the offender has to prove that the vehicle teleported to materialise in that position
Or was pushed. Because, m'lud, I had broken down and stuff. But I've fixed it and everything now.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Pavement parking - another consultation.... (and implementation)
(208 posts)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
@Frenchy: Scottish Conservatives transport spokesperson Graham Simpson said: “This just shows that this legislation is in the ‘too difficult’ box."
That assertion is BS. As I've pointed out before, parking on the footway has been illegal in London since 1974 - and I can confirm from my own personal experience that it is enforced. If it can be done in London, probably the busiest and most densely occupied city in the UK, then it cannot realistically be 'too difficult' to do it in Scotland.
It might be possible to argue that the Scottish legislation is more complicated than it needs to be because it allows for more exceptions than the Greater London (General Purposes) Act 1974 does (I don't know, I haven't compared the two acts). But even then that shouldn't make it 'too difficult', just 'fractionally more nuanced'. The 'too difficult' assertion is just a rather pathetic bit of self-serving sophistry.
@Morningsider: Where on earth are all the cars going to go once they are moved off the pavements? I do not have an answer to that question—I am not sure that any of us do.
That's even worse BS. Where will all the cars go? They will go where they are meant to be in the first place: on the carriageway, where it is permitted, or in a designated or private parking place (car park or private garage/drive). It's obvious that the argument is utter tripe if you turn it around, as in: "Where on earth are the pedestrians (and wheelchair users) going to go once the pavements are covered in cars?" The drivist lobby doesn't even care whether anyone has an answer to that question.
Posted 2 years ago # -
In my experience the answer to "Where are all the cars going to go" is usually either 1 foot sideways on the road or less than 1o metres away where the nearest available space is.
The number of cars which you see with 2 wheels on the pavement for no obvious reason or simply because someone is parked opposite them is astounding.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The classic approach on Oxgangs Road means that roughly half the car's width is on the footway. This ensures that the vehicle is completely blocking the advisory cycle while leaving the rest of the carriageway unobstructed. So people walking, wheeling or cycling can <rule 2> off so long as drivers don't have to deviate from their course by even the smallest fraction.
It probably doesn't help that the centre of the road is a more or less continuous "ghost island", discouraging drivers from moving towards the centre of the road when necessary (although HC Rule 130 is clear that that's legitimate). I've never really understood why they did that. Yes, it's required adjacent to pedestrian refuges (of which there is precisely one) and mini right turn lanes (of which there are five - which gives an indication of the priorities at the time that design was drawn up) but Comiston Road seems to manage without a continuous ghost island, although it unarguably carries more traffic than Oxgangs Road - and it has more side roads, not all of which seem to be deemed in need of right turn lanes for access.
</rant>
Posted 2 years ago # -
@ejstubbs - Apparently narrowing the lanes like they've done on Oxgangs Road reduces average speeds.
Posted 2 years ago # -
But you’re expecting a logical and consistent approach to road markings.
There can’t possibly be legislated parameters or written guidelines or even departmental custom and practice…
Posted 2 years ago # -
“Apparently narrowing the lanes like they've done on Oxgangs Road reduces average speeds.”
Not the (part pavement) parked cars?
Sounds like a proper a segregated cycle lane would solve various problems(?)
Posted 2 years ago # -
Indeed.
I was told by a council officer that the main reason for putting in advisory cycle lanes on Gilmerton Road was to narrow the traffic lane and hence try and reduce traffic speeds.
Posted 2 years ago # -
They could at least have put in mandatory cycle lanes, like on Chesser Avenue/Hutchison Terrace. I know that they are a horrible dog's breakfast and too frequently encroached upon by drivists - especially on the approach to the junction for Asda (not unlike bus lanes in that respect) but they do seem to slow some drivers down a bit, probably because the poor dears find it difficult to process a slightly unconventional road layout. Of course the real answer would be to put in proper segregation - but even that seems to be difficult for some drivers to cope with (e.g. Longstone Road and Lanark Road after they were SfPed).
It's not even as if drivists are forbidden to
abandonsorry, 'park' their beloved mobility aids in mandatory cycle lanes, due to the unbelievable botch/cunning subterfuge highlighted by Roger Geffen here. And I think that's despite the announcement in 2020 (link and link) that councils (in England only) can use CCTV to fine parking in mandatory cycle lanes: the 'innovation' there seems to consist of allowing the use of CCTV, but if it's still not actually illegal to park in an MCL* in and of itself then that would seem to make squat all difference.* I've just had a quick scan of the statutory instrument concerned and AFAICS it only allows enforcement against parking in an MCL where there are also signed parking restrictions in place i.e. SYLs, DYLs or yellow kerb ticks controlling loading/unloading. So no meaningful change at all there, then. Quelle surprise.
Posted 2 years ago # -
We drove through Longstone recently and there is definitely at least one bit of floating parking that is a bit of a shock / "in the middle of the road'.
But I haven't heard half the complaints about that as from the posher bits? or have I just missed it.
But the bike lanes (with wands) there made me think it might be a better route that some others?
Posted 2 years ago # -
The Longstone section is so compromised (for a cyclist) that I've got more sympathy with those who want to rip it out. But as you say, it's the unbroken and much more effective schemes that get the noise
Posted 2 years ago # -
I don't go through there enough to have much sense of it.
Was just surprised to see wands still in situ!
the only other place I ride where that is true is Fountainbrigde.
Posted 2 years ago # -
On one journey through Longstone at the turn of the year, I did notice a 'floating' car had been crashed into. But there was no subsequent 'Outraged of Lanark Rd' media blitz. Guess no Tory councillors living in the immediate vicinity...
Noticed last night that the floating parking outside the flats on Lanark Rd has been removed. These flats do have off-street parking round the back (for one car per flat, probably).
Posted 2 years ago # -
I go through Longstone most days and I really like the segregated bike lane compared to what was there before. The worst bit is around the Village Inn and the Chinese restaurant as there are often cars parked on either or both ends blocking the access to the cycle lane. If the driver is around I stop to have a chat (but usually the driver isn't there).
Some people parking in the floating bays don't realise there is a bike lane between the parking and the pavement. Last year I had folks having their door wide open onto the cycle lane and standing there, I pointed it out and they apologised. Last week I also encountered a lady standing and smoking by her car. She apologised and moved out of the way once I informed her.
I admit I found the road a bit confusing while driving there on a winter morning when the road was wet and the markings not well visible. But at 20mph (which is rare to see) you can navigate through it.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@Murun Buchstansangur: I think the parked car being collided with was mentioned in one of the chipwrapper articles about the Longstone SfP scheme, albeit somewhat in passing. Or maybe it was just the taxi driver of 50-odd years' standing who was complaining about how difficult it was to drive along there. (Really? A 'professional driver' can't negotiate a few changes of direction along an otherwise gently winding road? Okaaayyyy....)
I think they were removing the floating parking bays outside the flats on Lanark Road when I passed by that way the other day. ISTR that was one of the features of the SfP scheme that SWEM got all aerated about, in a "won't somebody think of the children?" kind of way on account of the park across the road.
Posted 2 years ago # -
@ejstubbs I'm pretty sure I observed the damage *after* the chipwrapper stooshie, as I was expecting another flurry from the usual suspects. So probably 2 incidents...
Posted 2 years ago # -
I thought Lanark Road would be continuing as-is until later in the year so they could do a "more in depth assessment", so why are they modifying the scheme now?
Posted 2 years ago # -
ISTR that the removal of those spaces was something that the council had proposed a while back. From memory (there's probably more detail on the SfP thread) that stretch of road by the park had seen a couple of incidents - IIRC including the one involving a parked car being crashed in to, and I think some of near miss with a kiddy (possibly due to a "speeding cyclist" or some such nonsense) and SWEM were spouting off about how incredibly dangerous the new road layout was (but then they came out with guff like that about pretty much every single inch of the scheme - their reaction to it being most simply characterised as "whaaa, don't like, wanna drive my car fast and dump it where it like").
Posted 2 years ago # -
Suppose these would be ‘trip hazards’ on pavements.
Posted 10 months ago # -
Modern SUVs would just bump over them anyway.
The only anti-vehicle measures that work are ones that even the thickest, plankiest dimwit behind a wheel will look at and think "that might hurt my poor precious motor".
Posted 10 months ago # -
Am told by Transport Scotland that, subject to Parliamentary approval of the final regulations necessary, local authorities will have enforcement powers from 11th December 2023.
Posted 7 months ago # -
I wonder if someone more in the know can say; how extensive is local authorities' ability to *delegate* their powers? By which I mean; they're clearly allowed to "outsource" some things to some extent, but in cases like this do wardens have to be direct employees of the council or can they be contractors? And if the latter, is there any reason they couldn't be any random pleb on the street with a phone app?
Because let's be real, the chances of the council actually enforcing pavement parking in any meaningful way with their current setup is essentially zero - there aren't enough wardens in the first place, and those that do exist are too focused on "revenue efficient" areas - and if there's a legal possibility of it happening I think we should start agitating for a wider approach. A simple phone app with a defined process for taking a set number of photos illustrating a vehicle parked illegally, causing an obstruction etc, and for taking videos of vehicles idling their engine which all meet the necessary standard of evidence would bring the council a glut of revenue in a fairly short period of time and, IMO, drive behaviour change far more quickly and effectively than whatever wishy-washy nonsense they get up to come December. And we know it works because it's been tried already elsewhere - things are bad enough here I think you wouldn't even need New York's bounty system(reporters there get a percentage of the fines levied against offenders), there are enough peds, cyclists, and decent car-users out there who'd do it for free.
Posted 7 months ago # -
@Yodhrin - a penalty charge for a pavement parking offence can only be issued where that offence has been observed by "an authorised enforcement officer" or recorded by "an approved device".
An enforcement officer does not have to be a Council employee, they can work of a Council contractor. They must be wearing an approved uniform when undertaking enforcement action.
The system has effectively been designed to prevent citizen reporting. However, I wonder whether it would be possible for Scottish Ministers to designate a parking offence app that could be downloaded by citizens as "an approved device".
References: Section 58 of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 and The Parking Prohibitions (Enforcement and Accounts)
(Scotland) Regulations 2023 - which have yet to be approved by the Scottish Parliament.Posted 7 months ago # -
I genuinely don't understand why the opportunity isn't being taken to communicate the pavement parking ban far more extensively.
Very few non-transport nerds I know are aware of it and, despite having a start date set, communication won't start for another month. https://twitter.com/LivingStreetsEd/status/1711830206787256402
This is going to require a significant change in habits for some people, so why not tell them as soon as possible? Leaving it till later will surely just increase the negative reaction from them.
Posted 6 months ago # -
I wonder if the plan will rely on a system of 'warning notices' to vehicles parked illegally before they are given an actual fine. You can see this as letting them away too easily but on the other hand it's a lot more targeted than spending money on telling random people about the ban, many of whom won't even own a car. It is also a lot more likely to be noticed!
Posted 6 months ago # -
“
Hello - *** *** here from the news team at (radio) - we're looking to interview Cycling Edinburgh ahead of the council's announcing its plans on a complete ban on pavement parking? Would anyone be around tomorrow?
“
Anyone interested?
If so PM me.
Posted 6 months ago # -
“
From my reading of the council papers no new enforcement staff are being employed. So enforcement will only happen where there are parking meters, as per double yellow enforcement.
So streets link Lanark Road through Juniper Green will not be checked.
“
https://twitter.com/fountainbridge/status/1723268896558330118
Posted 6 months ago # -
“
At Thursday's Transport & Environment Committee I shall be proposing a complete ban on pavement parking in Edinburgh without exemptions (other than those mandated by the Scottish Government).
Any organisation wishing to make a case at the Committee for or against the ban is welcome to do so:
“
Posted 6 months ago # -
Only 3300 of the worst offenders?
Posted 4 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
