http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: "A bill banning parking on pavements has been introduced to SP" en Mon, 06 Apr 2026 02:08:53 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-206017 Fri, 04 Dec 2015 14:12:18 +0000 twq 206017@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Debate ongoing - some good points being made.<br /> <a href="http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/e884692c-e5e5-4664-ae27-dba04f8bad1d">http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/e884692c-e5e5-4664-ae27-dba04f8bad1d</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-205984 Fri, 04 Dec 2015 11:27:47 +0000 kaputnik 205984@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><strong>Are the great pavement parking rows finally coming to an end?</strong><br /> <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34988833" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34988833</a></p> <p>Not the Scottish Bill, but reference to similar legislation being brought forward for England (and I assume Wales) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-203010 Wed, 28 Oct 2015 18:12:58 +0000 newtoit 203010@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Also the Police Scotland response comes across quite well - basically saying that if you expect us to enforce it, please stop it being so woolly for heaven's sake. Suggesting that double parking should only be allowed for emergency utility works is a good move - just need to bring in some compulsion to provide for us on bikes when doing so! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-203007 Wed, 28 Oct 2015 18:01:24 +0000 newtoit 203007@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Bikeability - sounds similar to Leicester then. The place is heralded as being cycle friendly but is full of shared use, which people get confused by and does lead to a lot of pavement cycling (sorry if I'm sounding a bit like Apollo21 on EEN!!). One thing they do well is contraflow lanes on one way streets though.</p> <p>Responded to this through the survey. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-202996 Wed, 28 Oct 2015 17:22:35 +0000 Edinburgh Cycle Training 202996@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ms Bawar's issue with pavement cycling makes sense to me.</p> <p>I have a good friend in Nottingham and visit him regularly. Pavement cycling does seem very prevalent down there!</p> <p>TBF to the city's pavement cyclists, speed cameras are everywhere in and around the city centre. Driving standards and road layouts are as bad as any city I've witnessed. Maybe I'd be tempted to cycle on the pavements there too. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-202988 Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:46:54 +0000 acsimpson 202988@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I responded to the survey rather than submitting "written evidence". I hope that's what most of "us" did, hence the lack of cyclists in the list.</p> <p>I notice the British Parking Association have made a submission and took a peek expecting some sort of Neil Greig level of logic but was pleasantly surprised to see that they are fully supportive of the bill.</p> <p>I like Sheila Bawar's final paragraph, although I'm not sure forcing people to use park and ride to get home would go down very well:</p> <p><em>May I say, Nottingham, the city where I live, has virtually eradicated parking issues in the city area by making so much of the city prohibited to private vehicles. They have created several “park and ride” areas, around the city boundary, where car users can combine parking cost with either bus or tram travel into the inner city area. I am not<br /> sure it went down well at first, but people appear to have accepted and adjusted to the situation. The park and ride package is at a reduced rate. Disabled/blue badge<br /> owners still have specified parking bays in the city area, and private hire cars are able to access most parts of the city.</em> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-202971 Wed, 28 Oct 2015 15:09:34 +0000 neddie 202971@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><strong>Reminder: The closing date for receipt of submissions is 5pm on Friday 6 November 2015</strong></p> <p><em>The Scottish Parliament’s Local Government and Regeneration Committee has launched a call for written evidence from all interested parties as part of its Stage 1 consideration of the Footway Parking and Double Parking (Scotland) Bill.</p> <p>Organisations and individuals are invited to submit written evidence to the Committee setting out their views on the provisions of the Bill. Those submitting evidence should feel free to address any, or all, of the policy issues contained in the Bill.</em></p> <p><em><strong>How to submit your evidence</strong><br /> <a href="mailto:lgr.committee@scottish.parliament.uk">lgr.committee@scottish.parliament.uk</a><br /> Alternatively, hard copy responses can be sent to the Clerk to the Local Government and Regeneration Committee, Committee Office, Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP</em></p> <p>From:<br /> <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/91536.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/91536.aspx</a></p> <p>Looking at the <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/91535.aspx">current submissions</a>, there isn't much 'balance' from cyclists... A certain Sheila Bawar even uses her submission as a rant about pavement cyclists.</p> <p>Would be good if as many of 'us' as possible could make a submission, to better support the bill. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-199173 Thu, 17 Sep 2015 14:39:57 +0000 acsimpson 199173@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The proposed wording is quite clear that <em>"Parking includes waiting"</em></p> <p>As the driver is waiting for the carer to return it would be explicitly banned by the proposed legislation. The driver should drop your dad and carer outside his house (with no wheels on the pavement) and then proceed to a nearby parking space to wait for the carer to return. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-199154 Thu, 17 Sep 2015 12:48:53 +0000 wingpig 199154@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>How about half the penalty upon first sighting/recording of the offence, uprated to the full fine if they're still there after their five minutes are used up? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-199153 Thu, 17 Sep 2015 12:39:45 +0000 wishicouldgofaster 199153@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I can see the argument for dropping people off, especially old folk. Currently my Dad, who is 84 has dementia and walking difficulties gets dropped off at his house by an old folks club. The driver plonks the minibus slightly on the pavement and a carer escorts him up the stairs and into his flat. Time stopped 5 mins.</p> <p>I think though they clearly have to indicate time-scales or folk will abuse it. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=3#post-199133 Thu, 17 Sep 2015 11:19:00 +0000 acsimpson 199133@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Klaxon,<br /> I put in my response that the councils shouldn't be allowed to create exceptions highlighting that if they believed the pavement to be wider than required they should instead be doing the necessary work to narrow the pavement. Although presumably as they haven't been able to find space for segregated cycle lanes they don't consider pavements too narrow.</p> <p>@crowriver,<br /> The only reference I can find in bill for accidents ishe pavement parking section.<br /> <em>"39. Parking includes waiting except in the case of (i) waiting to avoid obstructing the passage<br /> of a vehicle which is being used for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes or (ii) where the<br /> driver of a vehicle parks or waits as a result of circumstances beyond the driver‘s control or<br /> where it is necessary for the driver to stop to avoid an accident."</em><br /> So the exception only includes waiting rather than parking and then I would like to think it means avoiding an actual rather than abstract accident. There is certainly no mention of avoiding causing an accident.</p> <p>This exception is worded slightly differently in the double and dropped kerb sections in that it bans waiting but not stopping for boarding and alighting in these locations (no explicit mention of loading). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-199036 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:36:00 +0000 Klaxon 199036@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Given the legislation it's been copy and pasted from, I wouldn't be surprised if the intent of the original law was in fact to <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Chessington,+Greater+London/@51.3656507,-0.2909867,3a,75y,61.39h,69.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sOqqTRzWMEOe3M0Ac2YQLOA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DOqqTRzWMEOe3M0Ac2YQLOA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D234.50946%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x4875e1ce6f6cb125:0x8e9a2e03f1b4844!6m1!1e1">create streets like this</a> in London. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-199030 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:00:17 +0000 crowriver 199030@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@acsimpson, uh-huh, that would be the exception under "in order to not cause an accident"?</p> <p>Otherwise, folk can just put their blinkers on and pretend they're "loading" or "dropping off/picking up" for an hour or so...</p> <p>Basically the legislation proposed claims to ban pavement parking but in fact does feck all to ban it due to the number of loopholes (sorry "exceptions") left to placate motorists. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-199013 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:45:51 +0000 acsimpson 199013@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The pavement parkers who really get my goat are the ones who feel they must park on the pavement in order to leave 1.5 lanes for traffic to use as obviously no one can be trusted not to clip their wing mirror if only one lane has been left. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198998 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:19:12 +0000 gibbo 198998@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I think the gist of the proposal is that it should be illegal to park on the pavement, except when it would be inconvenient to not be able to...</p> <p>(Inconvenient = can't park within 50m of where you want to.) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198967 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:14:32 +0000 crowriver 198967@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Wilmington's Cow, no particular reason. However, there has been criticism of the way the Parly goes about its work lately.</p> <p>"There's not enough scrutiny, not enough rebels and too many party patsies"</p> <p><a href="http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/patrick-harvie-theres-not-enough-6350349" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/patrick-harvie-theres-not-enough-6350349</a></p> <p>"The purpose of a 
Parliament is to make sure the Government doesn’t just run around doing 
whatever it wants. It is meant to hold power to account. But the 
stale culture and old structures 
of legislative scrutiny we have are now so outdated that the SNP majority faces next to no resistance to its decisions.</p> <p>This problem is clear as day 
if you look at the work of 
Holyrood’s committees.</p> <p>The committees are a crucial check for all new Government legislation. Their job is to 
scrutinise proposed laws before they go to a vote and to make some noise if the Government gets 
it wrong. At the moment, very few 
people think our committees 
are working as they should.</p> <p>The first problem is the 
workload. MSPs often sit on 
committees with remits that 
span a huge range of subjects.</p> <p>Their workload is dictated by the Government’s requirements in terms of when they need an 
outcome. It should be the other way around – the Government should set their agenda based on how much time the committees need to carry out their work properly.</p> <p>In the current set-up, committees’ ability to put new laws through a detailed inspection is limited at best, non-existent at worst.</p> <p>And then there are the whips. Think of Westminster what you will, but at the moment there is far more rebellion and independent thought in the House of Commons than there is on the back benches of Holyrood.</p> <p>This problem extends to 
committee work – many members seem to have forgotten that their job isn’t to push the party line but to take a long, critical look at 
Government proposals.</p> <p>For example, when a row blew up between college bosses and the education secretary in 2012, the convener of the education committee dismissed the need for an inquiry out of hand.</p> <p>In 2013, an Audit Scotland report into the creation of Police Scotland concluded that the 
Scottish Government had not provided a business case to 
support the need for a single 
force – despite assuring the 
Public Audit Committee that it would do so.</p> <p>And just this month, we learned that barely a quarter of requests for action were accepted by the Public Petitions Committee.</p> <p>In fact, it’s rare these days that committees undertake work on anything ministers would rather was left alone." </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198944 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:09:14 +0000 fimm 198944@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Survey done.<br /> Added that anyone who walks is affected by pavement parking... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198942 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:48:55 +0000 SRD 198942@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Cara Hilton was at POP and very sensible on active travel. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198940 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:44:27 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 198940@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Any particular reason we shouldn't that your loaded question implies? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198929 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 23:13:10 +0000 crowriver 198929@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Would you trust this lot with the safe passage of the bill?</p> <p><img src="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_LocalGovernmentandRegenerationCommittee/General%20Documents/LGR_Feb_2015_(small).jpg"></p> <p><a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/29852.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/29852.aspx</a></p> <p>Apparently on 2nd September:</p> <p>"Footway Parking and Double Parking (Scotland) Bill: The Committee considered its approach to the scrutiny of the Bill at Stage 1. The Committee agreed to commence its consideration of the Bill whilst the issue of its legislative competency is being resolved and agreed a draft call for evidence."</p> <p>Attendance<br /> Convener<br /> *Kevin Stewart (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)</p> <p>Deputy convener<br /> *John Wilson (Central Scotland) (Ind)</p> <p>Committee members<br /> *Clare Adamson (Central Scotland) (SNP)<br /> *Cameron Buchanan (Lothian) (Con)<br /> *Willie Coffey (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)<br /> *Cara Hilton (Dunfermline) (Lab)<br /> Alex Rowley (Cowdenbeath) (Lab)</p> <p>*attended</p> <p>Clerk to the committee<br /> David Cullum </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198928 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 23:01:57 +0000 crowriver 198928@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Haha! Very good, bax! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198888 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 15:04:00 +0000 minus six 198888@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>What the peeps are asking is</p> <p><em>If I fix this reflective MOTORWAY MAINTENANCE sticker to the back end, does that mean Emergency Vehicle?</p> <p>Aye ? Nice one !</em> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198882 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:18:22 +0000 fimm 198882@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>This isn't even proper English:<br /> <em>"Do you think the police or local authorities would be able to enforce the proposed ban on footway, dropped kerb and double parking?"</em> Yes or no.</p> <p>Yes, someone would be able to enforce the ban, or No, no one would be able enforce the ban? I hope that isn't the question that they mean to ask... or do they genuinely mean "do you think this ban is unenforceable?" as opposed to "who do you think should be responsible for enforcement?". </p> <p>Or is it some other question they are trying to ask? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198850 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 12:17:04 +0000 Min 198850@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The exemption to allow drivers to pull over for emergency vehicles or stop to avoid an accident is pretty weird. If you have to put those in for some sort of legal reason, you would also have to put in being stopped at traffic lights or in a queue as those things are not parking either. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198848 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 12:00:02 +0000 minus six 198848@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>I seriously doubt the clerks would be trying to influence responses</em></p> <p>perhaps not, but the moto-centric perceptual bias is clear. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198847 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:53:08 +0000 chdot 198847@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>OK. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198838 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:39:39 +0000 Morningsider 198838@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>chdot - I think people are reading far too much into the wording of the survey. It's simply one channel for relaying views on the Bill to the Committee. </p> <p>I have no special insight into what the Committee will think about the Bill - I doubt the politicians will even have looked at it yet, all the work to date will have been carried out by committee clerks. I seriously doubt the clerks would be trying to influence responses. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198835 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:31:25 +0000 chdot 198835@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@ M</p> <p>Thanks, but reading comments above, there seems to be a view that the survey is trying to slant views/responses rather than being 'neutral' - does that reflect the intent of the Committee? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198833 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:26:35 +0000 Morningsider 198833@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>chdot - the survey is the responsibility of the Parliament's cross-party Local Government and Regeneration Committee. The Committee are initially charged with examining the "general principles" of the Bill and recommending to the full Parliament whether it should proceed to more detailed scrutiny. The purpose of the survey and call for written evidence is simply to gather views on the Bill and whether the general principles are sound (I imagine we would all agree that they are). These views also help influence potential amendments to the Bill if it proceeds to more detailed scrutiny.</p> <p>The more people that complete the survey or submit generally supportive written evidence (always the best way to get your views across) the more likely the Bill is to proceed and to be improved. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14848&page=2#post-198824 Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:07:39 +0000 chdot 198824@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@ Morningsider</p> <p>Makes (too much!) sense.</p> <p>So, who is responsible for the survey? </p>