SamJ89 Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 The Netherthorpe Fawcett Street Parking area is to become a Controlled Parking Zone, I live in the area and parking is non-issue, nor have we or our neighbours been consulted about this CPZ which is to enforced from the 1st August. Sheffield Council will now be taking £108 from us when we like many other hard working couples and families in the area are already struggling. We and several of our neighbours would like to fight this but we're not sure of the best method, or if there is anything we can actually do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Thc council say they consulted residents- https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/roads/works/schemes/upperthorpe.html But this was probably in very small print in Klingon at the back of Exchange and Mart. Having said that, when they imposed this tax on the residents of Sharrowvale, I wrote opposing the scheme, I went to public meetings and asked for futher balloting and even exclusion for the street (with the support of the neighbours) I was in and they ignored every request - not even bothering to take minutes of the public meetings. In the end 15% of the residents voted for the scheme and it was imposed on the rest - purely because of the cash generation - they now raise more than £1000000 per year from parking schemes - this partly offsets the £33M of unpaid council taxes they can't be bothered to collect!!! Unfortunately I don't think you have a hope of any change of mind once they have tethered their cash cow to your car. Sorry - but write to your councillor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No User Name Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 When will details of the scam be posted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 From the council website "the Upperthorpe permit parking scheme as advertised in March 2012 and considered previously by the Cabinet Highways C ommittee in December 2012." So it was only 18 months ago - they can't expect the residents to have changed (or changed their minds) in that time can they? </sarcasm> I quote... --------------- WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR SHEFFIELD PEOPLE? 2.1 Managing kerbside parking in residential streets to ensure convenient, safe access to premises contributes to creating ‘great places to live’ and ‘safe and secure communities’. 2.2 Introduction of a permit parking schemes in this area contributes to the Council’s policy of completing of the peripheral parking zones around the city centre, so as to improve access to local premises, and to manage demand for car travel into and around the city centre so as to manage levels of traffic congestion and air pollution. This is turn contributes to ‘a strong and competitive economy’, better health and wellbeing’, ‘a great place to live’ and ‘an environmentally responsible city’. ------------------- What a pile of condescending rubbish. ---------- Post added 03-06-2014 at 22:04 ---------- Their document (URL above) contains some factual inaccuracies, and if you are willing to fight you might get the most recent proposal (to implement the 2012 consultation) rejected as the document that proposes its introduction is wrong. They would then have gone beyond the date by which that consultation is valid and they would have to go out to consultation again. Or they might ignore you... ---------- Post added 03-06-2014 at 22:11 ---------- 2900 leaflets were distributed - In total 6 people were in support of the scheme, 57 did not support the scheme and 19 raised comments and questions regarding the design/operation of the scheme. So... 0.2% of people wanted it 1.9% didn't want it so 90% of those that responded didn't want it 97.9% expressed no opinion So they decided to impose it on you Typical money grabbing, resident-ignoring, council And yet they say... "The primary aim of the proposals is to help residents and their visitors to be able to park close to their homes." But they cannot guarantee that you will be able to... "People who are happy with the proposals tend not to comment." - RUBBISH - see other threads "The decision to increase charges for parking permits was not taken lightly and still offers value for money compared to similar schemes in other cities." - RUBBISH see other threads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaze1981 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 These bits would make me laugh if it didn't make me so angry..... "Managing kerbside parking in residential streets to ensure convenient, safe access to premises contributes to creating ‘great places to live’ and ‘safe and secure communities’." "The primary aim of the proposals is to help residents and their visitors to be able to park close to their homes." If that is the councils aim, then I think someone should tell their planning department. There's a hostel currently being built in Handsworth by Keepmoat for Sanctuary Housing. After Sheffield City Council giving the land away to Sanctuary in a closed meeting (a whole other story), they've allowed them to build right up to the edge of the boundary line. This has left Keepmoat with absolutely nowhere on the actual site to unload delivery vehicles. So instead, they park in the middle of the (narrow) road, and completely block the road until they've finished unloading. Nothing can get up and down the road. Nothing at all. I've had missed shopping orders, missed deliveries..... I recently ordered new laminate floor and the delivery van couldn't access the road because it was blocked by a Keepmoat delivery vehicle. The floor was dropped off on the next road along, and I had to get a friend to help me carry it round to my road. Despite going through a lengthy complaints process with the council, they just basically shrugged their shoulders and said there was nothing they could do. The Highways Department said that because Keepmoat haven't applied for a traffic regulation order, each and every time they close / block the road for deliveries to be made, they're unlawful road closures. But Highways said there was nothing they could do, and I'd have to ring the police if they closed the road. (If I did this, I'd be ringing the police 4 or 5 times a day. I'm sure that would go down well) Sorry for rambling on, it just really annoys me when the council come off with such rubbish about ensuring safe and convenient access, yet their own Planning Department knew that this building scheme would have no choice but to block the road every day for deliveries, yet did nothing about it. But, it should come as no surprise, as the hostel is a joint venture between Sanctuary and the council. They wanted it as large as possible, with as many rooms as possible, leaving no site access whilst the building work is going on. Oh, and to top it all off, the hostel will have 20 self contained apartments in it. And the hostel will be staffed Monday to Friday. How many car parking spaces did planning recommend? 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resident Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 How many car parking spaces did planning recommend? 6. Let's be frank with this though, how many people living in hostels actually afford to run a car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaze1981 Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 Let's be frank with this though, how many people living in hostels actually afford to run a car? This is true, and a good point. But with the hostel being staffed, plus visitors, I still think it's too few. There'll be social workers, support staff.... plus the residents visitors. The original plan submitted by Sanctuary actually had 10 parking spaces. It was on advice from the council that these were reduced down to 7, with Sanctuary saying: "We have discussed parking requirements with our client and the service providers, and with the aim of maintaining further on-street parking have been able to reduce the number of spaces to 7, any fewer was thought to be insufficient." *My earlier post saying 6 spaces was incorrect. There are 7 in total because I see they've included a disabled parking bay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medusa Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 So basically the council are just pushing the people who used to have plenty of room to park in the area further and further up into residential areas (using the new double yellow lines which were put down a few months ago) and then forcing them to pay for fewer parking spaces? That seems very sensible to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geared Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 In total 6 people were in support of the scheme, 57 did not support the scheme and 19 raised comments and questions regarding the design/operation of the scheme. So... 0.2% of people wanted it 1.9% didn't want it so 90% of those that responded didn't want it 97.9% expressed no opinion So they decided to impose it on you Isn't there some kind of law against crap like that? If there isn't one, then there should be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluecanary Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 So basically the council are just pushing the people who used to have plenty of room to park in the area further and further up into residential areas (using the new double yellow lines which were put down a few months ago) and then forcing them to pay for fewer parking spaces? That seems very sensible to me. I did think they went way over the top with their double yellow lines which took up around half of the previously available parking space, and particularly that not situated directly outside residential properties! I can only imagine that they got a job lot of yellow paint cheap and were desperate to use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.