Dropped kerb application

[intexasatthe moment]

Mmmm - I see I'll need to check several documents . SNMP , SNEP ,and the STP .

" What does the manual not include?

The SSDM does not include

Details of our policy about introducing traffic controls (e.g. parking restrictions); managing vehicle traffic on the network and providing access for different road users in new developments (e.g. whether new streets and spaces should be designed to allow access by buses or pedal cyclists). These can be found in the Southwark Network Management Policy (SNMP), the Southwark Network Enforcement Policy (SNEP) and the Southwark Transport Plan (STP) "

[marigolds]

Siduhe Wrote:

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

> Renata Hamvas Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Hi everyone, double yellow lines are not

> installed

> > where a dropped kerb is installed for someone

> to

> > park on their front driveway. They are

> installed

> > in other instances eg where dropped kerbs are

> put

> > in, possibly with an island in the middle of

> the

> > road to provide an informal road crossing

> point.

> > This is done to improve safety.

> > Renata

>

> Renata, is there any chance you could get this

> confirmed by someone at Southwark who is willing

> to put their name to it? What you put above is

> what I understood the regs say, but my neighbour

> is putting a drop in and the Southwark road

> engineer who came to measure up last week was

> adamant that double yellows are mandatory for

> every drop kerb now in Southwark - which is the

> same as what others appear to be being told given

> the above.

So changing the direction of this thread a little?

last week I parked across part of a 'type A' dropped kerb on Nutfield Road. Total accident as I was looking for road markings on the freshly tarmaced road and not at the pavement. Got out of the car and walked away from car, so didn't see the kerb (A fool and her money are easily parted - no way would I have parked there if I'd seen it)

My gripe is that when I got back to the ticket I saw that the exact corner on the other side of the road had a thick "H line' painted across, indicating clearly 'no parking'. There was no such line where I parked and the faded double yellows were at least a metre from the end of the car. I understand the rules about not parking in front of the dropped kerb ways but it doesn't appear fair not to put a line across what appears to be a generous parking space. The man who kindly watched me park, (without comment, thank you for that !) and then observed 'that corner's a gold mine for the council" win I came back, indicated that this is happening all the time at that spot. A nice revenue-earner for Southwark !

So my question is, is it worth appealing ? Especially if Suduhe's road engineer is adamant that there should be road markings across every dropped kerb in Southwark.

I'm not looking for sympathy or a rollicking for selfishness,just advice? It's a higher level fine of ?65 before Friday or ?130 after. Am I right to think that you pay the higher level if you appeal and it's over-ruled ? I do have photos to include in any appeal. Will readily pay the ?65 if it seems I'm on to a no-brainer. Although reading this thread it looks as clear as mud !

[AbDabs]

If you parked alongside a drop kerb then it's a no-brainer, pay the fine. Southwark may want to add double yellows to all new drop kerbs and some distance either side but it won't negate the existing legislation.

[intexasatthe moment]

Marigolds - what a pain . The situation in Southwark as I understand it is

White H markings will not be renewed or installed

Double yellow lines extending across the dropped kerb and 2 metres either side may be installed for new dropped kerbs .

[MarkT]

Texas, think above the kerbstone. This game is bigger than double and drop.

Few may have made the connection, but when the Dulwich Community Council discusses a parking scheme, you can't get in the door. Add speed bumps etc and, Borough wide there's more interest in the contents of the SSDM than in Heygategate.

I'm not campaigning for or against any specific item - but I'm definitely for Community Involvement and transparency. Watch this space,

Mark

[marigolds]

Thanks folks. Deep down I know I have to pay but always happy to take on bureaucracy but it looks like I'm on a loser here. Would love to know how many tickets are getting issued at that spot !

[Penguin68]

As regards the initial discussion on 'yellow lining' all new dropped kerb applications; and if you set aside conspiracy theories, then I think the logic of the situation is this:-

1. Where dropped kerbs are required, these may be either for public or private benefit.

2. There is general legislation forbidding parking over dropped kerbs.

3. Where (particularly) for public benefit ? you may anticipate reasonable levels of ?traffic? using them, it may be appropriate to additionally ?defend? them with mandatory parking restrictions (yellow lines 2 metres on each side of the drop) to give a wider visibility to those using them, and to make planning rules to allow this.

4. Where ?private use? kerbs exist, there is no further need to defend these with white lines (a cost to the roads department) which are anyway only ?advisory?. Existing legislation about parking over dropped kerbs will suffice.

5. Additionally, for private use kerbs, such enforcement will only be applied where the owner of the property served by the dropped kerb requests, to allow permitted parkers (friends, family, trades people) to park on the property owner?s authority.

What has happened, I think, is that the specific position in (3) has been extended (I would guess not as part of any legislative intention) by some officials to cover all new dropped kerbs, and not just a specific sub-set of these ? on the basis that this obviates the need for thought or decision.

This (I suspect) is a good example of ?unintended consequences?.

[AbDabs]

Penguin 68 - I am certain you are right. Someone has tried to simplify matters without thinking it through. Nothing devious, just a little sloppy. Common sense will undoubtedly prevail once a few heads have been bashed togather.

[LS1234]

Having spoken to the man at Southwark who has instigated this new yellow line policy, his view is that all off street parking is a hazard. He said that a 10 metre yellow line each side is what is needed for safety (something to do with braking distances) but that they realised that that wasn't practical so they gone for 2 metres either side. I can't see how it improves safety unless all the ones that are there currently are yellow lined as well?

[Penguin68]

The 'man at Southwark' clearly has a hatred of cars and people who own and park them and a very low opinion of people's ability to judge and avoid hazards. If this is a 'real' Southwark policy it is effectively new, has not been debated or discussed (or put in front of electors as a party policy) and (because it deals only with new applications and effectively creates a worse situation for existing dropped kerbs - which will be the vast majority in the borough for the forseeable future)is entirely mad and perverse.

I had assumed 'unintended consequences' - but this seems clearly a new policy being crept in under the radar - one which is clearly anti-car ownership (every new application will heavily penalise at least one, if not two, additional parkers - indeed in some streets if applied universally it could yellow line the whole street) - I wonder if our elected officals (one of whom, a regular on this forum, seems strangely and unusualy silent/ disengaged on the subject) actually knew of this new, draconian, policy?

Just how many accidents (associated with private parking) have been caused to make this in any way pressing or necessary?

[spider69]

From September to April job assessments are being made to get spinal point salary rises for the year 2015/16 in addition to the cost of living rise from the Council

Could this be justifying why a rise should be made by putting forward any number of plans to show they are earning their pay no matter how badly thought out. Get like minded in a room and it will get passed with no local consultation.

Strange that for all years past this has never been a problem. What has happened to people exercising a little common sense when out and about?

Perhaps Local Cllrs could explain where all displaced vehicles are to go?

Another revenue exercise by the jobsworths.

[Renata Hamvas]

It does seem to be a new policy, we had several come up at the recent Peckham and Nunhead Community Council. Almost all were deferred in a unanimous decision by Councillors. One on St Dunstan's Road was approved but only with the stipulation from Councillors that it can't extend outside the dropped kerb to a neighbouring property which doesn't have a dropped kerb. I have communicated my concerns about this new policy. I still haven't had the official response from officers about this.

Renata

[Penguin68]

Renata has been diligent in trying to bottom this one out and, for the record, is not the elected representative I had in mind. Thanks, Renata, for pursuing this.

[lesalden]

I have spoken to Charlie Smith the Labour ED Councillor about this. It was also discussed at the ED Labour Party Ward meeting.

It seems a completely illogical policy - H&S gone mad again. Charlie agrees and will take it up.

I suggested to him this is a test of whether the Members (representing the residents) or the Officers (representing themselves) run the council.

Good on you Charlie!

Les Alden

Upland Road

[intexasatthe moment]

Les - thanks for this info ,good to know that the issue is being raised by other people in addition to Renata .

[edhistory]

While we are waiting...

See how easy it is for Southwark to make an invalid order:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/2489/contents/made

[Earl Aelfheah]

I don't get why they're allowed. By installing a drop kerb, which no one can then park in front of, you're basically transferring a publicly available, on-street parking space into private ownership. Why would we, as a community want to privatise the highway in that fashion?

If every house did it, then what would happen to non-residents, visitors, or tradesmen wishing to park on the street?

[Earl Aelfheah]

...and it's really ugly when whole streets have their front walls taken down and their garden concreted over. What about visual amenity?

[antantant]

Maybe the new "policy" about the 2m yellow lines either side is actually a way to ensure that dropped kerb applications will not be successful? The argument against them becomes a lot more powerful.

[LS1234]

They only stop people who don't want to inconvienence other people who park in their road. I would have thought if it's extremely difficult to park where you live you won't be as bothered about the needs of others??

[intexasatthe moment]

I think antanant might mean that if a new application for a dropped kerb were considered as a planning application ( no idea if they already are ) then a legitimate objection from consulted neighbours would be loss of amenity .

[Jeremy]

I would have thought that if driveways are laid out sensibly (i.e. neighbouring houses have directly adjacent driveways) then it should still be possible to build driveways while still allowing some on-street parking. You might even have a net gain in available space.

When people want to use electric cars in years to come, it's going to become a lot more common...

[mikeb]

Southwark's logic makes no sense. If it's dangerous for new driveways then it's dangerous for existing dropped kerbs and they should be busy marking up all the streets in the borough. (not that I'm encouraging them to actually do this!)

[antantant]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> I think antanant might mean that if a new

> application for a dropped kerb were considered as

> a planning application ( no idea if they already

> are ) then a legitimate objection from consulted

> neighbours would be loss of amenity .

That is what I meant - thank you for being more eloquent!

[Earl Aelfheah]

Does anyone know whether this is, or is not the case? It seems crazy that local residents should get no say in whether or not a drop kerb is granted permission. Surely the council can't just hand over control of a section of the public roadway, to a private household, without consultation?