Taxpayers' Funds Proposed To Be Wasted On Unwanted & Ineffective Parking Scheme

[fools]

15 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

I have just spent nearly £80 on planters(barrels) to stop drivers using the grass verges to park

Perhaps they're far-righters conspiring against you. Doesn't happen around my way.

 

There's always one. How very passive aggressive. wonder what the neighbours call you.

 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by fools

[Rockers rule]

13 minutes ago, fools said:

Perhaps they're far-righters conspiring against you. Doesn't happen around my way.

 

There's always one. How very passive aggressive. wonder what the neighbours call you.

 

 

They're probably thinking the lady down the road has a drink problem with the amount of 'empty' barrels on't verge 🤣.

 

Sorry Annie  couldn't resist  .

[Resident]

22 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

I have just spent nearly £80 on planters(barrels) to stop drivers using the grass verges to park and drive on (and destroying the kerbs and guttering in the process). 

Sadly driving standards are so low and enforcement so lax they must be persuaded at my 'expense' to stick to the road.

If vehicle owners were considerate there would far less need for "...paint, camera's, signs, bus gates,...". Yes the "...old street scene has long gone, taken over by"... cars, whose owners follow each other like sheep. If drivers had the skills they could increase parking availability by at least a third, reduce journey times, improve everybody's environment and safety.

It is easy- park inline on the outside of the curve of the road. Sadly more paint is going to be needed to help the average driver  avoid having to think.

Is the verge owned by you or the council? 

If it's the council's then you need to remove the planters as you are commiting an offence under the Highways Act 1980. You're not only obstructing LEGAL right to pass, you're also causing damage as your planters will be killing the grass.

 

Quote

 

In common law under the Highways Act 1980, the public have the right to pass and repass over the full width of the highway (includes roads, pavements and verges). There is no legal right to park on a road, verge or footway.

Waiting restrictions (shown by yellow lines) apply to the entire width of the public highway from the centre of the road to the boundary on the same side of the road. Therefore parking on a verge or pavement adjacent to a carriageway where a waiting restriction applies could result in a driver being issued a parking ticket even if their vehicle is not encroaching onto any waiting restriction road markings.

Where no waiting restrictions are present on the road, parking on a grass verge or pavement is not illegal. However, a driver may be open to prosecution if their vehicle is persistently damaging a verge, parked dangerously or causing an obstruction.

Under national legislation, goods vehicles weighing 7.5 tonnes or over are prohibited from parking on grass verges, and Civil Enforcement Officers can issue Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) to offending vehicles.

 

 

[cgksheff]

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

Yes that is interesting.

 

They are allowed to raise prices or extend hours in order to cover costs, but doing so expressly to generate surplus income is unlawful according to every legal opinion I’ve ever seen. Indeed one London Borough which drastically increased permit prices were found to have done so specifically to raise more income to cover gaps in service budgets ( via an FOI’d email from a councillor if I remember correctly). They were taken to court by residents, lost and had to pay back the increased costs to permit holders and rescind the price increase. 

Thanks.

The proposal document does put forwards justifications of rationalisation of fee structure, and benefits that may mitigate climate change and I suppose that these would counter any legal claims.

 

The document, however does contain:

"Should Option 2 from this report not be adopted then that will create further budgetary pressure which may impact negatively on core council services."

 

"The amended fees and charges proposal represents an opportunity to add considerable economic benefits for the council."

 

If you are interested, the proposal document is  HERE .

 

 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by cgksheff

[Mr Bloke]

43 minutes ago, cgksheff said:

Thanks.

The proposal document does put forwards justifications of rationalisation of fee structure, and benefits that may mitigate climate change and I suppose that these would counter any legal claims.

 

The document, however does contain:

"Should Option 2 from this report not be adopted then that will create further budgetary pressure which may impact negatively on core council services."

 

"The amended fees and charges proposal represents an opportunity to add considerable economic benefits for the council."

 

If you are interested, the proposal document is  HERE .

 

 

 

Hmmm...

The risk assessment bit of that report is interesting.

 

Options 1, 3 and 4 have no risks identified whatsoever.

 

Whereas Option 2 (which potentially makes the most money) has the following risks, but is still the preferred option:

Quote

Risks:
The signage and software changes exceed budget estimates.
Revenue budget expectations are not met due to a combination of macroeconomic or externalised factors.

 

In other words, we've got an opportunity to make as much money as possible out of this, but just in case we don't make as much as we thought we would, it's definitely not our fault despite the fact that...

 

... we haven't a clue of the costs involved, and we're not even sure how many people will be daft enough to go along with our plan and pay whatever we ask.

 

You've just got to love local politics!

[AndrewC]

1 hour ago, Rockers rule said:

Cars are not getting bigger, more efficient yes and more of them but not bigger in engine size.

 

I was talking about dimensions, which is the important bit when considering parking situations (bigger cars put pressure on available parking space).

 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/features/investigation-why-are-cars-becoming-so-wide#:~:text=Another reason why cars have,of McDonald's and the rest.

 

 

Quote

As for the last bit I have never expected not to pay for my motoring  yet the illogical decision from the Government that says most of my vehicles are not only tax exempt but MOT exempt  as well does help 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣.

And far from daft. we moved out of Sheff years ago, have my own drive / Yard & Garages and wouldn't consider parking on't front anyway,

thank you 🤣.

 

So if you have driveway and garage space for your cars, who is making you pay for something you have 'already paid for'?

 

Quote

So you pay yer car tax or what ever you want to call it & get stuffed with paying for something your already paying for. 

 

[Rockers rule]

29 minutes ago, AndrewC said:

I was talking about dimensions, which is the important bit when considering parking situations (bigger cars put pressure on available parking space).

 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/features/investigation-why-are-cars-becoming-so-wide#:~:text=Another reason why cars have,of McDonald's and the rest.

🤣 🤣 Ha Ha Ha 🤣 🤣 cars are getting bigger because of obese drivers.

Great article. lets all eat nuts and drive around in smart cars 🤣 🤣.

A Bentley  and a Range Rover couldn't pass each other & Porsches are getting wider (about time, hate the bloody poky things anyway)  

29 minutes ago, AndrewC said:

 

 

 

So if you have driveway and garage space for your cars, who is making you pay for something you have 'already paid for'?

 

 

Lost with that last one Mr C,

See what you did though - I can only park my cars at my property and not allowed to venture out in them .

 

Wheres the nearest Bus stop ❓

 

Keep safe out there  .

 

 

  

[hackey lad]

3 hours ago, Resident said:

Is the verge owned by you or the council? 

If it's the council's then you need to remove the planters as you are commiting an offence under the Highways Act 1980. You're not only obstructing LEGAL right to pass, you're also causing damage as your planters will be killing the grass.

 

 

If I was in the same position as Annie , I would do exactly the same .  By the way , cars churning up a grass verge also kill the grass

[Annie Bynnol]

 

3 hours ago, fools said:

Perhaps they're far-righters conspiring against you. Doesn't happen around my way.

There's always one. How very passive aggressive. wonder what the neighbours call you.

3 hours ago, Resident said:

Is the verge owned by you or the council? 
If it's the council's then you need to remove the planters as you are commiting an offence under the Highways Act 1980. You're not only obstructing LEGAL right to pass, you're also causing damage as your planters will be killing the grass.
 

 

Sheffield Council owned verge.

Planters Council approved.

Totally legal.

[hackey lad]

3 hours ago, fools said:

Perhaps they're far-righters conspiring against you. Doesn't happen around my way.

 

There's always one. How very passive aggressive. wonder what the neighbours call you.

 

 

A good neighbour