Parking, obstruction and emergency vehicles.
Discussion
What constitutes obstruction by parked cars?
Where I live there are a series of access roads -back lanes between Edwardian houses - which recently people have started to park in.
One in particular is used a lot for people getting to and from the houses. Getting past a parked car can be a tight squeeze but it's doable. Depending on the size of the parked car, sometimes mirrors have to be folded.
It's annoying but nothing more to me.
However anything bigger than a Range Rover couldn't squeeze past. Delivery vans, builder's trucks bin lorries.
The other day I spotted an ambulance attempt to pass a parked car but fail. It had to reverse and get involved in a multi-point U-turn. It wasn't on a blue light call.
So what constitutes an instruction?
Where I live there are a series of access roads -back lanes between Edwardian houses - which recently people have started to park in.
One in particular is used a lot for people getting to and from the houses. Getting past a parked car can be a tight squeeze but it's doable. Depending on the size of the parked car, sometimes mirrors have to be folded.
It's annoying but nothing more to me.
However anything bigger than a Range Rover couldn't squeeze past. Delivery vans, builder's trucks bin lorries.
The other day I spotted an ambulance attempt to pass a parked car but fail. It had to reverse and get involved in a multi-point U-turn. It wasn't on a blue light call.
So what constitutes an instruction?
Anything that reduces the available road limiting what could otherwise have travelled down it is an obstruction, but that on it's own isn't an offence. It needs to be both an obstruction & unnecessary.
With so many vehicles on the roads, so many residences with so little parking provision you end up with a lot of unnecessary obstructions.
Factor in so few resources to deal with it & not a lot is going to be done about it.
With so many vehicles on the roads, so many residences with so little parking provision you end up with a lot of unnecessary obstructions.
Factor in so few resources to deal with it & not a lot is going to be done about it.
wildcat45 said:
Cheers I guessed something along those lines.
I suppose the crux is unnecessary
They sound like an unnecessary obstruction.I suppose the crux is unnecessary
Essentially roads are provided for driving on, not parking on at all (unless marked bays are provided for that purpose). It's just that society & our use of the car has changed so much in such a relatively short space of time. The cities & roads were built long before the sort of level of car ownership was a consideration, more & more people are living in them with more & more car ownership.
If you like a blind eye is turned to it because of the scale.
I remember as a young Police officer working in city station that we'd regularly get complaints from the fire brigade about double parked cars blocking the roads. This was in an affluent area, with expensive victorian terraced housing & little off road parking. It was also at a time that Police dealt with parking offences (yellow lines etc). You'd have young in service PCs posted to dealing with just that problem on a night duty. They'd be driven around in a car issuing tickets with the driver in radio contact with a fleet of contracted removal trucks. Ticketing & removing dozens & dozens of double parked vehicles a night each.
I'm lucky to have off street parking. The average house where I live has two cars minimum. Add the odd family with older teens and you're talking 4 cars to a house. Many of the properties have garages at the rear but most are way too small for modern cars having been built to house Bullnose Morrises or whatever back in the 1920s. My next door neighbour can only just squeeze his 1960s MGB into his garage.
It's made worse by the fact there are some very large houses in our Edwardian development that were built to front onto pedestrian paths rather than a road. A nice idea in 1901 no doubt but a pain in 2016.
It's made worse by the fact there are some very large houses in our Edwardian development that were built to front onto pedestrian paths rather than a road. A nice idea in 1901 no doubt but a pain in 2016.
Drumroll said:
Even with modern houses the car allocation is 1.5 per house. So even on a modern estate near us the problem isn't much better.
Says who ? That restriction was removed wasn't it?http://www.dft.gov.uk/rmd/project.asp?intProjectID...
PPG13: What's new on parking
11 January 2011
On 3rd January 2011, the Government issued a revised Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 on Transport (PPG 13). This has been done outside of the programme to replace PPG set after the 2006 Barker Review.
What changes were made?
Only paragraphs 49 to 56 of the note have been updated. The key changes to PPG13 are removal of:
restrictions on parking spaces in residential developments; and
the requirement to set high parking charges intended to encourage walking, cycling and the use of public transport.
Councils will now be able to set parking policies they believe are right for their own areas. This could, for example, include encouraging people to travel by car into town centres to use local shops and improve the economic vitality of the area.
It seems to be usual policy for developers to build houses with minimal parking. Two tiny spaces and a cupboard of a "garage" is the absolute maximum.
Such a development has been built near here, all 200,000 - 300,000 quid houses. The people daft enough to be buying them are all four car families, plus of course there are some who bring work vans home. That little development now looks like a sea of cars and vans dumped everywhere, up on pavements, grass verges (now destroyed) and on nearby streets.
Such a development has been built near here, all 200,000 - 300,000 quid houses. The people daft enough to be buying them are all four car families, plus of course there are some who bring work vans home. That little development now looks like a sea of cars and vans dumped everywhere, up on pavements, grass verges (now destroyed) and on nearby streets.
Edited by MoggieMinor on Tuesday 27th December 19:05
vonhosen said:
Anything that reduces the available road limiting what could otherwise have travelled down it is an obstruction, but that on it's own isn't an offence. It needs to be both an obstruction & unnecessary.
With so many vehicles on the roads, so many residences with so little parking provision you end up with a lot of unnecessary obstructions.
Factor in so few resources to deal with it & not a lot is going to be done about it.
I think it depends on where the obstruction is as to whether resources are allocated.With so many vehicles on the roads, so many residences with so little parking provision you end up with a lot of unnecessary obstructions.
Factor in so few resources to deal with it & not a lot is going to be done about it.
I reported a builders 4x4 after it was left 4 nights running, overnight here https://goo.gl/maps/zziJFtYHbtS2 before the yellow lines were out down, and the police sent somebody during the same night, measured the road and vehicle width and issued a ticket.
They told me that the fact the driver should have been clearly aware of the obstruction was the reason it was ticketed right away and not just warned.
The road concerned is used by delivery vehicles serving the businesses behind leftand right, and not even the vans could get past.
MoggieMinor said:
It seems to be usual policy for developers to build houses with minimal parking. Two tiny spaces and a cupboard of a "garage" is the absolute maximum.
Such a development has been built near here, all 200,000 - 300,000 quid houses. The people daft enough to be buying them are all four car families, plus of course there are some who bring work vans home. That little development now looks like a sea of cars and vans dumped everywhere, up on pavements, grass verges (now destroyed) and on nearby streets.
Same on my estate. 3 bed house with parking for 2 cars. I have my van on the drive with half a car. The other car has to go on the road somewhere.Such a development has been built near here, all 200,000 - 300,000 quid houses. The people daft enough to be buying them are all four car families, plus of course there are some who bring work vans home. That little development now looks like a sea of cars and vans dumped everywhere, up on pavements, grass verges (now destroyed) and on nearby streets.
justanother5tar said:
MoggieMinor said:
It seems to be usual policy for developers to build houses with minimal parking. Two tiny spaces and a cupboard of a "garage" is the absolute maximum.
Such a development has been built near here, all 200,000 - 300,000 quid houses. The people daft enough to be buying them are all four car families, plus of course there are some who bring work vans home. That little development now looks like a sea of cars and vans dumped everywhere, up on pavements, grass verges (now destroyed) and on nearby streets.
Same on my estate. 3 bed house with parking for 2 cars. I have my van on the drive with half a car. The other car has to go on the road somewhere.Such a development has been built near here, all 200,000 - 300,000 quid houses. The people daft enough to be buying them are all four car families, plus of course there are some who bring work vans home. That little development now looks like a sea of cars and vans dumped everywhere, up on pavements, grass verges (now destroyed) and on nearby streets.
wildcat45 said:
Where I live there are a series of access roads -back lanes between Edwardian houses - which recently people have started to park in.
I can't tell from what you've written if these are roads in the normal sense or at they more like alleyways? If there was a fire in one of the houses would a fire engine need to get through or is there some other means of access?justanother5tar said:
MoggieMinor said:
It seems to be usual policy for developers to build houses with minimal parking. Two tiny spaces and a cupboard of a "garage" is the absolute maximum.
Such a development has been built near here, all 200,000 - 300,000 quid houses. The people daft enough to be buying them are all four car families, plus of course there are some who bring work vans home. That little development now looks like a sea of cars and vans dumped everywhere, up on pavements, grass verges (now destroyed) and on nearby streets.
Same on my estate. 3 bed house with parking for 2 cars. I have my van on the drive with half a car. The other car has to go on the road somewhere.Such a development has been built near here, all 200,000 - 300,000 quid houses. The people daft enough to be buying them are all four car families, plus of course there are some who bring work vans home. That little development now looks like a sea of cars and vans dumped everywhere, up on pavements, grass verges (now destroyed) and on nearby streets.
"So what constitutes an in[ob]struction?"
Queried this with the local fire brigade after neighbour complained about my car parked in the lane outside leaving "no room for emergency vehicles."
Given that the adjacent supermarket suppliers drove an artic. down it every day, I wrote to the fire HQ, who replied they need 3.4 metres.
Sent copy letter to dim-wit neighbour, with a measurement of the road width, less my car (five metres free) who then complained to the council that my bedroom light was keeping her awake.
I sent her a roll of brown paper and some Sticky Fixers, with apologies for her insomnia.
Now going through the same thing in the resident's car park here, with one elderly resident who doesn't drive but has a lot of visitors who do: "There's no room for fire engines with your huge car." (It's a Dacia estate.)
A fire pump arrived on Christmas morning, lights ablaze, and parked, blocking us all in, so she needs to find another obstruction to moan about. :-)
It never ends.
Queried this with the local fire brigade after neighbour complained about my car parked in the lane outside leaving "no room for emergency vehicles."
Given that the adjacent supermarket suppliers drove an artic. down it every day, I wrote to the fire HQ, who replied they need 3.4 metres.
Sent copy letter to dim-wit neighbour, with a measurement of the road width, less my car (five metres free) who then complained to the council that my bedroom light was keeping her awake.
I sent her a roll of brown paper and some Sticky Fixers, with apologies for her insomnia.
Now going through the same thing in the resident's car park here, with one elderly resident who doesn't drive but has a lot of visitors who do: "There's no room for fire engines with your huge car." (It's a Dacia estate.)
A fire pump arrived on Christmas morning, lights ablaze, and parked, blocking us all in, so she needs to find another obstruction to moan about. :-)
It never ends.
Edited by Slushbox on Wednesday 28th December 12:27
wildcat45 said:
What constitutes obstruction by parked cars?
I'd like an answer too, as according to the local council and the police, this car parked in front of a shop door and therefore preventing anyone from entering or more importantly, leaving in the event of a fire, is not causing an obstruction. So they refuse to do anything about it.
Edited by mp3manager on Monday 2nd January 17:07
mp3manager said:
I'd like an answer too, as according to the local council and the police, this car parked in front of a shop door and therefore preventing anyone from entering or more importantly, leaving in the event of a fire, is not causing an obstruction. So they refuse to do anything about it.
Has the shop owner pissed someone off?Edited by mp3manager on Monday 2nd January 17:07
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff