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

[Planner1]

6 minutes ago, Allison R said:

Thank you.  This is encouraging.  We will be presenting the petition to the Council next week.  Hopefully, they will be open to compromises like putting a more effective scheme only in the affected streets, ideally without meters (surely this kind of thing can be done electronically in this day and age?) and leave the 90% of us who don’t want it out of it - at least for enough time to figure out whether the knock-on effect from those few streets really will have an impact spread out over so many streets.  
 

People grumble so much about the Council, but my experience of them has been positive and hopefully the grumbles will prove to be unfounded.

They can’t really put in schemes without pay and display machines as it is seen as disadvantaging those who don’t have (or want to,use) app based solutions.

 

Other places tried to go cashless Brighton was a notable one) and took out machines,  but after protests from motorists, had to put some back. The council now typically put in less machines than they used to on previous schemes because many do use the apps, but many still want to use cash.

[Allison R]

1 minute ago, Planner1 said:

Yes, but the cars generally belong to the residents. A parking scheme won’t make that better, in fact it would make the situation worse, because they would protect junctions and accesses with yellow lines, so there would be less space available. That would be an issue for  the residents, who might not want a scheme as a result.
 

There was a similar issue on several streets in the Sharrow Vale scheme and residents decided to opt out of that scheme on certain streets.

This is the same with most of us!  There are a few streets actually experiencing problems from commuter parking.  There are a few other streets experiencing other problems which this scheme will not solve. The scheme plans to include 65 streets, most of which are not experiencing any problem whatsoever and are convinced that we will not experience a problem from the knock-on effect of doing something on those few other streets. Would it be so hard for the Council to hold off for half a year on making the scheme this widespread to see if the other streets need it?  
 

And the reduction in viable parking resulting from painting yellow lines is exactly one of the problems with this scheme. Some people have what is effectively a guaranteed parking place because they park across their own driveways – these will all disappear.   Moreover, the designation of parking bays will actually end up making two places where there might be three and three places where there might be four because they have to make the space is big enough for big cars when most people drive smaller cars. Ditto for smaller stretches which might fit a mini-car but will now be double-yellowed off.
 

Hopefully, they will listen to us as they listen to Sharrow Vale.  

[Allison R]

29 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

I think you are missing the point. You have come and posted incorrect information on a number of points. You posts are alarmist about which areas might be next and yet you openly admit to a lack of observation on the schemes you are so against and haven’t even noticed that one of the areas you say will be “next” actually already has a scheme.  
 

It doesn’t help your case and doesn’t do much for your credibility. Getting your facts right is important as on forums there’s usually someone who does know the correct information and will shoot down your argument.

 

There are arguments for and against schemes like this and I’ve always said to people who live and do business in the proposed locations that they should be very sure that what’s on offer meets their needs and tell the council if it doesn’t.
 

These schemes will never suit everyone, but it is important to remember that they reflect the thrust of policy at local and national level, which is to discourage car use for as many trips as possible.

 

In my opinion the only effective way to do that is to make things more difficult or expensive for the motorist and limiting  the availability of free parking close to the city centre is one way of discouraging car commuting. There is plenty of parking in the city centre and the prices compare well with other similar size cities, but many folk just don’t want to pay.

And you have continually latched on to irrelevant details rather than addressing relevant points or answering relevant questions.  “It doesn’t help your case and doesn’t do much for your credibility.”

 

“Alarmist”?  Really?

 

”Shoot down” - interesting choice of words and my point exactly.  I can’t understand why there can’t be a civilised, meaningful discussion. This is you exactly: someone who hangs around wanting to shoot people down. I am not sure what you get out of that, but it is certainly not constructive.

 

 

[Mr Bloke]

10 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Yes, but the cars generally belong to the residents. A parking scheme won’t make that better, in fact it would make the situation worse, because they would protect junctions and accesses with yellow lines, so there would be less space available. That would be an issue for  the residents, who might not want a scheme as a result.
 

There was a similar issue on several streets in the Sharrow Vale scheme and residents decided to opt out of that scheme on certain streets.

Hmmm...

And this is where we see that SCC 'logic' is flawed.

 

Surely it's more important to 'protect junctions and accesses with yellow lines' even if that would mean there would be 'less space available'?

 

[Allison R]

25 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

Absolutely!

I don't discriminate and always give credit where it's due.

 

EDIT: And I think I've spotted your favourite word... I wonder if anyone else has?

 

Here's a clue: 7 letters, begins with a 'd' and ends in 'n' .

Clearly, disdain would be easy for you to recognise -  something you seem to pride yourself on.  Why?

[Planner1]

18 minutes ago, Allison R said:

Do you think Arbourthorne has more problems than Nether Edge?  I already said “thank you for the correction”. Why do you keep going on and on about this red herring? Do you not have anything of substance to add, anything constructive?

 

“Scare-mongering”?  Really?

Many areas have parking issues of differing types. Some of them are basically caused by the residents themselves. Parking schemes aren’t great for locations like that.

[Allison R]

Just now, Planner1 said:

Many areas have parking issues of differing types. Some of them are basically caused by the residents themselves. Parking schemes aren’t great for locations like that.

This is my point!  This is the case for most of the streets proposed to be involved!

I don’t want to waste my time or energy on this negativity and will not be returning to this discussion.  I apologise for any way I have participated.  Goodbye and good luck.

I don’t want to waste my time or energy on this negativity and will not be returning to his discussion.  I apologise for any way I have participated.  Goodbye and good luck.

[Planner1]

8 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

Hmmm...

And this is where we see that SCC 'logic' is flawed.

 

Surely it's more important to 'protect junctions and accesses with yellow lines' even if that would mean there would be 'less space available'?

 

It’s the same issue for any council. Public acceptability.

 

Councillors make the decisions and aren’t likely to approve measures which will lose them votes in considerable numbers. 

1 minute ago, Allison R said:

This is my point!  This is the case for most of the streets proposed to be involved!

So you are trying to contend that there aren’t issues with commuter parking in Park Hill area?
 

I really don’t think that is the case. 

[Rockers rule]

On 21/05/2022 at 23:50, Allison R said:

The Park Hill Parking scheme, which extends to most of the Norfolk Park neighbourhood as well as parts of Arbourthorne & Manor Castle, proposes to make our residential streets look like parking lots (with pay-and-display meters & yellow lines painted everywhere to delineate parking bays and to block people from parking across their own driveways). Residents will have to pay for permits to park in their own street, but will not be guaranteed a spot. Carers, visitors and tradespeople will have to do pay-and-display when they visit.  It says in the proposal, that they are planning to implement the same type of plan in other parts of Sheffield,
 

Most of our area’s residents have no problem whatsoever with parking and are strongly opposed to the scheme.  For the few residents who would like a parking scheme (concentrated in just a few of the 65 roads to be included), the proposed scheme won’t solve their parking problems - what might would be to simply have permit only parking.
 

Hello Alison. (I think some of the questions below you have just answered in your last post #73.

(but as I was 1/2 way through this i'm posting it anyway)

 

I did ask in an around about sort of way in post #19.

What are the perceived problems with parking in the areas you have mentioned that has prompted such a scheme being mooted? 

In your 1st post you simply asked people to sign your petition ad hock as if everyone on SF should know what problems are, or are not, having in those areas. (not being funny in anyway but did you research SF before deciding to post on here ? eclectic, rude, informative, mischievous are but a few of the qualities to be experienced)

I know all of the areas well albeit from years ago (moved out of Sheff in the 80's).

Mother lives on the Lansdown and one of the areas we lived in became a resident permit area (after we'd gone).

I can understand the areas around Lansdown & Broomhall had problems where the roads were clogged most of the time and residents couldn't park anywhere near their own house (ok it's not a given by law you have the 'right' but its nice if you can),  by office / shop workers & visitors / nurses as the case was up at Broomhall.

So again what problems are on going  in the areas you mentioned ?

Just how far do the council need to install 'resident parking schemes' away from town and do places as far as the Arbourthorne and Norfolk park really have such problems with commuters?

I wouldn't like to think i was leaving my car on either areas .

 

Seriously best of luck with your Council meetings Rocker  .

 

TOO LATE SHE'S GONE 🤣

 

Hope your all satisfied 🥴.

 

 

 

Edited May 24, 2022 by Rockers rule
-

[Mr Bloke]

8 minutes ago, Allison R said:

Clearly, disdain would be easy for you to recognise -  something you seem to pride yourself on.  Why?

Hmmm...

Good question!

Maybe it's because I find that the people who post most on here are usually those with the least to say!

Anyway, nice to speak with you, but I've got to go now...
... I've got a bus to catch!

Hope to see you again... if you're planning on staying around for a bit!

 

4 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

It’s the same issue for any council. Public acceptability.

 

Councillors make the decisions and aren’t likely to approve measures which will lose them votes in considerable numbers. 

Exactly Mr Planner!

Popularity before public safety...