Edinburgh to be first Scottish city to ban pavement parking

[bramling]

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?

Certainly not easy, however it ought to be possible to construct a value which measures what constitutes "obstructing a pavement". Is 1.5 metres sufficient for a wheelchair to pass through without difficulty?

One point to add, I realise it may appear to be minor damage to a material possession if, say, a wing mirror gets broken off, however this can have safety implications if it means someone then ends up driving with their safety device missing or damaged. Those safety implications could then adversely affect groups such as cyclists, which is certainly not a desirable outcome. Hence I can sympathise why someone may wish to try and park in a way which reduces the risk of damage, especially when it's likely to be the result of someone else's poor driving when they have parked their car entirely legally.

 

[Peter Sarf]

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.

For Croydon there are still far more bus routes into the centre of Croydon. A shame the shopping centre is demising. Now the medium size Sainsburys has gone.

Your right about size - I have taken some rather large items on the bus. Sixteen foot bamboo once ! - I took secateurs in case but a driver insisted I try. Dismantled furniture is more common. I collect freecycle items (not just for me). The rules are reasonable, I have stretched the rules (asking kindly) but also been refused entry for items within the size limit. Granted I avoid the peaks. It is always easier if both sides are reasonable but of course a car driver needs to know they will be OK before embarking on such a journey. A sad fact is that once someone is driven to learning to drive and bought a car it will take a lot more for them to abandon that habit.

 

[davews]

Pavement parking is rife round here, Bracknell, partly because the older estates were not built with cars in mind and newer ones have been planned for few cars.. Our street is quite narrow and is fine if people park just on one side, but some park half on the pavement the other side making it hard for ambulances etc to come down. Currently I have an MOT expired car from opposite taking up my pavement, no doubt will go soon. There usually are proper parking spaces, I can always find somewhere, but that of course that needs a few minutes walk, people are just bone idle.

I would welcome a proper ban.

 

[AM9]

Certainly not easy, however it ought to be possible to construct a value which measures what constitutes "obstructing a pavement". Is 1.5 metres sufficient for a wheelchair to pass through without difficulty?

One point to add, I realise it may appear to be minor damage to a material possession if, say, a wing mirror gets broken off, however this can have safety implications if it means someone then ends up driving with their safety device missing or damaged. Those safety implications could then adversely affect groups such as cyclists, which is certainly not a desirable outcome. Hence I can sympathise why someone may wish to try and park in a way which reduces the risk of damage, especially when it's likely to be the result of someone else's poor driving when they have parked their car entirely legally.

Where I live, not only is there a 1.5m footpath as standard, but soem homeowners' gardens have bushes/trees that overhang the footpath making even 1.5m unavailable. So even if the foorpath was (say) 2m wide, if 0.5m was unusable, especially to somebody in a wheelchair, but a driver was allowed to encroach by 0.5m, presumably the driver would claim that the garden was at fault and the garden owner would maintain that it was the driver made the available space inadequate on the day. Yet another situation where an absolute rule was needed rather than relying on two separate groups to work together, (chances are the homeowner wouldn't even be aware that the car had parked there, - even if they were at home).

 

[Bikeman78]

Pavement parking is endemic round where I live, and often it is completely pointless; It's either on a quiet cul-de-sac where parking fully on the road would obstruct nothing, or on a through road the pavement-parked vehicles still do not leave enough room for two others to pass simultaneously.

Exactly the same on the streets around me. Parking on the pavement achieves nothing for road users but blocks the pavement on bin day. More bizarrely, many of the people concerned have a drive. I get that modern cars are often too wide for older gates but I solved that by removing the gates and part of the railings.