Estate Agents Car Parking....

[nutty]

I know that I don't have a right to park my car outside my house in London etc etc, but it still seems a little unfair when our road is swamped by estate agents vehicles. I can only imagine it will get worse when the Foxton's minis appear.

If we had permit parking then would the estate agents be allowed to get permits for so many vehicles? The photo below is fairly typical for our road and we quite often see as many as 6 of these beetles parked up. It would be nice if they could just spread them a bit more around the local area so they weren't so obviously taking up so much room :)

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1124/1359452280_ea0dee42dd.jpg?v=0

[kford]

Don't wish for permits - you'll regret it. You can have as many as you like anyway, if the vehicle is registered at that address. And when permit bays are painted in, they never leave as many spaces as were there before. Plus the added hassles of having to have a book of visitor passes (5GBP-10GBP a pop) for tradesmen and relatives. Plus, permits are not effectve on the weekend when most parking congestion occurs from shoppers.

Unless, like in Australia, the permits issued free only to residents of a particular street, but that would never, ever happen over here - too sensible.

[Brendan]

You have every bloody right to park your car outside your house! When will town planners, engineers, architects etc realise that if there is a fair chance the every household has at least 1 car, BUILD IN A BLOODY SPACE TO PARK THE THING! Suburbs older that 50 years obviously can not be expected to have been designed in this way but some kind of modifications can surely be made. If everywhere else in the world can manage surely her majesty?s great kingdom can get their heads around it!?!?

I know you were being slightly sarcastic there nutty but then so am I. ;-)

[*Bob*]

Brendan Wrote:

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

> Suburbs older that 50 years obviously can not be

> expected to have been designed in this way

Ok - so that's pretty-much all of London. What now?!

[Alan Dale]

You don't have any legal right to park outside your house and nor should you in my opinion.

One of the reasons for the success of LL is that shoppers can easily park in the streets around the Lane.

I believe that the needs of the pedestrian and public transport local majority should be put first. You should also prioritise the needs of local traders. Again, subordinate the needs of local resident drivers to these.

Traders' needs may be very similar to those of the local pedestrian majority, because if they don't get the free short term parking provisions they need, locals may lose their beloved local shops.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Brendan - where are thou?

Even if households limited the amount of cars to just one (and many don't) but let's say they did.. that wouldn't allow that volume of cars to travel freely around a city the size of London (parking capacity is not the same as road capacity)

People are being discouraged from using a car and in the long term that won't be seen as the zany idea it is now

Plus "everywhere else" in the world haven't got their heads around it (in the sense you mean anyway) - most desnsley populated cities have higher density living accomodation, and fewer car spaces

Cities that are car-dependant (hello LA) have the joy of nose-to-tail jams on the freeway as an accepted part of their day

[kford]

But not if the local traders run a fleet of vehicles which they store on residents' streets. That's unfair and affects everyone, regardless of how they get about.

[*Bob*]

I realise that an Estate Agent is Lucifer personified, but if you can put that aside for a moment, they are in fact just another employed person in London who needs a car for work.

There are (no doubt) countless other anonymous-looking cars parked in the same street every day by non-residents.

The only difference is the cheesey paint-job.

[Alan Dale]

removed

[kford]

No CPZ. They are nothing to do with parking in this city and everything to do with making money.

[Brendan]

I?m not suggesting that motorcars be used or indeed promoted as the chosen form of transport. I?m just thinking about the fact that most families in London do have a car. Most do not need more than 1 and I think that you should be charged to park a second car and even perhaps be taxed higher if you own more than one car per family unless there is a legitimate reason (business use or a disability perhaps)

Alan you say that one of the reasons for LL success is that people are able to park. So these people are using cars to do their shopping and would foreseeable need somewhere to park them when they get back home?

What I think I?m getting at is that if each household had 1 space where they could park a car permanently for free but had to pay a fair wack to park a second it would stop people from having more than the necessary. If the parking was on the street it would have to be a registered, taxed vehicle and you wouldn?t get a spot if you didn?t have a car. The rest of the parking could be reserved for shoppers/estate agents etc and charged for by reasonably priced metres.

Sorry for the tone of my previous post. I?m not really that irate I promise.

[Loz]

No no no to CPZs. The cost a fortune and achieve nothing (if not worse). The actually reduce the amount of car parking available.

[SeanMacGabhann]

tis ok Brendan - I had an idea where you were coming from

The problem is reasonably complex (physical capcity against social expectations) but to take your 1 car per family idea

(and bear with me if people have heard this before)

take a quietish street - let's say Goodrich Rd. Park 1 car outside each house and the road is full. Problem is the houses have more than 1 family in them (oftentimes) - some of the houses may be actually 4 flats. Tot that up along the whole road and already it has exceeded any possible limit

What then?

[Alan Dale]

removed

[Brendan]

The fact that so many houses have been split into flats is a major factor.

If you took the general terraced houses in most of ED you could probably make provision for off street parking outside each one (as has been done to many) and still leave space for one space on the street for every 2 houses. You would have to walk around people?s cars on some of the pavements though. If everyone then only had 1 car it would all be fine and dandy.

Unfortunately it?s not that simple.

[*Bob*]

We could install giant steel pegs outside every ED house.

This way, everyone could 'peg up' their cars after a hard day's commute.

[Brendan]

Those VWs do look horrid though don't they? Don't they realise that giving them those paintjobs just puts people off? I doubt they attract more clients. If they were just normal colours no one would care.

[Ko]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

>Problem is the houses have more than 1

> family in them (oftentimes) - some of the houses

> may be actually 4 flats. Tot that up along the

> whole road and already it has exceeded any

> possible limit

>

> What then?

Exactly. A CPZ won't solve the problem of families having more than one car, or the fact that flats take up a lot of parking spaces. In my opinion, these are the real problems. ED has lots of houses converted into flats and too many families have two cars. If families can afford two cars - running costs, petrol, insurance etc, then they will probably be able to afford a second parking permit. Flat owners just have to pay the normal fee for their first car.

If there was a CPZ, the estate agents could apply for some extra permits (not sure how many) and wouldn't be that concerned about the higher prices for 2nd/3rd/4th permits. That would just be a business cost to them. If there was a limit on numbers of permits, they could just use unmarked cars registered to the address of a friend in ED - I wouldn't put it past them!!

I normally can't park outside my house, even though I easily have 2 parking spaces in front of my house. Its a pain when you have shoppping to unload etc.

I used to live in an area when my house was very central and right next to all the shops/bars/restaurants. It was hard to park anywhere on my road and I would often have to park a few minutes away. I just looked upon it as the downside of living somewhere so central and I really wouldn't have swapped that location because it was so great there.

Nutty - Ludlow Thompson are really pushing it though. I sympathise with your problem. :'( We used to have Wooster Stock cars parked on our road (they've now moved). Could you approach them and get an agreement from them to limit their cars to two maximum on your road?

I have had experioence of a CPZ elsewhere amnd it was a nightmare. :X

[Asset]

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> I realise that an Estate Agent is Lucifer

> personified, but if you can put that aside for a

> moment, they are in fact just another employed

> person in London who needs a car for work.

> There are (no doubt) countless other

> anonymous-looking cars parked in the same street

> every day by non-residents.

>

> The only difference is the cheesey paint-job.

Why do they need cars? given that most of the properties they will be dealing with are fairly close by they could have bikes or scooters

[nutty]

I agree the local traders need parking but does every estate agent who works at Ludlows need a car!? Surely it would make more sense for them all to get public transport to work and then share a pool of cars, therefore being kinder to the environment and taking up less parking spaces :) I bet they end up driving to properties that could be walked to in a matter of minutes...

And that paint job is awful...

** edited this post as realised I had attributed cars to Bushells - doh! **

[*Bob*]

I suppose, when selling a ?650k property, the owners would rather not have the viewing conducted by someone dressed head-to-toe in waterproofs with mud speckles on their face, 'helmet hair', and oil on their boots.

It's ok for pizza, but then they only get as far as the doorstep.

[Asset]

oh come on - that's poor.

[*Bob*]

It's the truth!

I can be sarcastic and realistic, you know.

[Jeremy]

Asset Wrote:

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

> Why do they need cars? given that most of the

> properties they will be dealing with are fairly

> close by they could have bikes or scooters

I definitely think that they should travel on foot when the property is close to the office. But if they're showing a buyer round various flats dotted around East Dulwich (not to mention Camberwell and Peckham), you would literally be walking round all afternoon!

[Asset]

on the back of the scooter! or maybe tandems.