Sharrowvale Parking Scheme - new thread

[WoodForWood]

Because it isn't an efficient way to work. If they have to drive around looking for "legal" places to park, people who park illegally and deserve a ticket will have the opportunity to get away with it.

 

As you've been told times many, drivers are usually given 5 minutes to return before being ticketed and the parking attendants do not have quotas.

 

Hi Planner1, I appreciate your comments on here... good to have a (former) inside voice.

 

What of other people's work efficiency? Are rule enforcers or council employees the only ones who matter? Parking restrictions in some of Sharrow Vale during quiet daytime M-F periods cause unhelpful and excessive problems for those delivering or working at residents' houses. I narrowly avoided a ticket as I tried to sort out a parking permit inside an old person's house (it took ages for her to unsuccessfully look for the permits before eventually borrowing one from the neighbour). The almost complete lack of vehicles on the road demonstrated to me that the prowling CEOs were not targeting parking problems but instead aiming for a hit rate; despite not having an official 'quota' from above. I can only imagine that 'good' and 'bad' days are measured unofficially in terms of a slap count. It wouldn't be unusual - they are only* human.

 

"How many today, Dave?"

"112!"

"Nice one!"

 

* I resisted the urge to say 'barely'

 

 

Note to self; don't get trapped in SF for days again...

[HotPhil]

Actually try blaming Thatcher for destroying a very good public transport system that was in South Yorkshire, that meant less poolution, less congestion due to less cars and more parking.

your post makes a lot of sense, but I don't get that bit.

if a decision was actually bad, who's more to blame, the person who got it wrong or the subsequent government for doing nothing about it for 20 years? i'm not sure that the public transport, and hence Sharrowvale parking, would be that different anyway.

[jezzyjj]

your post makes a lot of sense, but I don't get that bit.

if a decision was actually bad, who's more to blame, the person who got it wrong or the subsequent government for doing nothing about it for 20 years?

It much harder to put genies back in bottle particlarly if you aren't allowed to. Which I believe is the case for not having a publically owned, public transport system here anymore, in the form it was before.

 

i'm not sure that the public transport, and hence Sharrowvale parking, would be that different anyway.

Sheffield used to have lowest car ownership in country, congestion was not the isue it is now and the no. of commuter cars parked around city and surrounding areas has risen every year since the removal of the effective and cheap public transport sytem, which everyone benefitted from, including the drivers.

 

Apparently the old system was dismantled to allow competition which it was insisted everyone would benefit from. Well except those who used the buses, had to breathe in the increased pollution or sat in their cars in jams that previously did not exist whilst looking for somewhere to park. It was a very political and not just an ideological decision.

 

The real real reason it was dismantled was because it worked so well and there's no way the Thatcher government would allow any success to be seen to come from the 'Soviet Republic of South Yorkshire'.

[Planner1]

Hi Planner1, I appreciate your comments on here... good to have a (former) inside voice.

 

What of other people's work efficiency? Are rule enforcers or council employees the only ones who matter? Parking restrictions in some of Sharrow Vale during quiet daytime M-F periods cause unhelpful and excessive problems for those delivering or working at residents' houses. I narrowly avoided a ticket as I tried to sort out a parking permit inside an old person's house (it took ages for her to unsuccessfully look for the permits before eventually borrowing one from the neighbour). The almost complete lack of vehicles on the road demonstrated to me that the prowling CEOs were not targeting parking problems but instead aiming for a hit rate; despite not having an official 'quota' from above. I can only imagine that 'good' and 'bad' days are measured unofficially in terms of a slap count. It wouldn't be unusual - they are only* human.

 

"How many today, Dave?"

"112!"

"Nice one!"

 

* I resisted the urge to say 'barely'

 

 

Note to self; don't get trapped in SF for days again...

 

As you say, people are only human, but as has been said on here by people who know, there are no quotas given to parking attendants.

 

You must admit that the particular circumstance you quote was unusual, most people will probably use visitor permits and have some to hand when they are expecting visitors.

 

Nothing is ever perfect, but, the current situation is better than having the road completely parked end-to-end with cars, which mostly stay all day, so you woldn't even be able to park on the same road as the property you are attending.

 

The permit parking schemes are reviewed after they have been in operation for a while and people get the chance to say what changes they want to see. Many of these are implemented. Whether bays should be permit only or should allow pay & display is always a difficult one to judge, the balance of the parking mix is looked at in the review.

[MR BENN]

When did he post an 'anti-car' rant? I certainly missed it.

 

the last thing i can be accused of is being anti-car ! im totally pro car and want more breaks given to drivers instead of buses ,which for most of the day are at least half empty. i was sttod outside our local shop in high green this morning and in a space of 3 minutes there were 6 buses come up the road (88 76 66 77 and 2 75"s} and there were not more than 10 people on them in total.when will the council realize they will never get people out of their cars.

[MR BENN]

Hard to find in amongst all the "I've got a 3 litre diesel Discovery" posts (each to their own, I'm sure it's a car to be rightly proud of) but here's an example http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=4356616&postcount=30

 

that was a sarcastic reply to planner as to him all drivers are anti social -ive never said an anti car rant

[coolkiex]

When I used to live around Sharrow I never had any problems parking my car and my girlfriends, not even on most match days!!

 

Commuters weren't a problem at all! And the people who wanted this scheme to go ahead didn't even have a car or had private driveway, they just didn't want people coming around and park in their "street".

 

So at the end the council seems quite happy with all the new income, and parking problems are still there, worst for people who didn't even want or need this scheme.

 

Regarding parking attendants... what can I say! they are only doing the job they are paid for... and as in any other proffesion you have the good and the bad ones.

[jezzyjj]

when will the council realize they will never get people out of their cars.

Of course you can get people out of their cars. You simply make the alternatives preferable. Though there are plenty of idiots who will never relinquish their cars, regardless of anything or anybody else.

But as the buses are now privately owned then it's kind of hard for the council to properly sort the issue. Good public transport is not something the private sector will ever be able to provide as it's not as profitable to provide a good service than it is a barely adequate one.

Public transport to work effectively, needs to service all areas on a regular basis, not just the cherry picked busy routes and to work coherently with other types of transport.

It should be a public service, after all it benefits all of us, even if we do not directly use it.

[jezzyjj]

When I used to live around Sharrow I never had any problems parking my car and my girlfriends, not even on most match days!!

 

Commuters weren't a problem at all! And the people who wanted this scheme to go ahead didn't even have a car or had private driveway, they just didn't want people coming around and park in their "street".

We have a parking fascist on our street who doesn't like people parking in 'her' spot and was a huge supporter of the scheme, but not many private drives in area it has to be said.

There's certainly been a huge reduction of cars parked by commuters since the sheme has started as Sharrow was certainly becoming a commuter car park even if it wasn't when you lived there.

[MR BENN]

Of course you can get people out of their cars. You simply make the alternatives preferable. Though there are plenty of idiots who will never relinquish their cars, regardless of anything or anybody else.

But as the buses are now privately owned then it's kind of hard for the council to properly sort the issue. Good public transport is not something the private sector will ever be able to provide as it's not as profitable to provide a good service than it is a barely adequate one.

Public transport to work effectively, needs to service all areas on a regular basis, not just the cherry picked busy routes and to work coherently with other types of transport.

It should be a public service, after all it benefits all of us, even if we do not directly use it.

 

no mattr how good public transport is ,there is one thing it can never provide -door to door service -which is what cars do very well. i would never give up my car and use public transport