Sharrowvale Parking Scheme - new thread

[MR BENN]

except i was behind a bus the other day, it was pumping out more noxious fumes in 5 mins than i do in a month, go figure that, im sorry, but sheffield council are just plane mental!!!!

 

they always have been and always will be loopy. like ive said before drink-up and brewery spring to mind:D

[Captain_Scarlet]

What is concrete proof of the success of a residents parking scheme?

 

There are a now large number of permit only bays, where commuters can't park. Far fewer commuters park in that area. Indisputable, concrete facts.

No, that is a politician's proof. what is a concrete fact is that one without a parking permit may not park in these bays, this includes 'commuters'.

Go and have a look on Ecclesall Road and see the time limited parking bays. It was free all-day parking out of clearway times before and people used to complain that it was clogged with commuters. Now they say they can always get a space. Proven positive benefit.

You have a grudge against people who work for sure. What's with preventing people who work, contribute tax money and not let them do so? There are other people than evil not bus using commuters!

You don't get charged £35, it's £36 and it's not to park outside your house, it's within the scheme area.

1/ why do residents have to pay to have a permit which is rightfully theirs as they live within the prison zone? How hypocrite is a scheme allegedly targetting residents (and the evil commuter) and neither guarantees a parking space (or two) outside the drivers' house or a space altogether. Someone paying for the parking tax and not finding a space would find this slightly annoying to say the least.

Your Councillors approved it.

They're not my councillors.

As I said in post #817, availability of parking is a "car problem".

That these schemes do not cure.

On Ecclesall Road and Sharrow Vale Road, people now can't park all day and wander off into town or to work like they used to. Those spaces are time limited and are enforced, so there are now far more parking opportunities for visitors than there were before.

 

That's a fact and is a positive benefit for visitors.

It is not since the scheme target commuters. A commutor is a visitor to the area.

A commuter is someone that might stop by the shops near his parked car on his way back home.

All that's gone, another stab in the back of working people, shops owners.

And you aren't responding to my challenge:

 

"So how can you back up your contention about it being just a money making scheme?"

 

So we are at an impasse aren't we?

The scheme which is quasi universally described as a money making schemes on these boards is a money making scheme as there is no reason for it to to be paid for.

Originally Posted by Planner1

81% didn't say anything, so are we to assume they are content to let things stay as they are, or not? Or do we discount them altogether?

81% of whoever didn't bother replying to the Council as they mistrust it and believe Council will do what it wants regardless of what people want or what should be done. It's trust in your the issue and daft things you do for kicks.

You pay taxes to pay for services. The fact is that you don't pay enough taxes to fund the level of services you want. Other countries in the EU have much higher taxes than here, that's why they have better public services.

Western EU countries pay less taxes than us (Save Denmark where breathing is taxed). Look at France, when a council's bored there they build a 10 mile tram line for kicks (20 networks in construction and due to open before 2012). Public services are dreadful on the Continent, which hole you been living in these past twenty years? Whilst they are buliding tram networks there are little bus services, little or no regional or national coach network, ambulances are largerly privatised, their roads are paved. We have the Lord Mayor's Jag to pay for I guess.

We get frustrated too when we can't do things quickly because of all the formalities and we can't deliver what we see is needed because there is never enough money and the Government won't let us. The Council is not a business and it operates under constraints which businesses don't have to contend with, so it's unfair to make comparisons.

You have the money or the Government has your money, it's your problem to do what you have to do. It's our problem to tell you you're rubbish if you don't. We aren't asking for F1 quality surfacing on the A621, just no holes. I stopped on Saturday morning to measure a pothole on Dore Road, I could fit two wheels in length into to it.

As you'll be fully aware, getting an integrated public transport system within the current legislative framework is nigh-on impossible.

Considering the definition of "integrated public transport" I'd love to know how you create such a network that includes buses. What do you make buses work together with? Buses are meant t orun every odd minute (as should trams), how different is it to creating a bus network that does not suck in general? Isn't a good bus network a network that has high frequency, capacity, low prices, large and intersecting network?

Poor motorist? £36 per annum for a permit, 20p per day for a visitor permit or 20p per hour pay & display. How much did it cost you to fill your tank this week? Poor motorist - give me a break!

Paying for fuel is normal, an expenditure that is normally calculated by the car owner. Parking for outside one's house is not and is an extra expenditure, not a normal one. Residents should not be paying, nor should visitors.

[Guest sibon]

except i was behind a bus the other day, it was pumping out more noxious fumes in 5 mins than i do in a month, go figure that, im sorry, but sheffield council are just plane mental!!!!

 

Unless you ride a bike all month, I doubt that you are correct. The stuff that you can see is unburnt carbon, if you can see it, it is probably harmless. A car engine pumps out burnt carbon, CO2, which will take up much more space than the stuff you saw... and cause more damage too.

[Guest sibon]

Fine for visitors, but what about the residents?

 

I mean 8.00 until 6.30...

 

That is keeping people without permits (who live there) out of their homes for longer than is necessary. 10.00 until 12.00 and 2.00 until 4.00 would have been much better for the residents.

 

The clue is in the name... "Residents' Parking Permits". Try buying one, you can, if you are not in an HMO. If you are, try sharing one, or buying a book of day permits, or try paying 20p per hour. The parking schemes are excellent, unless you are a student in a house with five car drivers... in which case, I suggest that you adjust your lifestyle to match your choice of housing.

[Planner1]

And have you got more than 6% post scheme approval rate from the people who live there (and yes i am 1) that would be positive proof, and i will ask again, where have all these cars gone that cannot park in the area, do you actually know?, or is it a case as i suspect, that you don't really care as it wasn't the primary reason for this schemem in the first place

 

Can we get something straight here. You keep asking things like - "do you actually know?" I don't work for your Council, so no, I don't know unless I go and ask someone at the Council. Same as you can.

 

As it happens, I am aware that the Council have done parking occupancy surveys on roads adjoining the Sharrowvale pemit zone, so yes, THEY know what has changed. I believe they changed some of the waiting restrictions in the adjoining area to deal with some of the issues which arose.

 

If you know the history behind these permit schemes, they all came out of a consultation which was done in all of the areas around the city centre a few years ago, which asked whether people were experiencing parking problems and whether they wanted a residents parking scheme. From that consultation the strategy of having the peripheral parking zone (PPZ) was developed and approved by the Councillors. All of the recent schemes which have been implemented are part of that concept, ie Bromhall, Broomhill, Sharrowvale and Crookesmoor. The primary purpose of these schemes has always been to give residents in areas around the city centre relief from commuter parking problems.

[Guest sibon]

Can we get something straight here. You keep asking things like - "do you actually know?" I don't work for your Council, so no, I don't know unless I go and ask someone at the Council. Same as you can.

 

As it happens, I am aware that the Council have done parking occupancy surveys on roads adjoining the Sharrowvale pemit zone, so yes, THEY know what has changed. I believe they changed some of the waiting restrictions in the adjoining area to deal with some of the issues whic arose.

 

If you know the history behind these permit schemes, they all came out of a consultation which was done in all of the areas around the city centre a few years ago, which asked whether people were experiencing parking problems and whether they wanted a residents parking scheme. From that consultation the strategy of having the peripheral parking zone (PPZ) was developed and approved by the Councillors. All of the recent schemes which have been implemented are part of that concept, ie Bromhall, Broomhill, Sharrowvale and Crookesmoor. The primary purpose of these schemes has always been to give residents in areas around the city centre relief from commuter parking problems.

 

And, on the whole, they are working really well. It is only those who choose not to pay that have a problem.

[jezzyjj]

And if they made Ecclesall Road a motorway the travel times would also drop...

Simplistic thinking and simply incorrect.

 

But they won't upgrade the public transport to one which is a viable alternative, or the road...

They cannot as I've explained above several time and how on earth could you upgrade Eccy road.?

[jezzyjj]

As do we, not just bulldozed with stats, resident parking schemes are just money spinning schemes, they do NOT actually solve any car problems, and i would challenge you to show concrete evidence to us that shows it does help and why it helps

I live in the Sharrow area and although i disagree with how it was implemented, the parking scheme has improved things where I live. The roads are no longer clogged with commuter cars and there is less traffic on the road which is also nicer. So less chance of the many local moggies being run over.

[jezzyjj]

No, that is a politician's proof. what is a concrete fact is that one without a parking permit may not park in these bays, this includes 'commuters'.You have a grudge against people who work for sure. What's with preventing people who work, contribute tax money and not let them do so? There are other people than evil not bus using commuters!1/ why do residents have to pay to have a permit which is rightfully theirs as they live within the prison zone? How hypocrite is a scheme allegedly targetting residents (and the evil commuter) and neither guarantees a parking space (or two) outside the drivers' house or a space altogether. Someone paying for the parking tax and not finding a space would find this slightly annoying to say the least.They're not my councillors.That these schemes do not cure.It is not since the scheme target commuters. A commutor is a visitor to the area.

A commuter is someone that might stop by the shops near his parked car on his way back home.

All that's gone, another stab in the back of working people, shops owners.The scheme which is quasi universally described as a money making schemes on these boards is a money making scheme as there is no reason for it to to be paid for.81% of whoever didn't bother replying to the Council as they mistrust it and believe Council will do what it wants regardless of what people want or what should be done. It's trust in your the issue and daft things you do for kicks.Western EU countries pay less taxes than us (Save Denmark where breathing is taxed). Look at France, when a council's bored there they build a 10 mile tram line for kicks (20 networks in construction and due to open before 2012). Public services are dreadful on the Continent, which hole you been living in these past twenty years? Whilst they are buliding tram networks there are little bus services, little or no regional or national coach network, ambulances are largerly privatised, their roads are paved. We have the Lord Mayor's Jag to pay for I guess.You have the money or the Government has your money, it's your problem to do what you have to do. It's our problem to tell you you're rubbish if you don't. We aren't asking for F1 quality surfacing on the A621, just no holes. I stopped on Saturday morning to measure a pothole on Dore Road, I could fit two wheels in length into to it.Considering the definition of "integrated public transport" I'd love to know how you create such a network that includes buses. What do you make buses work together with? Buses are meant t orun every odd minute (as should trams), how different is it to creating a bus network that does not suck in general? Isn't a good bus network a network that has high frequency, capacity, low prices, large and intersecting network?Paying for fuel is normal, an expenditure that is normally calculated by the car owner. Parking for outside one's house is not and is an extra expenditure, not a normal one. Residents should not be paying, nor should visitors.

I was going to tackle the numerous errors, poor logic and faulty reasoning, but seeing as you simply misread or ignore anything that doesn't fit in with your poor persecuted world view, I decided to walk on thumbtacks instead as it would be less painful.

[fritzthecat]

i think Captain_Scarlet's point was, why should we have to pay £36 a year to park outside our own house? if it was £5 then it would be ok, that would have covered the admin costs (cost of printing permits, postage, time spent issuing ect) so the rest is just pure profit to the council