OT: Before you buy that new EV.....

Depends what a "sort of drive" actually means.

Maybe it could be useful for e.g. a bike or mobility scooter rather than a car?

Sadly that's not how the legislation works. The TMA 2004 stops others parking lawfully if the kerb has been dropped to allow vehicles to cross the footway etc. There's no requirement that there is still the same need. And it'd be hard to frame a simple test to tell if there is still a need. E.g. what if there is space for a Smart car? For a big mobility scooter?

IMHO what is needed is a requirement that anyone seeking planning permission to extend towards the road is required to justify the preservation of the dropped kerb and, if they cannot do so, to pay for the kerb to be raised as a condition for the development.

To make matters worse, round here the council paint double yellow lines where the kerb been dropped even when the garage that used to be there has been replaced by a habitable room.

Quite simply, a pavement with the kerb dropped is a carriageway. It remains so even if the property adjacent has a wall built at its boundary. The carriageway extends across the level part of the kerb, not the sloping parts.

Nobody has the right to obstruct a carriageway, not even the owner of the adjacent property.

We had a kerb dropped some years ago, and the paperwork sent in advance by the local council made this clear.

Thx for that - useful to know.

So in theory the house holder has not only lost the ability to park in his driveway due to his extension but can’t park outside his house either?

Tim

Why is that a problem? It allows the dropped kerb to be crossed bu prohibits *anyone* from parking in front of it.

Also where is the regulation that allows a person to park across his own dropped kerb?

Should that have been "a pavement with the kerb dropped is /not/ a carriageway"? I ask as the distinction between footway and carriageway is crucial for the language of section 86(1) TMA 2004 (Prohibition of parking at dropped footways etc.)

Indeed. But s.86(3) does give the occupier of the premises special status in one of the exceptionbs from the ban on parking ban

"(3)The second exception is where the vehicle is parked outside residential premises by or with the consent (but not consent given for reward) of the occupier of the premises."

The kerb can't be crossed when the garage abutted the pavement and there's now a room.

And the double yellows mean even the occupier can't park there!

See my reply to Joe a minute or so ago

They used to be parking spaces, and were often in use.

They are now EV charging places instead, and are not in use.

This may be seen as an advance by the council in Cambridge. They are the people who wanted to introduce a congestion charge on the business parks on the city edge, right next to the main road, and where the people who work there have no feasible alternative. (Political reality has sunk in

- after a survey they've abandoned the scheme)

Andy

It used to be an open field next to my house. Now it’s a housing estate. Things change.

Tim

The street in question - Seymour Road, Nottingham - has long sections of dropped kerb, some of it for drive access, some of it simply continues across the frontages of houses with no drive. The dropped kerb areas are specifically for parking, with the hope (I suppose) that drivers exercise a bit of common sense around driveways.

Yes I saw that, thanks.

Except maybe around my way where a couple of properties have the road outside the property marked as "reserved disabled only". While this may not stop any disabled person parking there I think it is the intention to be for the person living in the property.

I know of people who have been very disappointed on finding after "voting" for a residents only permit parking road that they are not guaranteed a space outside their own house but not even a space in the road if the number of permits are limited to one car per household or if the number of permits exceed the number of parking spaces. A disillusionment much reinforced if the council have charged for the permit.

Twice now my local council has asked residents living on the road outside my house if they want permit parking. Obviously the views of the residents have been taken into account and no such scheme has been subsequently introduced.

I wanted permit parking here. We live very near to the station. Even now we get 'day' parking.

But the commuters have largely stopped since the pandemic.

One counci; I know banned parking on roads near the station between 1 and

And also stops residents parking during those times. I'll bet to increase revenue those road will attract traffic wardens and parking penalties during that hour.

Sometime you have to be very careful for what you wish for

If it's just an annoyance that a lot of cars are parked in your street rather than preventing residents parking during the day then residents parking only may not be a good idea. One, you will usually have to pay for a permit. Two, it may be very inconvenient for random guests you may want to visit.

And the plumber and electrician and other similar trades will be unable to help you.

I don't want that. I am often at home.

I dunno about England but as far as I’m aware, the kind of “disabled parking” space that’s just painted on the road outside a disabled person’s house doesn’t actually have any legal status. You cannot be charged with illegal parking for using such a space without the appropriate badge.

Tim