Sharrowvale Parking Scheme - new thread

[HotPhil]

None of the schemes are residents parking schemes though. Residents may have asked for such a scheme, but got a permit-parking scheme and thought they were getting what they asked for. If you look at any of the signs, literature etc "residents" isn't mentioned - it's all "permit holders only".

[Tomataheeed]

Going off subject a little, but perhaps Planner1 can answer this one sensibly. A guy I know renovated one of those huge houses on Ecclesall Road, opposite the Pomona for student accommodation. He wanted to tarmac the whole of the front area to make sufficient parking for at least six cars. This would have allowed the drivers to back out of their parking spaces and enter Ecclesall Road front end on.

 

The council were having none of it, the best that he could get was four spaces where two cars parked behind another two cars. If one of the drivers of the cars parked at the front wants to get out the driver of the car at the rear has to reverse out into the road, as does the driver of the car parked at the front.

 

He couldn't get final approval until the four parking spaces were clearly white lined, obviously students are too stupid to park a car without white lines being painted. Isn't more cars parked off the road that can enter the road front ways on far better than the councils stupid decision?

 

Pulling down a few trees and tarmacing over grass, bushes and flowers? Just for people to park cars? No thanks. It really bugs me when people ruin the look of streets just to get their precious lump of metal 6 feet closer to the front door. I'm also sure all that extra tarmac doesn't help when we have flooding.

[fritzthecat]

Pulling down a few trees and tarmacing over grass, bushes and flowers? Just for people to park cars? No thanks. It really bugs me when people ruin the look of streets just to get their precious lump of metal 6 feet closer to the front door. I'm also sure all that extra tarmac doesn't help when we have flooding.

 

And what about all those new bus lanes??, they were origionally tree's, grass and bushes ect, and a there are a lot more of them around!!!

[Merry_Legs]

Some developments have planning conditions that the residents CANNOT obtain parking permits.

 

Have to say, mine's been pretty useless as I can't park during the day due to Pay & Display.

Can't park at night cos of all the restaurant customers.

[fritzthecat]

Have to say, mine's been pretty useless as I can't park during the day due to Pay & Display.

Can't park at night cos of all the restaurant customers.

 

Working well for you then i see, but at the end of the day, the council are not bothered as they got your £36 anyway!!!!

[Captain_Scarlet]

Some developments have planning conditions that the residents CANNOT obtain parking permits.

That has to be borderline illegal: "you cannot own a car in this area".

None of the schemes are residents parking schemes though. Residents may have asked for such a scheme, but got a permit-parking scheme and thought they were getting what they asked for. If you look at any of the signs, literature etc "residents" isn't mentioned - it's all "permit holders only".

Permits which are delivered to residents.

This is a planning development control decision, it's not my area of expertise, but I do know that they would view that location as being very "accessible" by public transport, walking etc, so they'd probably want to limit the number of parking spaces as the location should appeal to those who don't have a car.

 

You would be able to ask the planning officer concerned about why that was decided. Just look up the Planning Enquiries number for m the Council's website.

Where's that pro-choice you mentionned the other day gone. You're now saying that the Council is telling that person that the house residents can simply not have a car and have to use buses.

I'm not unreasonable, if the owner wanted to use grass outside his property and have some spaces outside the grounds where there is now a patch of grass then yes, sod him. If the owner wants to tarmac his garden, so the Council. It is a shame to remove grass from what appears to be a large property with grounds but it is his choice to make yet more student flats.

What should have been debated is whether the owner can make students flats, not if he can have as much parking as his garden can cope with.

Can someone explain to me why the residents don't put their cars on their drives?

Not everyone lives in Millhouses... I'd love a drive but then I'd have to sacrifice my living room. I'm keener on my fireplace (where I burn wood from unsustainable sources) than ruining the character of my Victorian property. I am sad however that I don't have a drive to park my car up it though it seems, even if I wanted one, the Council would prevent me from having a drive should I have the space to place one.

Central Government tasks Local Authorities with reducinng casualties and gives them stringent targets to achieve, so they must act.

We all know that working with targets is the wrng way to go, it's an arbitrary measure and forces people working under them to meet the targets regardless of how.

It's a bit presumptious of you to say "needlessly speedbumped". Nowhere is "needlessly" traffic calmed. It's only usually done in areas which have a poor accident record. You may not like traffic calming, but it is proven to reduce casualties.

Off course traffic can be needlessly calmed. Sheffield has A and B roads with bumps designed to make drivers slow down below the speed limit put in place and deemed safe. I've just been to Leeds today (in my car, and I reved for no reasons to get more gases out) and they have 40 mph limits on roads that traverse commercial and residential areas. I'm not talking about something like Penistone Road (which is a 40mph road at least despite forgetting to put the correct signs up), I mean a single carriageway with Coops, corner shops, parked cars and on street housing. Not going to see that around these parts.

They're not needed for those that drive carefully and properly. I can see they help with accident stats and that they're one of the most cost-effective methods of doing so. But they do inconvenience everybody when it's a tiny minority that have/cause accidents. Trouble is I can't really think of a better, more cost-effective way of local government to tackle it. Plenty that central government and Police should do though!

It's always the same people who continuously drive sillilly. I purposely did not say 'repeatedly driving wrecklessly' as this criterion is in the eyes of the beholder and not really objective. It is always the same that drive like pillucks. It's not hard to spot them, hurt them but banning them and leaving the roads for those who drive appropriately (another well chosen word).

[Planner1]

That has to be borderline illegal: "you cannot own a car in this area".

 

Perfectly legal, they're just saying you can't have a permit to park in this area. Residents will be aware of this BEFORE they move in. Most developments where this is applied have very limited parking and are designed to appeal to people who have no car.

[HotPhil]

Have to say, mine's been pretty useless as I can't park during the day due to Pay & Display.

Can't park at night cos of all the restaurant customers.

Was pretty sure permit holders could use the P&D bays too? Have you checked?

[Planner1]

Permits which are delivered to residents.

 

No, it's not just residents. Businesses can have them, as can visitors.

[fritzthecat]

Perfectly legal, they're just saying you can't have a permit to park in this area. Residents will be aware of this BEFORE they move in. Most developments where this is applied have very limited parking and are designed to appeal to people who have no car.

 

WRONG, i live in the sharrowvale parking tax area, and i didn't know about it till AFTER i moved in, and then i needed proof that i lived there before they would allow me to be robbed