Southwark Spine Consultation: Peckham High Street to Lordship Lane

[first mate]

Exactly.

[mikeb]

@ 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?

[uncleglen]

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

[rendelharris]

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.

[Sally Eva]

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]

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.

[rendelharris]

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.

[edhistory]

> the EDF car lobby

Is there any local car lobby?

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

[Sally Eva]

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

[edhistory]

Now it's a fixed penalty notice without any legal backing?

[first mate]

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.

[rendelharris]

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.

[uncleglen]

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

[rendelharris]

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.

[Champ]

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.

[JK2017]

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!

[Ampersand]

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?

[uncleglen]

I;m not saying I shouldn't have got a ticket- I'm just pointing out that Southwark will use motorists as cash cows at every opportunity.

[rendelharris]

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.

[Abe_froeman]

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.

[rendelharris]

"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?

[Louisa]

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.

[Sally Eva]

If you are disabled, the council will put a disabled parking bay outside your home, and enforce it.

You can apply here:

https://forms.southwark.gov.uk/ShowForm.asp?fm_fid=1304&np=1

[BrandNewGuy]

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.

[alex_b]

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.