whether the councils are charging too much for installing the proper ramp access across the pavement does come into this whole issue, but if they are just passing on the legitimate costs of so doing then that's fair enough. The article says Brent has done this in 33 locations, whilst no figures are provided for Harrow. I expect the counter argument to anyone suggesting that this action has further damaged the pavement is that the pavement was so damaged in the first place it makes little difference, as the council were going to have to fix it up anyway. It will certainly make for an effective deterrent. I have to say that, in some streets, it does sadden me to see so many driveways in place of front gardens (i.e. places were a conversion has been done). Of course this really does depend upon the context - size of the front garden/driveway area, how busy the street is, indeed whether the house/street was designed like this in the first place. However I think at some locations introduction of a controlled parking zone (CPZ), so residents could have a fair degree of certainty they could park nearby, would have been (indeed could still be) a preferable solution. I am however very much aware that in Harrow and Brent, much of the (often interwar) housing was built with a driveway in the first place, so even though the properties targeted by the councils' actions might originally have had gardens and only recently had driveway conversions, they could well simply be changing to fit in with the surrounding/nearby housing. Nonetheless if you want to have a driveway you need to pay up for the appropriate access to get across the pavement. I was completely sickened by the interview with the councillor concerned. Her excuse for impounding people's cars was health and safety - "people expect cars to drive up ramps but not across pavements" - whereas actually they are doing it to boost revenue. The bollards have been built cheaply and look a mess, plus they are an obstruction for partially sighted and disabled people. Why did the council choose to ereect bollards when the cars were on the drive? Why not simply knock on the door or provide 24 hours warning? The only answer can be shear nastiness. Personally I would prefer to see cars parked off road than on road. I hold no remit for car drivers, and I am strongly in favour of parking enforcement, clamping, the lot. But this kind of petty nastiness just goes too far. Ian |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 19 Feb, 18:27, MIG wrote:
I am wondering what legislation allows street parking anyway. I mean, you can't store other furniture in the street that you can't fit in Its called road fund tax. You don't generally find funiture driving down the road. B2003 |
Councils block in illegit driveways
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 |
Councils block in illegit driveways
In message
, at 01:40:44 on Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Boltar remarked: I am wondering what legislation allows street parking anyway. I mean, you can't store other furniture in the street that you can't fit in Its called road fund tax. Not since 1936. Today it's Vehicle Excise Duty. -- Roland Perry |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying: 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. Why? 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. Which they are. Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think Some village streets are even narrower. Indeed they are. But without the volume of traffic and the residential density. Oh, and without the "I live here, I park here" attitude. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 20 Feb, 10:05, Adrian wrote:
Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: 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. Why? Because its their bloody property! You going to start dictating what plants they can plant in their gardens next or perhaps what type of furniture they're allowed to buy?? its none of the councils business so long as they don't cause a public nuisance or break planning laws. Which they are. No they're not. Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think Some village streets are even narrower. Indeed they are. But without the volume of traffic and the residential density. Oh, and without the "I live here, I park here" attitude. What exactly is wrong with that attitude? Why shouldn't people have a reasonable expectation of being able to park near where they live? For mothers with kids, people who use their car or van for work and elderly or partially disabled people its almost essential. B2003 |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 2008-02-20, Adrian wrote:
Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: 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. Why? 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. Which they are. Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think Some village streets are even narrower. Indeed they are. But without the volume of traffic and the residential density. Oh, and without the "I live here, I park here" attitude. I don't think so - when I lived in a village there were people with that attitude - they suggested that I should park outside my own house, until I pointed out that it was on a corner and that parking there would block one or both routes through the village. I was also yelled at to the general effect of "I live here, how dare you park opposite!". |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 20 Feb, 11:48, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, wrote: On Feb 19, 6:27 pm, MIG wrote: I am wondering what legislation allows street parking anyway. *I mean, you can't store other furniture in the street that you can't fit in your house, so parking cars seems to be a special case, which must be well defined somewhere. I've thought that there must be a market for "motorized sheds" that you could just park outside your house. Obviously there would be costs involved, at the very least, VED, insurance and MOT. But presumably they could be electric vehicles with very little range so probably no VED. Given that they're going to be very low mileage there's probably the opportunity for a cheap specialist insurance. And surely it can't cost all that much to get them through an MOT each year given that they're hardly ever driven. I see from wikipedia that: "limited use" and agricultural vehicles are exempt from test altogether. If that's true, if your electric shed was an agricultural electric shed (an electric greenhouse?), you might not need the MOT. Or does that mean agricultural vehicles which don't go on the public highway? And what's a limited use vehicle? Okay, here we go: http://www.nfuonline.com/documents/B...nsport%20116%2... To be an agricultural vehicle, it has to fall into one of four specific classes, and i can't see that a mobile shed would. Limited use means (quoting): * It is used for purposes relating to agriculture, horticulture or forestry; and * It is used on public roads only in passing between different areas of land occupied by the same person; and * The distance it travels on public roads in passing between any two such areas does not exceed 1.5 km. There, i think we're in. You have to have two gardens (one could be rented from a friend), or a garden and allotment, less than a mile apart. You then build your electric shed in order to drive between them. You keep your gardening tools in it, so it's for horticultural purposes. Or you build a mobile greenhouse, as i mentioned. Either way, it meets the criteria, it's Limited Use, and you don't have to MOT or pay tax on it. Crossposted to uk.rec.sheds. For some reason I read that as "Composted ...". |
Councils block in illegit driveways
Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying: 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. Why? Because its their bloody property! No, it's the way they use their property which is impacting upon others. You going to start dictating what plants they can plant in their gardens next cough Tree Preservation Orders? or perhaps what type of furniture they're allowed to buy?? And that would impact upon others how? its none of the councils business so long as they don't cause a public nuisance or break planning laws. Which they are. No they're not. So how come the house across the road from me was refused planning permission for a second vehicular access to the road? How come there's a development going on at the moment just down from me which has had vehicular access restrictions placed upon the site? Hiho. Don't like it, don't live in a city. That simple. Or do you think Some village streets are even narrower. Indeed they are. But without the volume of traffic and the residential density. Oh, and without the "I live here, I park here" attitude. What exactly is wrong with that attitude? Why shouldn't people have a reasonable expectation of being able to park near where they live? Because it just ain't practicable, unless you're the most selfish "I'm all right, Jack, sod the rest of you" individual. If your "reasonable expectation" is followed, parking restrictions would evaporate overnight. Just a free-for-all. No regard to obstruction or traffic flow. No red routes. No restriction on unfettered commuter parking. It would be chaos. All that's being argued about, in practice, is the extent of restrictions necessary. Oh, and you may like to bear in mind that every vehicular access from the road to a driveway is a stretch of road lost - 24x7, whether the off-road parking is in use or not - to on-road parking. |
Councils block in illegit driveways
In message
, at 03:27:55 on Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Boltar remarked: No , but in that case they should be allowed to park in their gardens if they want, dropped kerb or not. Why? Because its their bloody property! You going to start dictating what plants they can plant in their gardens next or perhaps what type of furniture they're allowed to buy?? Ever heard of a conservation area or a listed building? They can tell you what colour to paint your front door. Normal housing doesn't have such stringent rules, but neither is it a case of "no rules". -- Roland Perry |
Councils block in illegit driveways
"MIG" wrote in message ... On 20 Feb, 11:48, Tom Anderson wrote: On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, wrote: On Feb 19, 6:27 pm, MIG wrote: I am wondering what legislation allows street parking anyway. I mean, you can't store other furniture in the street that you can't fit in your house, so parking cars seems to be a special case, which must be well defined somewhere. I've thought that there must be a market for "motorized sheds" that you could just park outside your house. Obviously there would be costs involved, at the very least, VED, insurance and MOT. But presumably they could be electric vehicles with very little range so probably no VED. Given that they're going to be very low mileage there's probably the opportunity for a cheap specialist insurance. And surely it can't cost all that much to get them through an MOT each year given that they're hardly ever driven. I see from wikipedia that: "limited use" and agricultural vehicles are exempt from test altogether. If that's true, if your electric shed was an agricultural electric shed (an electric greenhouse?), you might not need the MOT. Or does that mean agricultural vehicles which don't go on the public highway? And what's a limited use vehicle? Okay, here we go: http://www.nfuonline.com/documents/B...nsport%20116%2... To be an agricultural vehicle, it has to fall into one of four specific classes, and i can't see that a mobile shed would. Limited use means (quoting): * It is used for purposes relating to agriculture, horticulture or forestry; and * It is used on public roads only in passing between different areas of land occupied by the same person; and * The distance it travels on public roads in passing between any two such areas does not exceed 1.5 km. There, i think we're in. You have to have two gardens (one could be rented from a friend), or a garden and allotment, less than a mile apart. You then build your electric shed in order to drive between them. You keep your gardening tools in it, so it's for horticultural purposes. Or you build a mobile greenhouse, as i mentioned. Either way, it meets the criteria, it's Limited Use, and you don't have to MOT or pay tax on it. Crossposted to uk.rec.sheds. For some reason I read that as "Composted ...". That would be to uk.rec.gardening........ Steve |
Councils block in illegit driveways
IanB wrote:
I was completely sickened by the interview with the councillor concerned. Her excuse for impounding people's cars was health and safety - "people expect cars to drive up ramps but not across pavements" - whereas actually they are doing it to boost revenue. There is a real Elf & Safety Issue. Look at how much local councils have to pay out each year after being sued for Trip and Slips caused by uneven or rocking slabs. Where I live no person is (yet) heavy enough to break a paving slab under their own weight, yet I see broken slabs everywhere caused by motor vehicles driven on or across footways. The bollards have been built cheaply and look a mess, plus they are an obstruction for partially sighted and disabled people. Why did the council choose to ereect bollards when the cars were on the drive? Why not simply knock on the door or provide 24 hours warning? The only answer can be shear nastiness. Personally I would prefer to see cars parked off road than on road. I hold no remit for car drivers, and I am strongly in favour of parking enforcement, clamping, the lot. The original source suggested that all these people had been repeatedly warned that they needed to have a properly constructed footway crossing complete with dropped kerb. Where I used to live some idiot insisted on parking his (almost)HGV on the footway. Apart from the damage and difficulty in getting past with prams/pushchair etc, the water main beneath the path eventually failed. Now if only it were worth suing such idiots. Jim Chisholm |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On 20 Feb, 15:42, (Sn!pe) wrote:
MIG wrote: Crossposted to uk.rec.sheds. For some reason I read that as "Composted ...". By all accounts, two-year-old compost is wonderfully friable. I think we at utl should crosspost to uk.rec.sheds more often! After all, the major London termini station buildings are referred to as trainsheds... |
Councils block in illegit driveways
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 03:27:55 on Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Boltar remarked: No , but in that case they should be allowed to park in their gardens if they want, dropped kerb or not. Why? Because its their bloody property! You going to start dictating what plants they can plant in their gardens next or perhaps what type of furniture they're allowed to buy?? Ever heard of a conservation area or a listed building? They can tell you what colour to paint your front door. They told a friend of mine (or her landlady, anyway) that she shouldn't have double glazing. This seems a case of priorities not being right. Normal housing doesn't have such stringent rules, but neither is it a case of "no rules". And moreover, in this case, the problem is that get to the private property, you have to go over public property, the kerb, damaging it in the process. I couldn't give two hoots about some halfwit parking a car in their garden, but i don't want to be paying to repair damage they cause in doing it. tom -- At Forkmeeter in 12478, the Wracket Dispersal had reached the first limit of its bounding eastward rush. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 01:16 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk