The ArgusBrighton streets in line for parking restrictions (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Brighton streets in line for parking restrictions

The Argus: Brighton streets in line for parking restrictions Brighton streets in line for parking restrictions

More than a dozen streets could see new parking restrictions introduced in a matter of months.

A consultation has been launched into a proposed parking scheme within the Lewes Road Triangle following a city wide review by Brighton and Hove City Council.

Among the proposals are plans to introduce resident permit parking along Upper Lewes Road and nearby streets, introducing double yellow lines and possibly introducing pay and display machines in the area.

The council hopes the plan could help tackle double parking on the narrow streets as well as stopping drivers parking on pavements, making pedestrians walk out in to the road to get past, and improve cycle safety.

It is also hoped the plan could help traffic flow and access for emergency vehicles.

The scheme would be in place between 9am and 8pm from Monday to Sunday and provide parking bays for residents and visitors and for businesses on the affected roads.

A six-week consultation is currently taking place with residents and businesses and a full report is expected to go before the council’s environment, transport and sustainability committee on July 1.

Local opinion appeared to be split when The Argus visited.

Some said it would free up parking for those who needed it most while others claimed it would simply drive the problems further down the road.

Jackie Jones, who lives in Upper Lewes Road, said: “I’m not in favour of parking restrictions or permits because they just drive the problem on to somewhere else and isn’t a help at all.”

Student Flora Miskin added the only time she’s ever experienced a problem is when her parents visit.

She said: “It’s probably not a good idea to introduce restrictions.”

Business owners also spoke out against the proposals.

A spokesman for Deacon and Richardson architects said the yellow lines currently in place on one side of Upper Lewes Road had caused him to consider relocating his business.

Councillor Pete West, chairman of the environment, transport and sustainability committee, said: “As with all consultations it is an opportunity for the community to give their views on the various parking problems they experience on a daily basis and allow us to find the most practical way forward to alleviate them.”

 

Comments (40)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:47am Mon 7 Apr 14

rogerthefish says...

It's only a matter of time, a Hanover will be next all driven by the councils pure greed..so Surrey street (by the station) why have they changed it to one lane, it benefits no one buses/taxis/ordinari
ly punters and took a month of jams to achieve a constant jam..why not just block all roads and close all businesses up....
It's only a matter of time, a Hanover will be next all driven by the councils pure greed..so Surrey street (by the station) why have they changed it to one lane, it benefits no one buses/taxis/ordinari ly punters and took a month of jams to achieve a constant jam..why not just block all roads and close all businesses up.... rogerthefish
  • Score: 53

9:23am Mon 7 Apr 14

NickBtn says...

And so the money making parking scheme rolls on. Hopefully people will express their views, although even a vote against a scheme may be ignored by the council as happened near fiveways recently...

The council should be stopped from making a profit on parking. If they had to provide resident permits in affected areas for free then the "need" for these schemes would virtually disappear! The council should not be benefiting from a "parking tax". Without this financial incentive there would only be schemes where really needed - that would surely benefit all?
And so the money making parking scheme rolls on. Hopefully people will express their views, although even a vote against a scheme may be ignored by the council as happened near fiveways recently... The council should be stopped from making a profit on parking. If they had to provide resident permits in affected areas for free then the "need" for these schemes would virtually disappear! The council should not be benefiting from a "parking tax". Without this financial incentive there would only be schemes where really needed - that would surely benefit all? NickBtn
  • Score: 46

9:43am Mon 7 Apr 14

Skidrow says...

There seems to be a widespread misunderstanding of the word consultation. Whilst in the past it may have meant asking with a view to taking on board the responses, its modern meaning is merely to pay lip service to responses, the outcome being predetermined.
There seems to be a widespread misunderstanding of the word consultation. Whilst in the past it may have meant asking with a view to taking on board the responses, its modern meaning is merely to pay lip service to responses, the outcome being predetermined. Skidrow
  • Score: 49

9:45am Mon 7 Apr 14

Max Ripple says...

I believe the good people of Hanover are currently planning a sort of community led survey of their own. But it is about transport and parking issues together and may not result in a call for a cpz at all. If they do not want a cpz but want to find their own way of solving the problem then the council had better watch out because they have proved in the past that they will not be pushes around. See their rejection of communal bins a couple of years ago. Alternatively they may say that they would like some kind of zone but ONLY on their terms. I'll try to find out more......
I believe the good people of Hanover are currently planning a sort of community led survey of their own. But it is about transport and parking issues together and may not result in a call for a cpz at all. If they do not want a cpz but want to find their own way of solving the problem then the council had better watch out because they have proved in the past that they will not be pushes around. See their rejection of communal bins a couple of years ago. Alternatively they may say that they would like some kind of zone but ONLY on their terms. I'll try to find out more...... Max Ripple
  • Score: 16

10:04am Mon 7 Apr 14

Sir Prised says...

Come on people, catch up. Personal transport is no longer an acceptable mean of transport for the masses, causing too much congestion and pollution. Just get on the bus/bike and stop moaning. There are still millions who require jamming into our already over-crowded city.
Come on people, catch up. Personal transport is no longer an acceptable mean of transport for the masses, causing too much congestion and pollution. Just get on the bus/bike and stop moaning. There are still millions who require jamming into our already over-crowded city. Sir Prised
  • Score: -47

10:44am Mon 7 Apr 14

cookie_brighton says...

They say that they want to stop double parking where people have to walk onto the roads............the
y introduced communal refuse bins onto our roads, especially in the Lewes road triangle, where people due to the amount of black refuse bags and wardrobes, beds etc placed on the roads and pavements........FOR
CES people onto the roads to get past.......just what the council are trying to get rid of with the double parking of cars (they say ) ......but hey, the council cannot extort money from people who put rubbish on the pavements / roads,,,but they can with introducing paying for your parking.........cars will STILL double park along park crescent, park crescent terrace, as there will not be enough parking spaces available. a lot of houses in the Lewes road triangle are houses of H.M.O. ( house of multiple occupancy ), students, so the council will sell, say, for example, 300 resident parking permits when there will only be about 200 parking spaces available, buy buying a permit .......DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PARK, it will be a first come system.
I saw an area where the council put out literature to residents and asked their views about a residents parking scheme, the overall result from the residents was....NO...the council went ahead and introduced the parking scheme to that area, they failed in getting a 4.75% council tax increase so they are now introducing paying for parking in an area which is free.
They say that they want to stop double parking where people have to walk onto the roads............the y introduced communal refuse bins onto our roads, especially in the Lewes road triangle, where people due to the amount of black refuse bags and wardrobes, beds etc placed on the roads and pavements........FOR CES people onto the roads to get past.......just what the council are trying to get rid of with the double parking of cars (they say ) ......but hey, the council cannot extort money from people who put rubbish on the pavements / roads,,,but they can with introducing paying for your parking.........cars will STILL double park along park crescent, park crescent terrace, as there will not be enough parking spaces available. a lot of houses in the Lewes road triangle are houses of H.M.O. ( house of multiple occupancy ), students, so the council will sell, say, for example, 300 resident parking permits when there will only be about 200 parking spaces available, buy buying a permit .......DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PARK, it will be a first come system. I saw an area where the council put out literature to residents and asked their views about a residents parking scheme, the overall result from the residents was....NO...the council went ahead and introduced the parking scheme to that area, they failed in getting a 4.75% council tax increase so they are now introducing paying for parking in an area which is free. cookie_brighton
  • Score: 15

11:23am Mon 7 Apr 14

cookie_brighton says...

cookie_brighton wrote:
They say that they want to stop double parking where people have to walk onto the roads............the

y introduced communal refuse bins onto our roads, especially in the Lewes road triangle, where people due to the amount of black refuse bags and wardrobes, beds etc placed on the roads and pavements........FOR

CES people onto the roads to get past.......just what the council are trying to get rid of with the double parking of cars (they say ) ......but hey, the council cannot extort money from people who put rubbish on the pavements / roads,,,but they can with introducing paying for your parking.........cars will STILL double park along park crescent, park crescent terrace, as there will not be enough parking spaces available. a lot of houses in the Lewes road triangle are houses of H.M.O. ( house of multiple occupancy ), students, so the council will sell, say, for example, 300 resident parking permits when there will only be about 200 parking spaces available, buy buying a permit .......DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PARK, it will be a first come system.
I saw an area where the council put out literature to residents and asked their views about a residents parking scheme, the overall result from the residents was....NO...the council went ahead and introduced the parking scheme to that area, they failed in getting a 4.75% council tax increase so they are now introducing paying for parking in an area which is free.
further to my last post.
With Lewes road triangle being an area of student accomodation, when the students apply for and get their resident permits to park ,( hope they are not exempt from this as they are with paying council tax ) I can see the scenario now, students finishing their school day at 3.30pm / 4 pm arriving home and parking with no or little problems, I then see the workingman / woman finishing work and arriving home around 5.15/30 pm and finding nowhere to park, having paid out for a parking permit.
[quote][p][bold]cookie_brighton[/bold] wrote: They say that they want to stop double parking where people have to walk onto the roads............the y introduced communal refuse bins onto our roads, especially in the Lewes road triangle, where people due to the amount of black refuse bags and wardrobes, beds etc placed on the roads and pavements........FOR CES people onto the roads to get past.......just what the council are trying to get rid of with the double parking of cars (they say ) ......but hey, the council cannot extort money from people who put rubbish on the pavements / roads,,,but they can with introducing paying for your parking.........cars will STILL double park along park crescent, park crescent terrace, as there will not be enough parking spaces available. a lot of houses in the Lewes road triangle are houses of H.M.O. ( house of multiple occupancy ), students, so the council will sell, say, for example, 300 resident parking permits when there will only be about 200 parking spaces available, buy buying a permit .......DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PARK, it will be a first come system. I saw an area where the council put out literature to residents and asked their views about a residents parking scheme, the overall result from the residents was....NO...the council went ahead and introduced the parking scheme to that area, they failed in getting a 4.75% council tax increase so they are now introducing paying for parking in an area which is free.[/p][/quote]further to my last post. With Lewes road triangle being an area of student accomodation, when the students apply for and get their resident permits to park ,( hope they are not exempt from this as they are with paying council tax ) I can see the scenario now, students finishing their school day at 3.30pm / 4 pm arriving home and parking with no or little problems, I then see the workingman / woman finishing work and arriving home around 5.15/30 pm and finding nowhere to park, having paid out for a parking permit. cookie_brighton
  • Score: 13

11:56am Mon 7 Apr 14

Joshiman says...

"It is also hoped the plan could help traffic flow" What rubbish.Traffic flow in Brighton is non existent .The traffic planners paid for by taxpayers dont know traffic flow means? Their answer is to stick a few more stop start traffic lights.
"It is also hoped the plan could help traffic flow" What rubbish.Traffic flow in Brighton is non existent .The traffic planners paid for by taxpayers dont know traffic flow means? Their answer is to stick a few more stop start traffic lights. Joshiman
  • Score: 18

12:20pm Mon 7 Apr 14

s&k says...

cookie_brighton wrote:
cookie_brighton wrote:
They say that they want to stop double parking where people have to walk onto the roads............the


y introduced communal refuse bins onto our roads, especially in the Lewes road triangle, where people due to the amount of black refuse bags and wardrobes, beds etc placed on the roads and pavements........FOR


CES people onto the roads to get past.......just what the council are trying to get rid of with the double parking of cars (they say ) ......but hey, the council cannot extort money from people who put rubbish on the pavements / roads,,,but they can with introducing paying for your parking.........cars will STILL double park along park crescent, park crescent terrace, as there will not be enough parking spaces available. a lot of houses in the Lewes road triangle are houses of H.M.O. ( house of multiple occupancy ), students, so the council will sell, say, for example, 300 resident parking permits when there will only be about 200 parking spaces available, buy buying a permit .......DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PARK, it will be a first come system.
I saw an area where the council put out literature to residents and asked their views about a residents parking scheme, the overall result from the residents was....NO...the council went ahead and introduced the parking scheme to that area, they failed in getting a 4.75% council tax increase so they are now introducing paying for parking in an area which is free.
further to my last post.
With Lewes road triangle being an area of student accomodation, when the students apply for and get their resident permits to park ,( hope they are not exempt from this as they are with paying council tax ) I can see the scenario now, students finishing their school day at 3.30pm / 4 pm arriving home and parking with no or little problems, I then see the workingman / woman finishing work and arriving home around 5.15/30 pm and finding nowhere to park, having paid out for a parking permit.
It is ridiculous in this city for students to have cars and I think they should not be given permits but of course the greens need their vote and will skewer their policy to keep their voters happy!
[quote][p][bold]cookie_brighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cookie_brighton[/bold] wrote: They say that they want to stop double parking where people have to walk onto the roads............the y introduced communal refuse bins onto our roads, especially in the Lewes road triangle, where people due to the amount of black refuse bags and wardrobes, beds etc placed on the roads and pavements........FOR CES people onto the roads to get past.......just what the council are trying to get rid of with the double parking of cars (they say ) ......but hey, the council cannot extort money from people who put rubbish on the pavements / roads,,,but they can with introducing paying for your parking.........cars will STILL double park along park crescent, park crescent terrace, as there will not be enough parking spaces available. a lot of houses in the Lewes road triangle are houses of H.M.O. ( house of multiple occupancy ), students, so the council will sell, say, for example, 300 resident parking permits when there will only be about 200 parking spaces available, buy buying a permit .......DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PARK, it will be a first come system. I saw an area where the council put out literature to residents and asked their views about a residents parking scheme, the overall result from the residents was....NO...the council went ahead and introduced the parking scheme to that area, they failed in getting a 4.75% council tax increase so they are now introducing paying for parking in an area which is free.[/p][/quote]further to my last post. With Lewes road triangle being an area of student accomodation, when the students apply for and get their resident permits to park ,( hope they are not exempt from this as they are with paying council tax ) I can see the scenario now, students finishing their school day at 3.30pm / 4 pm arriving home and parking with no or little problems, I then see the workingman / woman finishing work and arriving home around 5.15/30 pm and finding nowhere to park, having paid out for a parking permit.[/p][/quote]It is ridiculous in this city for students to have cars and I think they should not be given permits but of course the greens need their vote and will skewer their policy to keep their voters happy! s&k
  • Score: 20

12:48pm Mon 7 Apr 14

grabur says...

I lived in the park cresent area (for a decade). I used my feet, bike and public transport. I was living in multi-occupancy accomodation with 4 others. The last I stayed there, there were two car owners in the house.

It does not take a genius to figure out that a typical terrace only affords _one_ parking space. Any houses that have more than one car will just add to the problem. The terraces were designed without cars in mind.

Traffic in the area is worsened because people circle around the small roads looking for a space. All the traffic/anger and frustration made what is a nice area, and an unpleasant place to live.

I travelled into Brighton with my partner recently and was absolutely horrified with the parking situation around Hanover, Elm Grove and Lewes Road. It has only gotten worse.

Cars and traffic are so ugly.

The only fair system I can think of is, is having numbered bays outside houses. One each, clearly delinearlated preferably with small trees. If you don't use it, you are free to sub let it, or place a shrub there. Incentivise non-car ownership, rather blind profiteering.

Long vehicles, multiple vehicles per household and visitors will pose a problem. So how do you deal with these? Why should one house with one car be punsished by a house with three? Don't forget social impact of people slamming car doors outside your house late at night. Many living in Hanover are trying to sleep in their front rooms a metre away from the pavements.

This is a national problem. The proliferation of the motorised vehicle and population expansion will only worsen the situtation. It's a real blight.

Car parks could help here. I previously joked that the Level could be turned into a giant underground car park. Wouldn't a pedestrianised Hanover and surrounding area feel better for it? How about a huge carpark under the prom like at Hastings? Alternatively super car parks on the city fringes could be preferable for those that do need to travel outside the city borders. People that use these could get free public transport travel into and out of the city centre or access to free cycle hire and secure cycle parking. We could then push a lot of traffic out of the city centre which would be better for everyone.

Friends - a family of three visited at the weekend. They were based outside Brighton, and they spent three hours navigating their way into the city by car on Saturday. They won't be doing it again, and they are quite fond of the city.
I lived in the park cresent area (for a decade). I used my feet, bike and public transport. I was living in multi-occupancy accomodation with 4 others. The last I stayed there, there were two car owners in the house. It does not take a genius to figure out that a typical terrace only affords _one_ parking space. Any houses that have more than one car will just add to the problem. The terraces were designed without cars in mind. Traffic in the area is worsened because people circle around the small roads looking for a space. All the traffic/anger and frustration made what is a nice area, and an unpleasant place to live. I travelled into Brighton with my partner recently and was absolutely horrified with the parking situation around Hanover, Elm Grove and Lewes Road. It has only gotten worse. Cars and traffic are so ugly. The only fair system I can think of is, is having numbered bays outside houses. One each, clearly delinearlated preferably with small trees. If you don't use it, you are free to sub let it, or place a shrub there. Incentivise non-car ownership, rather blind profiteering. Long vehicles, multiple vehicles per household and visitors will pose a problem. So how do you deal with these? Why should one house with one car be punsished by a house with three? Don't forget social impact of people slamming car doors outside your house late at night. Many living in Hanover are trying to sleep in their front rooms a metre away from the pavements. This is a national problem. The proliferation of the motorised vehicle and population expansion will only worsen the situtation. It's a real blight. Car parks could help here. I previously joked that the Level could be turned into a giant underground car park. Wouldn't a pedestrianised Hanover and surrounding area feel better for it? How about a huge carpark under the prom like at Hastings? Alternatively super car parks on the city fringes could be preferable for those that do need to travel outside the city borders. People that use these could get free public transport travel into and out of the city centre or access to free cycle hire and secure cycle parking. We could then push a lot of traffic out of the city centre which would be better for everyone. Friends - a family of three visited at the weekend. They were based outside Brighton, and they spent three hours navigating their way into the city by car on Saturday. They won't be doing it again, and they are quite fond of the city. grabur
  • Score: -12

12:51pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Fight_Back says...

The council claims it doesn't make a profit on residents permits and that the charges cover the costs of running the scheme. Would they like to explain how come Bristol City council claims the same thing and their permits are HALF the price of ours ? Either the council are lying or they're so incompetent that they all need sacking.
The council claims it doesn't make a profit on residents permits and that the charges cover the costs of running the scheme. Would they like to explain how come Bristol City council claims the same thing and their permits are HALF the price of ours ? Either the council are lying or they're so incompetent that they all need sacking. Fight_Back
  • Score: 27

1:04pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Meanwhile the council is planning give permission to the unis to build student homes with 500 parking spaces on Preston barracks. Free parking to students who also don't pay council tax. More than 5,000 additional students are on their way.
The Green Party, punishing working local people to line the pockets of their transient student voters.
We are being mugged by Mr Davey and his colleagues.
Meanwhile the council is planning give permission to the unis to build student homes with 500 parking spaces on Preston barracks. Free parking to students who also don't pay council tax. More than 5,000 additional students are on their way. The Green Party, punishing working local people to line the pockets of their transient student voters. We are being mugged by Mr Davey and his colleagues. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 31

1:21pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Just trying to earn a crust says...

Those poor people in the surrounding streets, whose roads will now become van car parks. Any one who wants to avoid the charges will use their roads as a free car park. Which is exactly Kitkat and his pals want, because then the neighbouring streets will ask for their area to have parking restrictions. Parts of city such as Carden Hill and Preston Drove are now van ghettos due to theses ridiculous parking restrictions. The Green council should hang their heads in shame at the mess they have made of Brighton. They are not even fit to run a dolls house. They must never be given a position of power again
Those poor people in the surrounding streets, whose roads will now become van car parks. Any one who wants to avoid the charges will use their roads as a free car park. Which is exactly Kitkat and his pals want, because then the neighbouring streets will ask for their area to have parking restrictions. Parts of city such as Carden Hill and Preston Drove are now van ghettos due to theses ridiculous parking restrictions. The Green council should hang their heads in shame at the mess they have made of Brighton. They are not even fit to run a dolls house. They must never be given a position of power again Just trying to earn a crust
  • Score: 24

1:31pm Mon 7 Apr 14

lewes road low life says...

Being a self employed tradesman driving is an essential part of my job, as is parking within a reasonable distance of my home to load / unload.
Since the greens have been in I have seen a substancial increase in my working day and journey times to and from my home off the Lewes Road. If this goes ahead the problem will be even worse. This scheme will only create further parking problems in streets close by. This is the beginning of the end, this parking scheme will just increase to cover the whole of Brighton. Working people and families will be driven out of the Lewes Road area, leaving it primarily to the buy to let market, a transient student population absent of any real community feel.
Time to move, I think .
Being a self employed tradesman driving is an essential part of my job, as is parking within a reasonable distance of my home to load / unload. Since the greens have been in I have seen a substancial increase in my working day and journey times to and from my home off the Lewes Road. If this goes ahead the problem will be even worse. This scheme will only create further parking problems in streets close by. This is the beginning of the end, this parking scheme will just increase to cover the whole of Brighton. Working people and families will be driven out of the Lewes Road area, leaving it primarily to the buy to let market, a transient student population absent of any real community feel. Time to move, I think . lewes road low life
  • Score: 25

1:35pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Pheasant pluckers son says...

What the council says:
we are going to complete 6 week consultation period with residents and report back to the relevant committee on July 1st.
What's is actually means:
we'll do the consultation and do what ever we want, ignoring public opinion and residents. After all it's about screwing the car driver into paying another £100 or more a year and making money.
I'm surprised the daft greens ain't putting in cycle lanes there .
What the council says: we are going to complete 6 week consultation period with residents and report back to the relevant committee on July 1st. What's is actually means: we'll do the consultation and do what ever we want, ignoring public opinion and residents. After all it's about screwing the car driver into paying another £100 or more a year and making money. I'm surprised the daft greens ain't putting in cycle lanes there . Pheasant pluckers son
  • Score: 15

1:55pm Mon 7 Apr 14

DC Brighton says...

Sir Prised wrote:
Come on people, catch up. Personal transport is no longer an acceptable mean of transport for the masses, causing too much congestion and pollution. Just get on the bus/bike and stop moaning. There are still millions who require jamming into our already over-crowded city.
This has nothing to do with congestion or pollution.

I, like most local car owners I know, have little choice but to own their own "personal transport" in Brighton. This merely makes it more expensive and less convenient. It addresses nothing more than the council's inability to control its budget.

Come on, catch up.
[quote][p][bold]Sir Prised[/bold] wrote: Come on people, catch up. Personal transport is no longer an acceptable mean of transport for the masses, causing too much congestion and pollution. Just get on the bus/bike and stop moaning. There are still millions who require jamming into our already over-crowded city.[/p][/quote]This has nothing to do with congestion or pollution. I, like most local car owners I know, have little choice but to own their own "personal transport" in Brighton. This merely makes it more expensive and less convenient. It addresses nothing more than the council's inability to control its budget. Come on, catch up. DC Brighton
  • Score: 13

2:32pm Mon 7 Apr 14

PETE OF QUEENS PARK says...

If this council wants to improve traffic flow then I suggest they start off with Manor Hill it must be a nightmare for bus drivers and also for emergency services.
If this council wants to improve traffic flow then I suggest they start off with Manor Hill it must be a nightmare for bus drivers and also for emergency services. PETE OF QUEENS PARK
  • Score: 1

3:20pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Boloney-marshal says...

At the end of the day this is a revenue collection exercise with no thought of how it affects residents,shop keepers and visitors. This is truly a rotten city.
At the end of the day this is a revenue collection exercise with no thought of how it affects residents,shop keepers and visitors. This is truly a rotten city. Boloney-marshal
  • Score: 17

3:30pm Mon 7 Apr 14

grabur says...

@lewes road low life,

I understand your predicament. You can't expect to run a physical business from such a residential area.

Some vans are unassuming, and yours might be a multi-purpose vehicle for both business and pleasure and in that manner might not be a problem for others. I for one am fed up of having large commercial vehicles parked outside my house depriving us of our space. Especially when their drivers have other vehicles. I know the law doesn't discriminate against such parking. If people do not show consideration to others, then perhaps the state should.

What would be good for sole traders is a good cheap, secure lock up for your goods and van. A small trades estate.

Other people are bemoaning the idea of permits. Accusing the council of making a fast buck. But no-one is particularly suggesting any solutions.

I hate to say it, but those who take no personal responsibility in terraced areas by having more than one vehicle on the road are just adding to the problem and ensure that permitting will inevitably happen.

Even areas with private parking are being overrun by cars, Hangleton Road should be a really pretty road - but it's pig ugly due to the on street parking. Grass verges, pavements, everywhere is being overrun by vehicles.

Tree planting and hiding or reducing the amount of vehicles is a great step towards making an area a more desirable place to live. Cars take up too much space, when space is such a premium. The hum of traffic is also really insidious and I'm sure psychologically damaging for pedestrians. Think the Vogue Gyratory feels like an insurmountable barrier, much like North Road, North Street, Kings Rd and Queens Rd and even Western Rd with just the buses. Venice anyone?
@lewes road low life, I understand your predicament. You can't expect to run a physical business from such a residential area. Some vans are unassuming, and yours might be a multi-purpose vehicle for both business and pleasure and in that manner might not be a problem for others. I for one am fed up of having large commercial vehicles parked outside my house depriving us of our space. Especially when their drivers have other vehicles. I know the law doesn't discriminate against such parking. If people do not show consideration to others, then perhaps the state should. What would be good for sole traders is a good cheap, secure lock up for your goods and van. A small trades estate. Other people are bemoaning the idea of permits. Accusing the council of making a fast buck. But no-one is particularly suggesting any solutions. I hate to say it, but those who take no personal responsibility in terraced areas by having more than one vehicle on the road are just adding to the problem and ensure that permitting will inevitably happen. Even areas with private parking are being overrun by cars, Hangleton Road should be a really pretty road - but it's pig ugly due to the on street parking. Grass verges, pavements, everywhere is being overrun by vehicles. Tree planting and hiding or reducing the amount of vehicles is a great step towards making an area a more desirable place to live. Cars take up too much space, when space is such a premium. The hum of traffic is also really insidious and I'm sure psychologically damaging for pedestrians. Think the Vogue Gyratory feels like an insurmountable barrier, much like North Road, North Street, Kings Rd and Queens Rd and even Western Rd with just the buses. Venice anyone? grabur
  • Score: -4

4:23pm Mon 7 Apr 14

tom servo says...

grabur wrote:
@lewes road low life,

I understand your predicament. You can't expect to run a physical business from such a residential area.

Some vans are unassuming, and yours might be a multi-purpose vehicle for both business and pleasure and in that manner might not be a problem for others. I for one am fed up of having large commercial vehicles parked outside my house depriving us of our space. Especially when their drivers have other vehicles. I know the law doesn't discriminate against such parking. If people do not show consideration to others, then perhaps the state should.

What would be good for sole traders is a good cheap, secure lock up for your goods and van. A small trades estate.

Other people are bemoaning the idea of permits. Accusing the council of making a fast buck. But no-one is particularly suggesting any solutions.

I hate to say it, but those who take no personal responsibility in terraced areas by having more than one vehicle on the road are just adding to the problem and ensure that permitting will inevitably happen.

Even areas with private parking are being overrun by cars, Hangleton Road should be a really pretty road - but it's pig ugly due to the on street parking. Grass verges, pavements, everywhere is being overrun by vehicles.

Tree planting and hiding or reducing the amount of vehicles is a great step towards making an area a more desirable place to live. Cars take up too much space, when space is such a premium. The hum of traffic is also really insidious and I'm sure psychologically damaging for pedestrians. Think the Vogue Gyratory feels like an insurmountable barrier, much like North Road, North Street, Kings Rd and Queens Rd and even Western Rd with just the buses. Venice anyone?
"I for one am fed up of having large commercial vehicles parked outside my house depriving us of our space."

Your space?.... you own that part of the public highway do you? .... who are you? the Queen?
[quote][p][bold]grabur[/bold] wrote: @lewes road low life, I understand your predicament. You can't expect to run a physical business from such a residential area. Some vans are unassuming, and yours might be a multi-purpose vehicle for both business and pleasure and in that manner might not be a problem for others. I for one am fed up of having large commercial vehicles parked outside my house depriving us of our space. Especially when their drivers have other vehicles. I know the law doesn't discriminate against such parking. If people do not show consideration to others, then perhaps the state should. What would be good for sole traders is a good cheap, secure lock up for your goods and van. A small trades estate. Other people are bemoaning the idea of permits. Accusing the council of making a fast buck. But no-one is particularly suggesting any solutions. I hate to say it, but those who take no personal responsibility in terraced areas by having more than one vehicle on the road are just adding to the problem and ensure that permitting will inevitably happen. Even areas with private parking are being overrun by cars, Hangleton Road should be a really pretty road - but it's pig ugly due to the on street parking. Grass verges, pavements, everywhere is being overrun by vehicles. Tree planting and hiding or reducing the amount of vehicles is a great step towards making an area a more desirable place to live. Cars take up too much space, when space is such a premium. The hum of traffic is also really insidious and I'm sure psychologically damaging for pedestrians. Think the Vogue Gyratory feels like an insurmountable barrier, much like North Road, North Street, Kings Rd and Queens Rd and even Western Rd with just the buses. Venice anyone?[/p][/quote]"I for one am fed up of having large commercial vehicles parked outside my house depriving us of our space." Your space?.... you own that part of the public highway do you? .... who are you? the Queen? tom servo
  • Score: 8

4:35pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Supporter of Democracy says...

As others have already highlighted. This Council doesn't know the meaning of the words 'Consultation' or 'Democracy'. They will invite people to vote on whether they want a scheme or not, and invite them to make comments, and then they will ignore them and do whatever they wanted to do in the first place (hint: Implement the scheme and use displacement of the problem to the neighbouring streets to imlement the next scheme, and so on).

This is in direct breach of their own published policy on implementation of new parking schemes (clause 2 of policy document HP 4/15), but do they care? Do they Hell.
As others have already highlighted. This Council doesn't know the meaning of the words 'Consultation' or 'Democracy'. They will invite people to vote on whether they want a scheme or not, and invite them to make comments, and then they will ignore them and do whatever they wanted to do in the first place (hint: Implement the scheme and use displacement of the problem to the neighbouring streets to imlement the next scheme, and so on). This is in direct breach of their own published policy on implementation of new parking schemes (clause 2 of policy document HP 4/15), but do they care? Do they Hell. Supporter of Democracy
  • Score: 10

5:11pm Mon 7 Apr 14

tez1959 says...

told you all before the greens want everybody to get a bike to go about there business i dont think i could get a 3 piece ladder on it though the greens only need to carry a pen to sign away the cycle lanes and bus lanes that they keep on putting in across the county there clueless and dont live in the real world like us sooner they go the better
told you all before the greens want everybody to get a bike to go about there business i dont think i could get a 3 piece ladder on it though the greens only need to carry a pen to sign away the cycle lanes and bus lanes that they keep on putting in across the county there clueless and dont live in the real world like us sooner they go the better tez1959
  • Score: 8

5:36pm Mon 7 Apr 14

grabur says...

@tom servo, verry funny. It's a perception thing, feeling hemmed in by a fleet of other people's vehicles.

There's a difference between having a car parked outside where you live compared to a van, bus or truck. About the only private space we have is where we live, and having an unblocked view is preferable. If you have a large vehicle, put it outside your own dwelling.

To be fair the government doesn't know the meaning of the word democracy. People are berating the Greens. Of course if everyone was using their bikes, then transport and parking would be better. That's a good goal to have. There exists a problem. Provide some answers rather than constantly moaning. Parking and traffic is a big issue in Brighton and Hove you can't really lay the blame at the Council's door! However they may be able to help. Do you not agree that something needs to change? You need some progression, rather than just maintaining the status quo that no one is particularly happy with anyway.
@tom servo, verry funny. It's a perception thing, feeling hemmed in by a fleet of other people's vehicles. There's a difference between having a car parked outside where you live compared to a van, bus or truck. About the only private space we have is where we live, and having an unblocked view is preferable. If you have a large vehicle, put it outside your own dwelling. To be fair the government doesn't know the meaning of the word democracy. People are berating the Greens. Of course if everyone was using their bikes, then transport and parking would be better. That's a good goal to have. There exists a problem. Provide some answers rather than constantly moaning. Parking and traffic is a big issue in Brighton and Hove you can't really lay the blame at the Council's door! However they may be able to help. Do you not agree that something needs to change? You need some progression, rather than just maintaining the status quo that no one is particularly happy with anyway. grabur
  • Score: 2

5:52pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Brighton Living says...

Please be Ewart Street please, please, please......
Please be Ewart Street please, please, please...... Brighton Living
  • Score: 4

7:25pm Mon 7 Apr 14

tom servo says...

grabur wrote:
@tom servo, verry funny. It's a perception thing, feeling hemmed in by a fleet of other people's vehicles.

There's a difference between having a car parked outside where you live compared to a van, bus or truck. About the only private space we have is where we live, and having an unblocked view is preferable. If you have a large vehicle, put it outside your own dwelling.

To be fair the government doesn't know the meaning of the word democracy. People are berating the Greens. Of course if everyone was using their bikes, then transport and parking would be better. That's a good goal to have. There exists a problem. Provide some answers rather than constantly moaning. Parking and traffic is a big issue in Brighton and Hove you can't really lay the blame at the Council's door! However they may be able to help. Do you not agree that something needs to change? You need some progression, rather than just maintaining the status quo that no one is particularly happy with anyway.
" If you have a large vehicle, put it outside your own dwelling."

Can you stop telling people what to do on the public highway. The "public" have every legal right to park on the public highway where there are no restrictions.

If you don't want people parking outside your house then I suggest you buy a house somewhere a bit more remote than Brighton.
[quote][p][bold]grabur[/bold] wrote: @tom servo, verry funny. It's a perception thing, feeling hemmed in by a fleet of other people's vehicles. There's a difference between having a car parked outside where you live compared to a van, bus or truck. About the only private space we have is where we live, and having an unblocked view is preferable. If you have a large vehicle, put it outside your own dwelling. To be fair the government doesn't know the meaning of the word democracy. People are berating the Greens. Of course if everyone was using their bikes, then transport and parking would be better. That's a good goal to have. There exists a problem. Provide some answers rather than constantly moaning. Parking and traffic is a big issue in Brighton and Hove you can't really lay the blame at the Council's door! However they may be able to help. Do you not agree that something needs to change? You need some progression, rather than just maintaining the status quo that no one is particularly happy with anyway.[/p][/quote]" If you have a large vehicle, put it outside your own dwelling." Can you stop telling people what to do on the public highway. The "public" have every legal right to park on the public highway where there are no restrictions. If you don't want people parking outside your house then I suggest you buy a house somewhere a bit more remote than Brighton. tom servo
  • Score: 4

8:03pm Mon 7 Apr 14

grabur says...

@tom servo, I'm perfectly aware that the law doesn't discriminate against such parking (I did write that). I was bringing up the idea of common courtesy and being fair and considerate to others.

If I owned a large vehicle, given the option (and I'd go out of my way), I'd place it somewhere a little more discrete if not outside my own dwelling. I might even seek out property that could accomodate such vehicle. Rather than placing it in a residential street.

Many vehicle owners are considerate to others, it's not a blanket statement, but vehicle owners really need to curb the "I've got a God given right to park wherever I like mentality, just because I pay my taxes".

I haven't even an issue with those that sleep in their vehicles at the roadside, as long as they find a discrete place, and move their vans from time to time, bearing a thought for others. I can understand your bitterness perhaps if that is how you live.

I was speaking from a residential perspective, if I owned a massive transit van and a porshe, and parked the porshe outside my house, and the transit van outside my neighbours on a daily basis. I'd have thought that even the most easy going of neighbours would get irritated.

It's multiple vehicles that are leading to the parking problems in the first place. I don't think people are really connecting the dots together...
@tom servo, I'm perfectly aware that the law doesn't discriminate against such parking (I did write that). I was bringing up the idea of common courtesy and being fair and considerate to others. If I owned a large vehicle, given the option (and I'd go out of my way), I'd place it somewhere a little more discrete if not outside my own dwelling. I might even seek out property that could accomodate such vehicle. Rather than placing it in a residential street. Many vehicle owners are considerate to others, it's not a blanket statement, but vehicle owners really need to curb the "I've got a God given right to park wherever I like mentality, just because I pay my taxes". I haven't even an issue with those that sleep in their vehicles at the roadside, as long as they find a discrete place, and move their vans from time to time, bearing a thought for others. I can understand your bitterness perhaps if that is how you live. I was speaking from a residential perspective, if I owned a massive transit van and a porshe, and parked the porshe outside my house, and the transit van outside my neighbours on a daily basis. I'd have thought that even the most easy going of neighbours would get irritated. It's multiple vehicles that are leading to the parking problems in the first place. I don't think people are really connecting the dots together... grabur
  • Score: 3

9:08pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Tussle says...

They have to plug the pension deficit, and now not possibly having enough money to settle the equal pay claims.
They have to plug the pension deficit, and now not possibly having enough money to settle the equal pay claims. Tussle
  • Score: -3

9:13pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Tussle says...

Obviously need to plug something bigger, possibly like the equal pay settlement monies (Not a enough in the kitty anymore) .... how long has that been going on - maybe they don't want to tell us the wage increase across the Council year on year. Suppose we've just got to be glad they don't employ consultants a lot of the time anymore. Nor encourage zero hour contracts.
Obviously need to plug something bigger, possibly like the equal pay settlement monies (Not a enough in the kitty anymore) .... how long has that been going on - maybe they don't want to tell us the wage increase across the Council year on year. Suppose we've just got to be glad they don't employ consultants a lot of the time anymore. Nor encourage zero hour contracts. Tussle
  • Score: 0

9:17pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Tussle says...

It is also down to the pressure felt by social services, and benefit costs to house exterior people are sky high and not many towns can accommodate an even minor surge in numbers - It's hit a lot of towns across the UK. It takes years, so vote these clowns out.
It is also down to the pressure felt by social services, and benefit costs to house exterior people are sky high and not many towns can accommodate an even minor surge in numbers - It's hit a lot of towns across the UK. It takes years, so vote these clowns out. Tussle
  • Score: 1

10:40pm Mon 7 Apr 14

Pheasant pluckers son says...

Tussle wrote:
They have to plug the pension deficit, and now not possibly having enough money to settle the equal pay claims.
On a different not, regarding settling equal pay claims, the council have been dragging their feet on this for over 10 years, so each party is partially to blame.
I wonder under the freedom of information act would the council state how many permits they issue every year and the income, then actually how many resident spaces there is. Just because you have a permit it gives you know right to a space, merely the right to park in a space if you can find one.
[quote][p][bold]Tussle[/bold] wrote: They have to plug the pension deficit, and now not possibly having enough money to settle the equal pay claims.[/p][/quote]On a different not, regarding settling equal pay claims, the council have been dragging their feet on this for over 10 years, so each party is partially to blame. I wonder under the freedom of information act would the council state how many permits they issue every year and the income, then actually how many resident spaces there is. Just because you have a permit it gives you know right to a space, merely the right to park in a space if you can find one. Pheasant pluckers son
  • Score: 0

12:25am Tue 8 Apr 14

tom servo says...

grabur wrote:
@tom servo, I'm perfectly aware that the law doesn't discriminate against such parking (I did write that). I was bringing up the idea of common courtesy and being fair and considerate to others.

If I owned a large vehicle, given the option (and I'd go out of my way), I'd place it somewhere a little more discrete if not outside my own dwelling. I might even seek out property that could accomodate such vehicle. Rather than placing it in a residential street.

Many vehicle owners are considerate to others, it's not a blanket statement, but vehicle owners really need to curb the "I've got a God given right to park wherever I like mentality, just because I pay my taxes".

I haven't even an issue with those that sleep in their vehicles at the roadside, as long as they find a discrete place, and move their vans from time to time, bearing a thought for others. I can understand your bitterness perhaps if that is how you live.

I was speaking from a residential perspective, if I owned a massive transit van and a porshe, and parked the porshe outside my house, and the transit van outside my neighbours on a daily basis. I'd have thought that even the most easy going of neighbours would get irritated.

It's multiple vehicles that are leading to the parking problems in the first place. I don't think people are really connecting the dots together...
Guess what grabur (and I hate to be the one to break this to you) .... but this isn't all about you.

Judging everyone by what you would and would not do irrespective of the law of the land interests none of us except for you.

If someone legally parks outside your home and you don't like it then move to somewhere else. Or if you do have to live in a city please don't feel the need to tell all of us when diddums view is obstructed by a nasty van.

pathetic.
[quote][p][bold]grabur[/bold] wrote: @tom servo, I'm perfectly aware that the law doesn't discriminate against such parking (I did write that). I was bringing up the idea of common courtesy and being fair and considerate to others. If I owned a large vehicle, given the option (and I'd go out of my way), I'd place it somewhere a little more discrete if not outside my own dwelling. I might even seek out property that could accomodate such vehicle. Rather than placing it in a residential street. Many vehicle owners are considerate to others, it's not a blanket statement, but vehicle owners really need to curb the "I've got a God given right to park wherever I like mentality, just because I pay my taxes". I haven't even an issue with those that sleep in their vehicles at the roadside, as long as they find a discrete place, and move their vans from time to time, bearing a thought for others. I can understand your bitterness perhaps if that is how you live. I was speaking from a residential perspective, if I owned a massive transit van and a porshe, and parked the porshe outside my house, and the transit van outside my neighbours on a daily basis. I'd have thought that even the most easy going of neighbours would get irritated. It's multiple vehicles that are leading to the parking problems in the first place. I don't think people are really connecting the dots together...[/p][/quote]Guess what grabur (and I hate to be the one to break this to you) .... but this isn't all about you. Judging everyone by what you would and would not do irrespective of the law of the land interests none of us except for you. If someone legally parks outside your home and you don't like it then move to somewhere else. Or if you do have to live in a city please don't feel the need to tell all of us when diddums view is obstructed by a nasty van. pathetic. tom servo
  • Score: 0

2:51am Tue 8 Apr 14

Gribbet says...

Brighton Living wrote:
Please be Ewart Street please, please, please......
Please be Hanover in general, Brighton's biggest free car park where you often have to walk in the road because the pavements are filled with cars and camper vans, you can't get a pushchair down Hanover pavements.

The worst for me was trying to move furniture into my house a few years ago, but had to leave it at a friend's house and try again later because a van was parked so near to my front door that the furniture wouldn't fit through the gap.

I'm also not a fan of being woken up at the weekend by the smell of diesel fumes in my bedroom and the noise of some guy out the front of my house revving his old dying camper van for 15mins before driving off, which happens pretty regularly.

Face the reality, there just isn't the space in the city for so many cars, people need to adapt like they did in London decades ago where public transport is now the norm. It's such a shame that our nicest residential areas are blighted by parked cars all the time, Hanover is basically a car park with a few houses poking out from between the vehicles.
[quote][p][bold]Brighton Living[/bold] wrote: Please be Ewart Street please, please, please......[/p][/quote]Please be Hanover in general, Brighton's biggest free car park where you often have to walk in the road because the pavements are filled with cars and camper vans, you can't get a pushchair down Hanover pavements. The worst for me was trying to move furniture into my house a few years ago, but had to leave it at a friend's house and try again later because a van was parked so near to my front door that the furniture wouldn't fit through the gap. I'm also not a fan of being woken up at the weekend by the smell of diesel fumes in my bedroom and the noise of some guy out the front of my house revving his old dying camper van for 15mins before driving off, which happens pretty regularly. Face the reality, there just isn't the space in the city for so many cars, people need to adapt like they did in London decades ago where public transport is now the norm. It's such a shame that our nicest residential areas are blighted by parked cars all the time, Hanover is basically a car park with a few houses poking out from between the vehicles. Gribbet
  • Score: 4

9:23am Tue 8 Apr 14

grabur says...

You can view for yourselves parking around Hanover, the Lewes Rd triangle and the Elm Grove area by using Google Street View.

Jackson St./Lincoln St. crossroads in Hanover looks pretty typical.
You can view for yourselves parking around Hanover, the Lewes Rd triangle and the Elm Grove area by using Google Street View. Jackson St./Lincoln St. crossroads in Hanover looks pretty typical. grabur
  • Score: 0

1:58pm Tue 8 Apr 14

DrJetty says...

I have lived overlooking Blakers Park for many years, as there are very few converted flats and dwellings only on one side of the road parking was never a problem. One of the selling points which is reflected on the house price was adequate parking with views overlooking the park.

Since the spread of the parking zone to the south, the whole area has lost it's charm as the roads around the park are cluttered with 2nd cars, builders and camper vans. Now the local residents who paid a premium for the location are being forced to search for parking when there was no problem before. The council almost bully residents into accepting permit parking by creating a problem where there was no problem before.

The area around Blakers Park is now going to be a parking permit zone from September, that means the park and the Victorian houses in the conservation area will be blighted with parking meters, parking signs, white and yellow lines which will ruin what was once a charming area to live.
I have lived overlooking Blakers Park for many years, as there are very few converted flats and dwellings only on one side of the road parking was never a problem. One of the selling points which is reflected on the house price was adequate parking with views overlooking the park. Since the spread of the parking zone to the south, the whole area has lost it's charm as the roads around the park are cluttered with 2nd cars, builders and camper vans. Now the local residents who paid a premium for the location are being forced to search for parking when there was no problem before. The council almost bully residents into accepting permit parking by creating a problem where there was no problem before. The area around Blakers Park is now going to be a parking permit zone from September, that means the park and the Victorian houses in the conservation area will be blighted with parking meters, parking signs, white and yellow lines which will ruin what was once a charming area to live. DrJetty
  • Score: 1

3:28pm Tue 8 Apr 14

gheese77 says...

grabur wrote:
I lived in the park cresent area (for a decade). I used my feet, bike and public transport. I was living in multi-occupancy accomodation with 4 others. The last I stayed there, there were two car owners in the house.

It does not take a genius to figure out that a typical terrace only affords _one_ parking space. Any houses that have more than one car will just add to the problem. The terraces were designed without cars in mind.

Traffic in the area is worsened because people circle around the small roads looking for a space. All the traffic/anger and frustration made what is a nice area, and an unpleasant place to live.

I travelled into Brighton with my partner recently and was absolutely horrified with the parking situation around Hanover, Elm Grove and Lewes Road. It has only gotten worse.

Cars and traffic are so ugly.

The only fair system I can think of is, is having numbered bays outside houses. One each, clearly delinearlated preferably with small trees. If you don't use it, you are free to sub let it, or place a shrub there. Incentivise non-car ownership, rather blind profiteering.

Long vehicles, multiple vehicles per household and visitors will pose a problem. So how do you deal with these? Why should one house with one car be punsished by a house with three? Don't forget social impact of people slamming car doors outside your house late at night. Many living in Hanover are trying to sleep in their front rooms a metre away from the pavements.

This is a national problem. The proliferation of the motorised vehicle and population expansion will only worsen the situtation. It's a real blight.

Car parks could help here. I previously joked that the Level could be turned into a giant underground car park. Wouldn't a pedestrianised Hanover and surrounding area feel better for it? How about a huge carpark under the prom like at Hastings? Alternatively super car parks on the city fringes could be preferable for those that do need to travel outside the city borders. People that use these could get free public transport travel into and out of the city centre or access to free cycle hire and secure cycle parking. We could then push a lot of traffic out of the city centre which would be better for everyone.

Friends - a family of three visited at the weekend. They were based outside Brighton, and they spent three hours navigating their way into the city by car on Saturday. They won't be doing it again, and they are quite fond of the city.
Sensible well thought out post. Thats why it got down voted then
[quote][p][bold]grabur[/bold] wrote: I lived in the park cresent area (for a decade). I used my feet, bike and public transport. I was living in multi-occupancy accomodation with 4 others. The last I stayed there, there were two car owners in the house. It does not take a genius to figure out that a typical terrace only affords _one_ parking space. Any houses that have more than one car will just add to the problem. The terraces were designed without cars in mind. Traffic in the area is worsened because people circle around the small roads looking for a space. All the traffic/anger and frustration made what is a nice area, and an unpleasant place to live. I travelled into Brighton with my partner recently and was absolutely horrified with the parking situation around Hanover, Elm Grove and Lewes Road. It has only gotten worse. Cars and traffic are so ugly. The only fair system I can think of is, is having numbered bays outside houses. One each, clearly delinearlated preferably with small trees. If you don't use it, you are free to sub let it, or place a shrub there. Incentivise non-car ownership, rather blind profiteering. Long vehicles, multiple vehicles per household and visitors will pose a problem. So how do you deal with these? Why should one house with one car be punsished by a house with three? Don't forget social impact of people slamming car doors outside your house late at night. Many living in Hanover are trying to sleep in their front rooms a metre away from the pavements. This is a national problem. The proliferation of the motorised vehicle and population expansion will only worsen the situtation. It's a real blight. Car parks could help here. I previously joked that the Level could be turned into a giant underground car park. Wouldn't a pedestrianised Hanover and surrounding area feel better for it? How about a huge carpark under the prom like at Hastings? Alternatively super car parks on the city fringes could be preferable for those that do need to travel outside the city borders. People that use these could get free public transport travel into and out of the city centre or access to free cycle hire and secure cycle parking. We could then push a lot of traffic out of the city centre which would be better for everyone. Friends - a family of three visited at the weekend. They were based outside Brighton, and they spent three hours navigating their way into the city by car on Saturday. They won't be doing it again, and they are quite fond of the city.[/p][/quote]Sensible well thought out post. Thats why it got down voted then gheese77
  • Score: 0

7:05pm Tue 8 Apr 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

I will fill in the consultation to voice my objection along with everyone else and sigh as it gets ignored by the council. Not happy about this as it will mean all the students around Upper Lewes Road will move their cars to other streets. Can't see them coughing up for a permit. Plus other residents who resent paying to park near their homes. It just pushes the problem elsewhere.
I will fill in the consultation to voice my objection along with everyone else and sigh as it gets ignored by the council. Not happy about this as it will mean all the students around Upper Lewes Road will move their cars to other streets. Can't see them coughing up for a permit. Plus other residents who resent paying to park near their homes. It just pushes the problem elsewhere. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 1

9:34pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Jules D. says...

I live in this area and will vote yes.Parking in our area has become a nightmare and I'm happy to pay if it means an improvement to the area. Residents are now forced to park on pavements at night and regularly get their cars keyed, wing mirrors get ripped off, parking fines by 9.05am, endless driving around to find a space during the day. The narrow streets are jammed with cars owned by non residents using our streets as a free park and ride facility, particularly at weekend's. As we can't reverse the introduction of cpz zones around our area (zone j) we might as well join it. It has to be an improvement to what we have now. Just hope the returns are invested wisely by the council!
I live in this area and will vote yes.Parking in our area has become a nightmare and I'm happy to pay if it means an improvement to the area. Residents are now forced to park on pavements at night and regularly get their cars keyed, wing mirrors get ripped off, parking fines by 9.05am, endless driving around to find a space during the day. The narrow streets are jammed with cars owned by non residents using our streets as a free park and ride facility, particularly at weekend's. As we can't reverse the introduction of cpz zones around our area (zone j) we might as well join it. It has to be an improvement to what we have now. Just hope the returns are invested wisely by the council! Jules D.
  • Score: 1

10:02pm Tue 8 Apr 14

Jules D. says...

Just to add to my point - I've just read quite a few negative reactions in the comments boxes - the overwhelming majority of neighbours in the streets nearest to me are in favour of the cpz. Also I know a lot of people living in zone j who are really pleased, despite their initial reservations. Their empty streets are looking more attractive for a start. What the council should have included in the cpz proposals across our city are concessions for certain groups. An oversight??
Just to add to my point - I've just read quite a few negative reactions in the comments boxes - the overwhelming majority of neighbours in the streets nearest to me are in favour of the cpz. Also I know a lot of people living in zone j who are really pleased, despite their initial reservations. Their empty streets are looking more attractive for a start. What the council should have included in the cpz proposals across our city are concessions for certain groups. An oversight?? Jules D.
  • Score: 0

3:08am Wed 9 Apr 14

power_ranger says...

cookie_brighton wrote:
cookie_brighton wrote:
They say that they want to stop double parking where people have to walk onto the roads............the


y introduced communal refuse bins onto our roads, especially in the Lewes road triangle, where people due to the amount of black refuse bags and wardrobes, beds etc placed on the roads and pavements........FOR


CES people onto the roads to get past.......just what the council are trying to get rid of with the double parking of cars (they say ) ......but hey, the council cannot extort money from people who put rubbish on the pavements / roads,,,but they can with introducing paying for your parking.........cars will STILL double park along park crescent, park crescent terrace, as there will not be enough parking spaces available. a lot of houses in the Lewes road triangle are houses of H.M.O. ( house of multiple occupancy ), students, so the council will sell, say, for example, 300 resident parking permits when there will only be about 200 parking spaces available, buy buying a permit .......DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PARK, it will be a first come system.
I saw an area where the council put out literature to residents and asked their views about a residents parking scheme, the overall result from the residents was....NO...the council went ahead and introduced the parking scheme to that area, they failed in getting a 4.75% council tax increase so they are now introducing paying for parking in an area which is free.
further to my last post.
With Lewes road triangle being an area of student accomodation, when the students apply for and get their resident permits to park ,( hope they are not exempt from this as they are with paying council tax ) I can see the scenario now, students finishing their school day at 3.30pm / 4 pm arriving home and parking with no or little problems, I then see the workingman / woman finishing work and arriving home around 5.15/30 pm and finding nowhere to park, having paid out for a parking permit.
Oh dear. Another idiot who thinks they are better than others...
These are the people who will be paying council tax to fund your state pension in a few years, old man.
[quote][p][bold]cookie_brighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]cookie_brighton[/bold] wrote: They say that they want to stop double parking where people have to walk onto the roads............the y introduced communal refuse bins onto our roads, especially in the Lewes road triangle, where people due to the amount of black refuse bags and wardrobes, beds etc placed on the roads and pavements........FOR CES people onto the roads to get past.......just what the council are trying to get rid of with the double parking of cars (they say ) ......but hey, the council cannot extort money from people who put rubbish on the pavements / roads,,,but they can with introducing paying for your parking.........cars will STILL double park along park crescent, park crescent terrace, as there will not be enough parking spaces available. a lot of houses in the Lewes road triangle are houses of H.M.O. ( house of multiple occupancy ), students, so the council will sell, say, for example, 300 resident parking permits when there will only be about 200 parking spaces available, buy buying a permit .......DOES NOT MEAN YOU WILL BE ABLE TO PARK, it will be a first come system. I saw an area where the council put out literature to residents and asked their views about a residents parking scheme, the overall result from the residents was....NO...the council went ahead and introduced the parking scheme to that area, they failed in getting a 4.75% council tax increase so they are now introducing paying for parking in an area which is free.[/p][/quote]further to my last post. With Lewes road triangle being an area of student accomodation, when the students apply for and get their resident permits to park ,( hope they are not exempt from this as they are with paying council tax ) I can see the scenario now, students finishing their school day at 3.30pm / 4 pm arriving home and parking with no or little problems, I then see the workingman / woman finishing work and arriving home around 5.15/30 pm and finding nowhere to park, having paid out for a parking permit.[/p][/quote]Oh dear. Another idiot who thinks they are better than others... These are the people who will be paying council tax to fund your state pension in a few years, old man. power_ranger
  • Score: 3

11:14am Wed 9 Apr 14

grabur says...

@power ranger,

I think @cookie brighton, raises a valid point.

http://www.brighton-
hove.gov.uk/content/
parking-and-travel/p
arking/resident-perm
it

Quote:
'Each resident can apply for one resident permit but there is no limit on the number of residents who can apply in any one household'

Some other permit schemes suggest that permits are limited to one per household.

How many permits then can be awarded per household? It all gets a little ambiguous with houses with multiple residency / houses that have been split into flats.

As I pointed out, terraced areas pretty much only have room for one parking space per house. So it seems illogical to me, in that you may have more permits awarded than available parking spaces. The only benefits I see is that it discourages those that are using a place like Hanover as a free car park. (When I live near Preston Park, there was a car owner in Hove that parked their spare car outside the flats. So I know this happens.)

It seems unfair that residents would pick up the cost for visitor parking, or still struggle to park. I guess the logic is, that they are more likely to park. It would be interesting to know just how many of the parked cars do not belong to local residents.

Permitting doesn't appear to exclude commercial vehicles, you can have a vehicle up to 6m long!

Perhaps parking in the newly controlled zones will have different rules than that listed in the link above.

Are permits limited to residential streets or larger areas? How do you allay privacy issues, you wouldn't want your car displaying where you live.

I can understand those wanting some parking control. And the anger raised by those thinking that it won't have much effect. If the schemes are ill thought out, people will just accuse the council of money making.

Parking on a first come, first serve basis isn't entirely fair either. I think that is what @cookie brighton is getting at. They are not suggesting that students shouldn't get access to permits.

Having better cycling links will reduce the necessity to own a car, especially for students. Car share, and car hire schemes could also reduce the need for car ownership. With any luck students will realise it's not worth the time and the effort of running a car. As I say, I lived in the area for a decade and had no need or want for one.

The problem still remains too many vehicles, not enough spaces. I think that requires a more radical solution.
@power ranger, I think @cookie brighton, raises a valid point. http://www.brighton- hove.gov.uk/content/ parking-and-travel/p arking/resident-perm it Quote: 'Each resident can apply for one resident permit but there is no limit on the number of residents who can apply in any one household' Some other permit schemes suggest that permits are limited to one per household. How many permits then can be awarded per household? It all gets a little ambiguous with houses with multiple residency / houses that have been split into flats. As I pointed out, terraced areas pretty much only have room for one parking space per house. So it seems illogical to me, in that you may have more permits awarded than available parking spaces. The only benefits I see is that it discourages those that are using a place like Hanover as a free car park. (When I live near Preston Park, there was a car owner in Hove that parked their spare car outside the flats. So I know this happens.) It seems unfair that residents would pick up the cost for visitor parking, or still struggle to park. I guess the logic is, that they are more likely to park. It would be interesting to know just how many of the parked cars do not belong to local residents. Permitting doesn't appear to exclude commercial vehicles, you can have a vehicle up to 6m long! Perhaps parking in the newly controlled zones will have different rules than that listed in the link above. Are permits limited to residential streets or larger areas? How do you allay privacy issues, you wouldn't want your car displaying where you live. I can understand those wanting some parking control. And the anger raised by those thinking that it won't have much effect. If the schemes are ill thought out, people will just accuse the council of money making. Parking on a first come, first serve basis isn't entirely fair either. I think that is what @cookie brighton is getting at. They are not suggesting that students shouldn't get access to permits. Having better cycling links will reduce the necessity to own a car, especially for students. Car share, and car hire schemes could also reduce the need for car ownership. With any luck students will realise it's not worth the time and the effort of running a car. As I say, I lived in the area for a decade and had no need or want for one. The problem still remains too many vehicles, not enough spaces. I think that requires a more radical solution. grabur
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree