LSWR Cavalier
Established Member
Cycled through Sheffield some years ago, been through both by train
Bicycles are just an example and indeed something which would work in the Netherlands. The idea isn't specially to use the bicycle or whatever mode to go from home to mobility hub, but to use it from mobility hub to destination or railway station. In the UK, I would maybe focus on shared scooters or mopeds instead of bicycles and mainly look at giving the hubs a good bus service to the town centre and station.I suppose if you can do a P&R for a destination you can do it for an origin, but with many places in the UK being rather hillier than the Netherlands bicycles aren't likely to often be the answer. But really the carrot needs to come before the stick.
To be honest, it might well be worth, in places like the bit of Lancaster I referred to above, purchasing a few of the houses, knocking them down and creating residents' car parks, possibly on two levels (ground and an underground level). Compulsory purchase would be difficult because it would cause a massive fuss, but these are typically areas of very low house prices (outside London at least) for the place concerned, so if you offered people well over the odds it still wouldn't cost much and they may well sell voluntarily. You could also mark bays up one side of the road and have everything one way, and that should provide enough space for at least one car per household.
That is "high frequency" by my local standardsThat requires the transit to exist.
An hourly bus service from about 8am to 5pm does not constitute adequate "transit".
That is "high frequency" by my local standards
There are plenty of houses without their own parking in villages too.It's high frequency by rural standards, indeed. But it is not going to get city dwellers (who are the problem here; there is no great parking issue in rural locations, and if there is just buy a bit of farmer's field and build a car park) to give up their cars.
Getting people out of cars is going to require a bare minimum of 4 or even 6 buses per hour in order to replicate the "I can go when I want" feeling of a car and to ease connections.
There are plenty of houses without their own parking in villages too.
There are plenty of houses without their own parking in villages too.
Yes rural locations can, if anything, be worse as you can end up with an isolated car on an otherwise unbroken section of fast road, blind corners, etc.
Not that any of this *should* be a problem, but in the real world it can be. I’ve seen more near misses in rural areas than in built up ones.
There are, but it causes less of a problem, and as noted in rural villages building a car park on a nearby field is nowhere near as difficult a problem.
Yes, though that tends to have less to do with pavements.
Indeed, I suspect that a good proportion of pavement parking isn’t selfish “I’m lazy and can’t be bothered to walk”, but actually considerate “I’ve had a bad experience and don’t wish for an accident to happen”. After all, mounting the kerb isn’t exactly good for their car.
May well be true, but I suspect most of it is actually being considerate, but only considering people in the same role as you are when you do it, i.e. "I'll park a bit on the pavement then other cars can fit through more easily" without thinking about pedestrians and wheelchair users, as at the time of doing it you are neither so it may not spring to mind. So you could probably call it being "absent-mindedly considerate" or somesuch. Those most against it on here are the non-drivers, so they think only of the role of pedestrian, cyclist, wheelchair user or whatever because that is the familiar role.
The other is probably just following what others in the same location have done. Rarely will a narrowish, older residential street (where most of it happens) have no cars parked on it at all, so the trend to do it will have been set potentially many, many years ago, because there has been no point over the past something like 30-40 or more years when there were not several cars pavement-parked on it, so when you arrive you just follow convention.
There is a lot to be said for not thinking or considering, but for simply obeying the law: parking on the road
Pavements are for people
There is a lot to be said for not thinking or considering, but for simply obeying the law: parking on the road
Indeed. The RAC adviice is:It is not presently illegal to park on the pavement outside London, hence this whole debate which is about whether, and if so how, that should change. So pavement parkers are obeying the law.
If every pavement parker did obey the RAC's advice, there would be few complaints from pedestrians and of course wheelchair users. However, despite years of pleading/explaining etc. by motoring organisations as well as those who care for wheelchair users, there is still a significant amount of irresponsible parking, - the usual response being that they had no choice. Well, the RAC advice (as posted above) clearly says: "If there are restrictions, or your parking would cause wheelchair users or people with prams to have to walk into the road, then you should find somewhere else to park.".Indeed. The RAC adviice is:
"Outside of London, we advise people to use common sense when faced with no other option but to park on the pavement.
If you are parking along a narrow road, where parking wholly on the road would stop other cars, and particularly emergency vehicles, from getting through, then it is a sensible option to park partially on a pavement, providing there are no parking restrictions and providing you are not blocking a wheelchair user or pram from using the pavement.
If there are restrictions, or your parking would cause wheelchair users or people with prams to have to walk into the road, then you should find somewhere else to park."
This is exactly what people do on the road whcih runs past my house (apparently I am not allowed to say "my road" for brevity). For some reason people following the recommended sensible option seems to upset some posters.
If every pavement parker did obey the RAC's advice, there would be few complaints from pedestrians and of course wheelchair users. However, despite years of pleading/explaining etc. by motoring organisations as well as those who care for wheelchair users, there is still a significant amount of irresponsible parking, - the usual response being that they had no choice. Well, the RAC advice (as posted above) clearly says: "If there are restrictions, or your parking would cause wheelchair users or people with prams to have to walk into the road, then you should find somewhere else to park.".
That is why the matter is now up for consultation. As so many motorists won't respond to a reasonable request, the inference is that maybe they need the encouragement of the law to respect the welfare of others less fortunate than themselves. Time will tell as the consultation proceeds.
In areas where few homes have private off-street parking, I expect there to be kerbside provision made. Ideally, that would be kerb-edge posts that would have the benefit of not only avoiding cables across the footpath, but also preventing pavement parking. Where practical, there would also be wired communal parking bays. The size of the problem is however being exaggerated because:I'm wondering what's going to happen in the wonderful world of electric only vehicles, unless a very light removable battery is invented then where are people to charge their cars other than in the road outside their home, if indeed they actually have a road available. Not only would the roads themselves be logjammed but on narrow(er) roads so would the pavements thanks to both cars and electric cables, those with sight restrictions would be battling with both blocked and booby trapped pavements, does this consultation actually consider this as a potential problem?
Only if they aren't obstructing the passage of pedestrians and those using wheelchairs, (including their being able to pass others). The whole purpose of the consultation is precisely because the trust for drivers to park with consideration for all legal pavement users has been serially abused by a significant proportion of them. The law as intended clearly isn't working well enough.It is not presently illegal to park on the pavement outside London, hence this whole debate which is about whether, and if so how, that should change. So pavement parkers are obeying the law.
And when they need to carry stuff?
the usual response being that they had no choice