I think it already is. It just doesn’t get enforced.
Councils call for pavement parking to be banned across England
Submitted 9 months ago by thehatfox@lemmy.world to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-68255312
Comments
cashews_best_nut@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Zip2@feddit.uk 9 months ago
I think it is illegal to completely obstruct a pavement to the point that wheelchairs, pushchairs etc can’t get past.
But parking your car and leaving a bit of a gap is apparently fine.
AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 9 months ago
When I had driving lessons, it was taught that most people think that’s the rule, and in real life it practically is the rule, but it’s on the books as illegal to put your car on the pavement at all, and you’ll be penalised for it during the parking parts of a driving test.
DarkThoughts@fedia.io 9 months ago
We have the same issue in Germany. :(
Car drivers just get away with absolutely everything unfortunately.echodot@feddit.uk 9 months ago
It’s not the rule people, just think it’s the rule.
So what happens is this, someone says you’re allowed to park on the pavement as long as you don’t obstruct the road, then someone else says no and quotes the highway code. Then you point out that the only thing you’re not allowed to do is park on the payment in London, and elsewhere you should basically not do it if you can avoid it.
No one is going to get arrested for parking partially on the pavement outside of London unless you’ve been a complete dick about it, or if it’s unnecessary. For where it’s necessary as long as there’s no other parking restrictions then you should be fine as long as people pedestrians can get past.
The highway code is fine in principle, but the people who wrote it have never been further north than Bedford.
ianovic69@feddit.uk 9 months ago
If only there was some kind of book or document that contains all the rules and instructions about the use of roads, that everyone can access freely and is constantly updated.
Rule 244
You MUST NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement in London, and should not do so elsewhere unless signs permit it. Parking on the pavement can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians, people in wheelchairs or with visual impairments and people with prams or pushchairs.
Seems pretty clear to me…
FatLegTed@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Should not means you can. You’re just a very naughty boy.
ianovic69@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Ha, it gives that impression doesn’t it? But no, in this context that isn’t what should means. It’s like an also that extends the Must Not to the additional scenario, in this case outside of London.
It’s true that a lot of these things aren’t enforced, and if they are it’s not consistent. The thing is, the law is there and it can be enforced. If you are caught breaking it, well, that’s no-one else’s fault.
Tweak@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Said councils need to provide adequate parking, and ensure that future developments have such.
byroon@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Councils need to provide public transport, and support walking and cycling
Tweak@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Sure, and the government needs to regulate the public transport industry such that they stop structuring their businesses so they can squirrel their profits away using Hollywood-style accounting. But, failing that, councils need to plan cities appropriately.
Even London, which has decent public transport, has decent space for parking.
Nyfure@kbin.social 9 months ago
So you want the city to freely give public space for your private vehicle?
FatLegTed@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Yes, Because I am entitled. So there. Peasant.
admiralteal@kbin.social 9 months ago
Why do city governments need to provide free storage for private vehicles in public spaces, now?
It is not financially nor geometrically sustainable. It is a wealth transfer from the poorer to the richer. People who want cars can store them on their own property.
Tweak@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Private vehicles are owned by members of the public. The public pay taxes.
It not being “geometrically sustainable” is the result of poor planning - which the government is responsible for.
RobotToaster@mander.xyz 9 months ago
That would hurt the number of little boxes their developer cousins can build though.
admiralteal@kbin.social 9 months ago
Why are city governments obliged to provide storage for private vehicles on the public dime?
Tweak@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Because the private vehicles are owned by members of the public, and the public pay tax to the government. They’re also obligated to plan cities appropriately, rather than blame the problems on mistakes of past governments.
freamon@endlesstalk.org 9 months ago
Part of the problem is how much wider on average cars have got, making it less viable to park next to the curb or with just 2 wheels on it. Another part is that both members of a couple are more likely to be working and needing separate cars, and if their kids can’t afford to move away, than that’s an extra car too. Additionally, councils have convinced themselves that not lowering carbs to allow for extra driveways is promoting public transport use, ignoring how unviable that often is.
Cars with all 4 wheels on the pavement annoy me, but it’s become so normalised that drivers have looked at me, like me walking on the pavement is an irritating obstruction to where they have every right to be. I think the police in some areas allow you to upload a photo to report them, but it’s not something I’d do 'cos it’s a complex problem and fines aren’t the solution.
Tomosijohn@lemm.ee 9 months ago
HMU on telegram @pounddc1 if you got verified idme let hit $300k upwards then we split 50/50
Oneeightnine@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Sounds great in principle, but where are me and the other 60 houses down our terraced street with no off-street parking supposed to park our cars?
Yes, I’d love to live in the public transport utopia that’s just over the horizon, but right now, I need a car to get to and from work and I live in a house that was literally built before cars were a thing.
Again, I can only speak to our street but the vast majority of car owners make sure there’s ample room to get through. The issue is that there’s usually one or two assholes who ruin it for everyone, and those guys usually find out pretty quickly why it’s a bad idea to block the path.
For context: I drive, but I’ve also had two kids and therefore two pushchairs I’ve had to navigate along the pavement. My car also got totalled a few years ago by a delivery driver who drove into it whilst it was parked. Id rather it not be parked on the road/pavement but what choice do we have here?
EinfachUnersetzlich@lemm.ee 9 months ago
It’s your problem to find somewhere to park. Maybe on another nearby street. Or buy/rent a dwelling with parking provided.
MeepsTheBard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 months ago
“That’s your problem” is a terrible way to get people to support policy. These are real, valid concerns that many people simply can’t deal with without other systems in place that currently don’t exist.
This type of “fuck any gradual change, revolution now” is just armchair anarchy pushed by kids who don’t face financial pressure.
soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz 9 months ago
Found the guy from Manchester
echodot@feddit.uk 9 months ago
Basically any city or town or village that was built before the invention of the car, and in the UK that’s basically everywhere. The house I live in was built before plumbing. God damn the road is narrow.
If we didn’t park on the curb no one would be able to get past. The other day an ambulance came up here, and it was a squeeze but it was fine so I don’t think it’s actually a problem.
EnderMB@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Basically true for Bristol too. Barely any rail network (despite having two main stations), a terrible bus system under a monopoly, and often no choice but to drive if you want to keep your job.