Edinburgh to be first Scottish city to ban pavement parking

[Peter Sarf]

Saying "

Is just claiming that any decisions made a decade or more ago are permanent, and (in this case) pedestrians will just have to lump it having drivers of road vehicles parking on the footpath for their convenience (forever).

No I am not saying those situations are permanent but they will be permanent if all sides don't recognise the issues and their causes.

 

[DDB]

Unfortunately efforts to promote having services easily accessible to everyone ("15 min cities") are being fought by conspiracy theorists including remarkably by a government minister.

 

[AM9]

Unfortunately efforts to promote having services easily accessible to everyone ("15 min cities") are being fought by conspiracy theorists including remarkably by a government minister.

Aided and abetted by motoring organisations, vehicle manufacturers and all those that might find it inconvenient for them. They all prefer the US position where pedestrians are actually prosecuted for crossing the motorists' roads..

No I am not saying those situations are permanent but they will be permanent if all sides don't recognise the issues and their causes.

No they won't. As I said above in post #18 "A few interventions from police/traffic wardens will help the learning process." Once motorists learn that shopping habits will have to change to avoid getting obstruction prosecutions, developers of out of town shopping will get less patronage, or buses will serve those shopping centres better.

 

[paul1609]

The interesting thing for Croydon is that once the Whitgift Centre and Centrale were the shopping centre of choice for a large part of the southern counties. Then along with much of London it went on its war on the motorist. The motorists instead moved to the shopping centres outside the M25. Croydon obviously couldn't exist solely on its non car owning city dwellers and went rapidly downhill, it's in a right state now. Westfield recognised this and pulled the plug on Westfield South London. I can see IKEA being the next victim with the ULEZ charge.
People from Kent and Sussex just don't go to Croydon anymore.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Aided and abetted by motoring organisations, vehicle manufacturers and all those that might find it inconvenient for them. They all prefer the US position where pedestrians are actually prosecuted for crossing the motorists' roads..


No they won't. As I said above in post #18 "A few interventions from police/traffic wardens will help the learning process." Once motorists learn that shopping habits will have to change to avoid getting obstruction prosecutions, developers of out of town shopping will get less patronage, or buses will serve those shopping centres better.

So its the stick approach for the victims of bad planning. Motorists learn what ? - nowhere to shop so abandon Croydon ?. How about a carrot and lean on the people that encourage the car culture. Make a lot less enemies that way.

I had an ecological bent decades ago. I have seen the use of cars rise and moaned about it, walked when others drive (and they join a gym !). Now at last people wake up, but to what - the inconvenience but not the planets needs. Just making enemies but not facing the real challenge.

The interesting thing for Croydon is that once the Whitgift Centre and Centrale were the shopping centre of choice for a large part of the southern counties. Then along with much of London it went on its war on the motorist. The motorists instead moved to the shopping centres outside the M25. Croydon obviously couldn't exist solely on its non car owning city dwellers and went rapidly downhill, it's in a right state now. Westfield recognised this and pulled the plug on Westfield South London. I can see IKEA being the next victim with the ULEZ charge.
People from Kent and Sussex just don't go to Croydon anymore.

It seems to be so. Westfield has stumbled along and is now in its 3rd incarnation. Meanwhile the Whitgift centre is getting run down unfortunately - it really looks like a conspiracy how bad it is getting. Thing is we want normal shops not the luxury day out that Westfield is !. I think the way to sum that problem up is that the two Westfields at Hammersmith and Stratford are both built on brown field sites and did not involve the removal of the existing shopping centre.

 

[bramling]

Saying "

Is just claiming that any decisions made a decade or more ago are permanent, and (in this case) pedestrians will just have to lump it having drivers of road vehicles parking on the footpath for their convenience (forever).

While we are at it, can we ban restaurants and cafes from having tables and chairs on pavements? This is something which has been a particular menace since Covid. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, after all.

 

[Stewart2887]

I'm born and raised Edinburgh. About 6 years ago me and my family went to visit my elderly mother in Edinburgh, in the house I was raised. Cul-de-sac, and we had offroad parking. The day we left, my mum was going to daycare, and the bus turned up to take her. All good, but I had to move my car out to street to let her wheelchair out. Bus parked up to take her on, council knobhead turned up and threatened me with a ticket. Bus blocked me in, no coins to pay so had to drive up the road rather than help my mum. Last time I saw her at home. Total cnuts

 

[Peter Sarf]

While we are at it, can we ban restaurants and cafes from having tables and chairs on pavements? This is something which has been a particular menace since Covid. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, after all.

That reminds me. Hire bakes left discarded on the pavement. Strategically left lying down for the blind and frail to fall over.

 

[GatwickDepress]

That reminds me. Hire bakes left discarded on the pavement. Strategically left lying down for the blind and frail to fall over.

Lime bikes are particularly bad for this. It seems every time I visit the Big Smoke, the amount of bikes littering the pavements have worsened.

 

[AM9]

That reminds me. Hire bakes left discarded on the pavement. Strategically left lying down for the blind and frail to fall over.

All these other suggestions are off-topic so maybe a thread about anything/body except legit items/users obstructing footpaths would help.

 

[Vespa]

In some roads that's designed before motor cars or pre dated any town planning, it's necessary to park on pavements so emergency services, bin lorries and buses can get past otherwise the road is blocked.

I need a car because where I work is in the middle of nowhere and I work shifts without any available public transport.

It sounds to me Edinburgh is using this as an opportunistic revenue stream without actually thinking consequences through.

 

[bramling]

All these other suggestions are off-topic so maybe a thread about anything/body except legit items/users obstructing footpaths would help.

It’s still obstructing the pavement, so for me falls in the same category as pavement parking. We can also add bus shelters - in my town centre there are a number of these that essentially block pavements, like cars this is also related to a mode of transport.

 

[AM9]

It’s still obstructing the pavement, so for me falls in the same category as pavement parking. We can also add bus shelters - in my town centre there are a number of these that essentially block pavements, like cars this is also related to a mode of transport.

I was suggesting starting a thread before the mods decided that it was off-topic, I agree with you that what is the primary part of the highway (the footpath) is so often neglected. The problem with bus shelters is that they are important to the development of bus services in towns so there is a tradeoff. Ideally, I think that where the carriageway is too narrow that the pavement should extend into the roadway so that drivers can't fail to give way when a bus needs to re-enter the traffic flow, as there is only a single lane in each direction. I've seen this done in a lot of places within the GLA. TfL sees itas a fix for reducing bus delays, especially where to problem is really caused by motorists not acknowledging bus priority which is alluded to in the Highway Code.

 

[lachlan]

In some roads that's designed before motor cars or pre dated any town planning, it's necessary to park on pavements so emergency services, bin lorries and buses can get past otherwise the road is blocked.

I need a car because where I work is in the middle of nowhere and I work shifts without any available public transport.

It sounds to me Edinburgh is using this as an opportunistic revenue stream without actually thinking consequences through.

If the roads are designed that way, park somewhere else. Or perhaps the roads could be made one way and permitted parking spaces added to one side.

 

[Vespa]

If the roads are designed that way, park somewhere else. Or perhaps the roads could be made one way and permitted parking spaces added to one side.

It's not a solution as its not possible for some areas that's already saturated with cars leaving no options but to park where they can.

Edinburgh City Council is not offering solutions only problems and taking advantage of it to generate cash.

 

[jon81uk]

It's not a solution as its not possible for some areas that's already saturated with cars leaving no options but to park where they can.

Edinburgh City Council is not offering solutions only problems and taking advantage of it to generate cash.

Well the obvious solution is that if you need a car get a house/flat that has parking. Why should it be up to the council to fix the issue?

 

[AM9]

It's not a solution as its not possible for some areas that's already saturated with cars leaving no options but to park where they can.

Edinburgh City Council is not offering solutions only problems and taking advantage of it to generate cash.

So there aren't any people in Edinburgh with wheelchairs, walking aids, disability scooters etc. that frequently can't pass along the footpath owing to inconsiderate drivers occupying a dedicated pedestrian space. Wow, either the population is extremely healthy and lucky to not have lost the ability to walk like a normal healthy person, or the health service in Scotland is far better at making disabled people normal again.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Well the obvious solution is that if you need a car get a house/flat that has parking. Why should it be up to the council to fix the issue?

But are the council unfixing the problem. How many people can move to this urban utopia you speak of.

So there aren't any people in Edinburgh with wheelchairs, walking aids, disability scooters etc. that frequently can't pass along the footpath owing to inconsiderate drivers occupying a dedicated pedestrian space. Wow, either the population is extremely healthy and lucky to not have lost the ability to walk like a normal healthy person, or the health service in Scotland is far better at making disabled people normal again.

Well it depends how many of these evil car owners actually take too much of the pavement. Round where I park there is plenty of space left on the pavements. The trees are more of a problem but I would not want them gone. The risk is people are creating a solution to a non-existent problem that creates a bigger problem if there was a small problem.

Granted there will always be someone who parks inconsiderately but to hammer the majority for a minority transgression will just create bad will, and money for the council. We have to learn to live together.

 

[jon81uk]

But are the council unfixing the problem. How many people can move to this urban utopia you speak

Well pavements are for not designed for cars to park on so they aren't "unfixing" the problem, merely enforcing something as it was designed. Modern developments should be designed with appropriate parking.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Well pavements are for not designed for cars to park on so they aren't "unfixing" the problem, merely enforcing something as it was designed. Modern developments should be designed with appropriate parking.

I agree things should be designed with appropriate parking AND more importantly things that re-enforce the car culture need to be avoided so there is less need for cars. But they are not, just opposite where I live ten flats built and 8 parking spaces provided, ideally those spaces would not be needed though. Instead it seems councils have let cars run riot and now want to punish motorists for the mistake the planners made. It makes me wonder if they just want to make money out of a problem rather than removing the cause of the problem thus getting to a better way of life for everyone.

 

[jon81uk]

I agree things should be designed with appropriate parking AND more importantly things that re-enforce the car culture need to be avoided so there is less need for cars. But they are not, just opposite where I live ten flats built and 8 parking spaces provided, ideally those spaces would not be needed though. Instead it seems councils have let cars run riot and now want to punish motorists for the mistake the planners made. It makes me wonder if they just want to make money out of a problem rather than removing the cause of the problem thus getting to a better way of life for everyone.

I've been objecting to planning applications near me that are being built without parking, although they are in an area where most shops and services are walkable, the bus service to get further afield isn't adequate really so they should still be allocating some parking. But equally if someone knows the only way to get to their place of work is by car, they should be trying to buy/rent a property with parking.

 

[AM9]

I agree things should be designed with appropriate parking AND more importantly things that re-enforce the car culture need to be avoided so there is less need for cars. But they are not, just opposite where I live ten flats built and 8 parking spaces provided, ideally those spaces would not be needed though. Instead it seems councils have let cars run riot and now want to punish motorists for the mistake the planners made. It makes me wonder if they just want to make money out of a problem rather than removing the cause of the problem thus getting to a better way of life for everyone.

So now the council is trying to correct it's previous shortcomings (maybe one of a different political flavour), for the benefit of the less fortunate users of footpaths, but you are attempting to pass it off as they "just want to make money out of a problem". The problem is that unless there is a firm prohibition for parking on a footpath, (with suitably marked spaces that are exempted from that prohibition), there are plenty of drivers who park indiscriminately and then get into protracted argument about what (in their opinion) is parking that obstructs the passage of legal footpath users.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I've been objecting to planning applications near me that are being built without parking, although they are in an area where most shops and services are walkable, the bus service to get further afield isn't adequate really so they should still be allocating some parking. But equally if someone knows the only way to get to their place of work is by car, they should be trying to buy/rent a property with parking.

Your right we seem to still be coaxing more people into cars - once bought they will be used as much as possible and need a parking space. In London there are an awful lot of houses with absolutely no front garden all from the Victorian era. There used to be a "corner shop" in most roads and most things delivered. In fact I wonder if the answer is the internet and deliveries. There is a lot more to buy as we are now so consumerist of course. But after that we are a more mobile society these days - working further afield and having family moving further afield. There is a lot to undo and I see no start being made on it.

So now the council is trying to correct it's previous shortcomings (maybe one of a different political flavour), for the benefit of the less fortunate users of footpaths, but you are attempting to pass it off as they "just want to make money out of a problem". The problem is that unless there is a firm prohibition for parking on a footpath, (with suitably marked spaces that are exempted from that prohibition), there are plenty of drivers who park indiscriminately and then get into protracted argument about what (in their opinion) is parking that obstructs the passage of legal footpath users.

As I have said before - its more than just merely money making. But pushing motorists around is not the best way to achieve a solution. There are things that need to be done to undo the need for so many cars. Those things are not within the power of motorists. You appear to just want a more authoritarian approach. If you don't want to see that it needs more of a solution that alienates fewer people then we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[ExRes]

I wonder if there will be a chorus of whining motorists claiming that it will cause "chaos".

Why would it be whining? in many places it will cause chaos, fact

 

[jon81uk]

In London there are an awful lot of houses with absolutely no front garden all from the Victorian era

At least in London the public transport infratructure is there. Unfortunately for the rest of the country the bus service is inadequate and underfunded.

 

[lachlan]

At least in London the public transport infratructure is there. Unfortunately for the rest of the country the bus service is inadequate and underfunded.

Making it harder to drive by banning pavement parking will push more people towards public transport, making providing a good service more viable

 

[bramling]

So now the council is trying to correct it's previous shortcomings (maybe one of a different political flavour), for the benefit of the less fortunate users of footpaths, but you are attempting to pass it off as they "just want to make money out of a problem". The problem is that unless there is a firm prohibition for parking on a footpath, (with suitably marked spaces that are exempted from that prohibition), there are plenty of drivers who park indiscriminately and then get into protracted argument about what (in their opinion) is parking that obstructs the passage of legal footpath users.

I suspect there’s two factors in all this.

First is those who simply need somewhere viable to park near their place of residence. I have some sympathy for this, especially when they go on the pavement as a means of trying to mitigate against their vehicle being damaged as a result of poor driving by others.

Then there’s those who do it in places like town centres simply because they can’t be bothered to walk a short distance. This certainly should be clamped down upon.

 

[AM9]

I suspect there’s two factors in all this.

First is those who simply need somewhere viable to park near their place of residence. I have some sympathy for this, especially when they go on the pavement as a means of trying to mitigate against their vehicle being damaged as a result of poor driving by others.

But as is often the case, there are other people to consider here, and in the case of residents' parking convenience, any concession to parking on the footpath is so often to the detriment of pedestrians, and particularly disabled users. I've seen many wheelchair users and their carers have to pass in the road against moving traffic because there is insufficient space on the footpath, which is hardly a fair situation sacrificing somebody's safety for a driver's personal convenience or even just so that their material possession isn't at risk of minor damage. Just how would you construct rules or a legal requirement to mitigate that?

 

[Peter Sarf]

At least in London the public transport infratructure is there. Unfortunately for the rest of the country the bus service is inadequate and underfunded.

Public transport is mostly there in London but not centred on the out of town shopping that has been allowed to grow to the detriment of town centres. Your correct though the further one gets from a built up area the harder it is to find plentiful public transport.

Making it harder to drive by banning pavement parking will push more people towards public transport, making providing a good service more viable

Push - but, instead, how about doing something to attract drivers to public transport. Put the shopping back where it belongs - in the town centre where the busses go and where other amenities are (like railway stations). A constructive approach that respects people rather than provoking disrespect.

I suspect there’s two factors in all this.

First is those who simply need somewhere viable to park near their place of residence. I have some sympathy for this, especially when they go on the pavement as a means of trying to mitigate against their vehicle being damaged as a result of poor driving by others.

Then there’s those who do it in places like town centres simply because they can’t be bothered to walk a short distance. This certainly should be clamped down upon.

Well quite. There are considerate motorists and inconsiderate motorists.

 

[jon81uk]

Public transport is mostly there in London but not centred on the out of town shopping that has been allowed to grow to the detriment of town centres. Your correct though the further one gets from a built up area the harder it is to find plentiful public transport.

When I used to live in East London there was a regular bus service to the "out of town" shopping parks in Beckton. We brought a 50" TV home from Currys on the bus. No reason why other towns couldn't design with bus in mind too. Many larger supermarkets were also bus terminus.