Jump to content

Recommended Posts

@ Sally Eva - as we have previously discussed, as a "DO NOT" statement this is not a legal prohibition rule but a piece of advice that may be cited as evidence if there is a specific legal offence actually committed. This guidance does not distinguish between major roads where cars are zipping along at 60mph and urban streets where the speed limit is now 20mph (and in practice difficult to achieve even that).


I think it is likely that 5m (or less) will produce sufficient visibility. Are you aware of any accidents in this area where parking was a problem?

I wonder how many extra traffic wombles they will employ to gather the revenue when/if it's done? Also, maybe they are doing this to use up the money before next April. In my experience the only vehicles that are a danger at the moment are bloody inconsiderate cyclists...there was one on Sunday afternoon travelling at speed on the pavement in LL.

The next council elections are next year btw

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

In my experience the only

> vehicles that are a danger at the moment are

> bloody inconsiderate cyclists


God you really are the Daily Mail in human form, aren't you? Of the 1800+ people killed on the roads last year, and the 25,000+ seriously injured, how many of those do you reckon were harmed by cyclists? Utterly crass comment.

Hi Mikeb,

that's what I used to think -- that the rule was not enforceable -- it was just a good idea.


However that link which I posted


https://www.drivingtesttips.biz/nearest-you-can-park-to-a-junction.html


says that it can be enforced by PCSOs.

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If any paragraph of the Highway Code is

> enforceable it quotes the legislation which can be

> looked up.

>

> The rest is guidance only.

>

> It helps no-one to provide the URL of an amateur

> web-site.


The "amateur web-site [sic]" is however perfectly correct: there is no specific offence of parking too close to a junction if it has no yellow lines, however if you do so you may be ticketed for causing an obstruction.


I don't quite understand why the EDF car lobby get in such a paddy about this; maybe 10m is overdoing it but it's simple common sense that if you park close to a junction you're blocking sightlines and selfishly making things more dangerous than they need be for pedestrians, cyclists and your fellow drivers. Not to mention greatly increasing the chance of your precious vehicle being clipped by others.

The link which I posted says:


Parking near junctions (Rule 243) being one piece of advice stating: ?DO NOT stop or park opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space?. Almost all of us have parked within 10 metres of a junction at some point and as can be seen by observing car parking habits around us, many people park too close on a daily basis.


IF IT?S NOT ILLEGAL, CAN I STILL GET A TICKET?


Although there?s not a law that specifically prohibits motorists from parking close to a junction, you may still find your vehicle ticketed on your return. A non-endorsable (no penalty points added to your driving licence) Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) under the offence of unnecessary obstruction will see you fined ?50, or up to ?100 for more serious circumstances.


There's quite a lot more but I thought I wouldn't post it all. For further discussion see:

https://www.drivingtesttips.biz/nearest-you-can-park-to-a-junction.html

Parking near junctions (Rule 243) being one piece of advice stating: ?DO NOT stop or park opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space?. Almost all of us have parked within 10 metres of a junction at some point and as can be seen by observing car parking habits around us, many people park too close on a daily basis.


But Southwark is currently advocating 7.5m yellow lines at junctions? James Barber has also stated on this forum that he thinks 10m is excessive.

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Now it's a fixed penalty notice without any legal

> backing?


I suspect you're just being deliberately obtuse, but it does have legal backing: Road Vehicles Regulations 1986: "No person in charge of a motor vehicle or trailer shall cause or permit the vehicle to stand on a road so as to cause any unnecessary obstruction of the road."


In any case it's simple common sense and courtesy not to park obstructing the view of others at a junction. The reason the council have decided they need yellows round the junctions is because of people like you, who in the absence of clear regulation or enforcement wish to park selfishly. Well, now there will be yellow lines round the corners and they definitely have legal backing. When you whine about them, remember that it's the inability of a minority of drivers to show sense or courtesy when parking that brought them into being.

Most of the junctions around here have no kerb where they have crossing places for wheelchairs, pushchairs etc.

I woke up one morning to find that a traffic womble had ticketed my car at 07.10- the bumper was overhanging the crossing place by about 4". Then a few days later another car parked near me had a ticket issued before 07.45; that car had about 2" of rear tyre on the kerb.

If they resume their zealousness after the lines have been painted then Southwark will be quids in- not that I'm cynical or anything

Don't park in prohibited areas (no, not even just a tiny bit - would you expect to be let off any other offence on the grounds that you'd only transgressed the law a little bit?) and you won't get a ticket. Easy, really.

Exactly, even if its just a small part of your vehicle on a pavement or overhanging a yellow line you've still broken the law so just a bit more care when parking is required.


Having 10 m yellow lines at junctions is ludicrous, surely 10 ft would be more than sufficient.

There is a creeping inevitability that all residential roads will become CPZ. The first area to be controlled - Dagmar to Vestry - occurred the same week the last staff moved from Southwark Town Hall (maybe no surprise they looked after their own first, although they do deny this, and say it was merely coincidence).


This had the knock on effect that the roads east became gridlocked as Grove Lane and so on are experiencing now. This caused a vocal few who did not want the inconvenience of having to park off their own road to petition for CPZ.


It doesn't take many to influence the results while there are low turn outs. Southwark can then say they are merely doing the will of the residents, whilst getting extra revenue. Every CPZ will cause extra inconvenience and gridlock in the surrounding areas and the pattern repeats itself until the whole borough is CPZ.


Why they can't use this new revenue to sort out the bridge is beyond me....it looks as though they are trying to use the vocal few to postpone/cancel the reopening of Grove Bridge.


Watch out ED - CPZ is coming for you!

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> Is there any local car lobby?

>

> I'll ask the next 50 people I talk with.


Maybe when you are all sitting in the same traffic jam perhaps?

Firstly, how else are the council going to deter selfish and illegal parking? By appealing to your better nature? Secondly, this oft-repeated canard about councils using motorists as "cash cows" really is nonsense; it's said as if the council are some sort of robber barons, growing fat on the takings. By law, all monies from parking fines have to go back into highway maintenance and improvement or public transport, they can't be spent anywhere else (and without them you'd have to choose between worse roads or higher council tax). As per previous, the rules are clearly laid out (and basically a matter of common sense and courtesy anyway), if you disapprove of Southwark using you as a "cash cow" then don't break the rules and they won't be able to.

Agreed, I don;t think southwark see motorists as a cash cow, otherwise they would actually encourage motoring!


This council has an explicit political agenda against private car ownership. They don't impose all this expensive street furniture, road closures ("if I lived on Melbourne Grove ..." etc) double yellow lines, restricted parking , CPZs etc to make money. It costs a lot more than it raises.


They are doing it because they don;t think people should have their own cars and they want to make it as inconvenient and difficult as possible for people to continue to do so.

"Explicit" = "stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt." Think I may have asked you this before without response, where, please, can I find Southwark Council's explicitly stated aim of reducing private car ownership?

What frustrates me as a driver and as a pedestrian, is not being able to park a vehicle outside your own property because of ?out of town? commuters using my road like a car park so they can travel into town on a train/bus. This is all well and good when you?re younger, but for older and disabled people this can be infuriating. Having friends and family over to visit is almost impossible during the week, if my vehicle is moved for a second to go shopping or to the hospital- I expect to be parking three or four streets away on return. Adding yellow lines to junctions by 7m will exacerbate this problem, unless a CPZ is put in place. I personally would be MORE than happy to pay for the privilege of parking close to my home, to prevent the ignorance of commuting motorists.


Louisa.

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What frustrates me as a driver and as a

> pedestrian, is not being able to park a vehicle

> outside your own property because of ?out of town?

> commuters using my road like a car park so they

> can travel into town on a train/bus. This is all

> well and good when you?re younger, but for older

> and disabled people this can be infuriating.

> Having friends and family over to visit is almost

> impossible during the week, if my vehicle is moved

> for a second to go shopping or to the hospital- I

> expect to be parking three or four streets away on

> return. Adding yellow lines to junctions by 7m

> will exacerbate this problem, unless a CPZ is put

> in place. I personally would be MORE than happy to

> pay for the privilege of parking close to my home,

> to prevent the ignorance of commuting motorists.

>

> Louisa.


The data collected from the shelved Grove Vale area CPZ a few years back showed that the actual number of 'out of town' comnmuters parking and catching a train/bus into town was tiny. Most parking 'commuters' were workers in local schools, shops etc.

Interesting meeting at All Saints last night. Although not very well organised and far too few council employees for the number of attendees.


Lots of agitated cyclists and fairly annoyed residents giving very "direct" feedback to a small number of junior council employees who could simply say "we'll look at that" or "I think this was meant to do X". It's also clear that this is a cycle scheme for those crossing the borough with pedestrian and residential "improvements" tacked on as an afterthought.


As a newer (3 yrs) resident I learned a lot from residents who have been having these same battles with the council about rat runs for 25+ years.


What was most disappointing is the lack of participation from the Lane Ward Councillors and the absence of anyone senior in the council who was taking ownership and justifying the scheme from first principals.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The SE22 Evri delivery family are lovely, and always say hello wherever we spot them in the area. We gave them a box of chocolates during Covid as they were working their socks off at Christmas
    • What was he doing on the stage at Glastonbury? Or on the stage at the other concert in Finsbury Park? Grinning like a Cheshire cat whilst pissed and stoned 20 somethings on the promise of free internet sung-- Oh Jeremy Corbyn---  What were his policies for Northern mining towns with no jobs or infrastructure? Free Internet and university places for youngsters. What were his other manifesto pledges? Why all the ambiguity over Brexit?  I didn't like Thatcher, Blair or May or Tony but I respected them as politicians because they stood by what they believed in. I respect all politicians across the board that stick to their principles. Corbyn didn't and its why he got  annihilated at the polls. A socialist, anti imperialist and anti capitalist that said he voted for an imperialist and pro capitalist cabal. He refused to say how he'd vote over and over again until the last knockings. He did so to appease the Islington elite and middle class students he was courting. The same people that were screaming that Brexit was racist. At the same time the EU were holding black and Asian immigrants in refugee camps overseas but not a word on that! Corbyn created and courted a student union protest movement that screamed at and shouted down anyone not on the left . They claimed Starmer and the centre right of labour were tories. He didn't get elected  because he, his movement and policies were unelectable, twice. He turned out not to have the convictions of his politics and died on his own sword.    Reform won't win an election. All the idiots that voted for them to keep out Labour actually enabled Labour. They'll be back voting tory next time.    Farage wouldn't be able to make his millions if he was in power. He's a very devious shyster but I very much doubt he'd actually want the responsibility that governance requires.
    • The purge of hard left members that were part of Corbyn's, Mcdonnel's and Lansmans momentum that purged the party of right wing and centrist members. That's politics. It's what Blair did to win, its what Starmer had to do to win. This country doesn't vote in extreme left or right governments. That's partly why Corbyn lost  We're pretty much a centrist bunch.  It doesn't make it false either. It's an opinion based on the voting patterns, demography and statistics. Can you explain then why former mining constituencies that despise the tories voted for them or abstained rather than vote for Corbyns Labour?  What is the truth then? But he never got elected!!! Why? He should have been binned off there and then. Why he was allowed to hang about is an outrage. I hold him party responsible for the shit show that we've had to endure since. 
    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...