No properly dropped kerb - introduction of parking permits

Lorian

I have a friend who owns a house that has a small drive (adequate size for 2 cars end to end, he only has one). It has gates. but currently the exit onto the side-road across the pavement has no dropped kerbs. The Kerbstones are missing, and they pavement has at some point been tarmaced (not by the house owner) to form a shallow incline to the road. This was all done before he was the owner (15+ years ago) and I guess not looked in to at the time of purchase.

Obviously not done properly, however many drives in the same road are done in the same manner - maybe 10 or more.

Now the fun comes - they are about to have parking permits imposed on them.

Presumably this might result in a parking bay being painted outside the gates?

And if not, then anyone with a permit could I'm sure park outside the gates anyway, blocking access?

So I'm about to mention to him that he might need to get permission for and pay for the pavement to be properly dropped, to ensure continued access to his drive.

The question is - am I right?

And the second one is - If so - should he apply now or wait and see what happens when the permits are introduced first?

bris

You may very well be right. If there was no permission to drop the kerb then the road will be fair game for parking bays.


Your friend will need to look into whether the property has the right to cross the pavement or not.


If he waits and they paint the parking bays it's going to be to late to change it. It's probably already to late if the plans are already in the late stages.

stator

The council can undo a bodged dropped kerb and can install bollards, but they won't do it if it's been there so long they might get into legal trouble.

If it was a long time ago he will have acquired a right to cross the kerb, but he may need to hire a solicitor to enforce that right, if it can be proved.

EachPenny

Lorian wrote: »

Now the fun comes - they are about to have parking permits imposed on them.
Presumably this might result in a parking bay being painted outside the gates?

The traffic engineer designing the scheme might stop the bays assuming the crossover is legitimate, or might run the bays through. If there is a bay, then this has serious implications for your friend as it establishes a right in law to park in that position, even if it obstructs access to your friend's property.

However, it is important to note that the parking scheme cannot be "imposed on them". There is a statutory consultation process and affected people have the right to object to the traffic order being made. It would be grounds for objection if a parking bay is proposed across your friend's 'driveway'. I'll add more about the order process below.

Lorian wrote: »

And if not, then anyone with a permit could I'm sure park outside the gates anyway, blocking access?

In a controlled parking zone the Council should either mark parking bays, or else yellow lines. However, there is now an option in some circumstances to control parking in a whole street simply by placing signs at the start and end of the street.

If the scheme in your friend's street involves marked bays then the correct design approach would be for a yellow line to be marked across his drive. This would normally operate for the same hours of the day the bays do. During those hours parking on the yellow line is a contravention, even if you live in the house and have a permit. Outside the restricted hours the yellow line has no function and the situation returns to one of whether or not the parking is causing an obstruction.

Lorian wrote: »

So I'm about to mention to him that he might need to get permission for and pay for the pavement to be properly dropped, to ensure continued access to his drive.

He might do, but that depends on the council's plans, and also whether they consider the current drive an 'official' dropped kerb. Even if the work was not done properly, it could still have been done by the council. If I was him I would start from the position the driveway was authorised, but be willing to pay for rectification work if that becomes necessary.

Lorian wrote: »

And the second one is - If so - should he apply now or wait and see what happens when the permits are introduced first?

Don't wait. After the traffic order is made the cost of making a further one to amend the bay layout can run into thousands. This cost could be added to the cost of having an official dropped kerb.

Your friend needs to see a copy of the council's consultation plans, or if things have progressed further then a copy of the plan drawn up for the traffic order. Most councils now place these online to allow residents to view and comment.

If it is not online, then your friend has a statutory right to view the plans at the Council's office (and sometimes also a library) during the traffic order making process.

If the statutory consultation for the Order is currently underway then he must make an objection and ask to meet with the engineer to discuss options, otherwise he could end up with people parking across his driveway and a substantial bill to get it sorted out.

Depending on the area he lives in the formal process will either be called a Traffic Management Order (TMO) or Traffic Regulation Order (TRO).

Serching the council's website for the terms 'CPZ', 'TMO' or 'TRO' should give access to the relevant pages.

Lorian

I've checked - the consultation period ended a month ago and the owner made no objection. Not sure on next best action - I don't want to make the situation worse for him.

The consulation just said they will introduce the new restriction for the length of the road on both sides and the map just shows a coloured line along the length of the road - its not very detailed - and they dont say when it will come in to force.

- Edit - I should add the owner can afford to have the properly dropped stones put in place.

So should he should go ahead and apply to drop the kerb officially, and ASAP?
Bit worried in case it gets refused. There is no obvious consition that would stop it, but they dont publish their actual conditions (no trees, no corssings near etc)

Kingsd316

Even a dropped curb may not guarantee restrictions outside their gate, example of a road near me:

EachPenny

Lorian wrote: »

I've checked - the consultation period ended a month ago and the owner made no objection. Not sure on next best action - I don't want to make the situation worse for him.

The consulation just said they will introduce the new restriction for the length of the road on both sides and the map just shows a coloured line along the length of the road - its not very detailed - and they dont say when it will come in to force.

- Edit - I should add the owner can afford to have the properly dropped stones put in place.

So should he should go ahead and apply to drop the kerb officially, and ASAP?
Bit worried in case it gets refused. There is no obvious consition that would stop it, but they dont publish their actual conditions (no trees, no corssings near etc)

Was the consultation on the scheme, or was it the statutory consultation on the TMO/TRO?

Also, does it describe the "restriction"? It could be a "prohibition of waiting" which usually means yellow lines, or perhaps a "parking place" which usually means bays. The other possibility is if it is described as one restriction for the whole street then they are going with the easy option of signs at the end of the street and no bays/lines will be used. If it is the latter then they probably don't need to do anything as there will be no physical changes on the street.

Feel free to PM me a link to the consultation document and I can have a look if you like. It might take me a day or two to respond though.... lots of xmas shopping still to do

Lorian

It appears to call itself a "formal public consiltation on proposed parking restrictions".
this is the opening paragraph of what was posted to them (some months ago):

"XXX Council hereby gives notice that in exercise of its statutory enabling powers it is proposing to make THE XXXX RESIDENTS PARKING) ORDER 2017, the effect of which will be:"

With what they are proposing for the complete length of the road where my friend lives is

"To introduce permit holders (zone N)/limited waiting (max stay 1 hour, no return 2 hours) 9am – 8pm restrictions in the following lengths of road:"

and some description of where the restricitons start and end based on nearby house numbers/boundaries.

It does make mention of being able to visit the council to see a draft Order and Plans - it also says this is on their website - but I don't see i anything other thean the document mentioned and a very high level plan.

Lorian

I made a cursory approach to the council and they consider this to be the only consultation (now closed) prior to the TRO being implemented.

Having read the full TRO I can see on other roads they actually mention creating bays, but not in this road.

So I guess even though there will be no marked bays outside he will need the kerb dropped to ensure he can get no parking enforced. They do say on their site that they will enforce if the kerb is dropped.

The area is frequently parked in by people accessing shops down the road, which is what causes the issues. the neighbours all suffer the same.

EachPenny

Lorian wrote: »

It appears to call itself a "formal public consiltation on proposed parking restrictions".
this is the opening paragraph of what was posted to them (some months ago):

"XXX Council hereby gives notice that in exercise of its statutory enabling powers it is proposing to make THE XXXX RESIDENTS PARKING) ORDER 2017, the effect of which will be:"

With what they are proposing for the complete length of the road where my friend lives is

"To introduce permit holders (zone N)/limited waiting (max stay 1 hour, no return 2 hours) 9am – 8pm restrictions in the following lengths of road:"

and some description of where the restricitons start and end based on nearby house numbers/boundaries.

If the restrictions are applied to the whole length of the street then it is likely to be a zone with no markings, restrictions which are defined according to property boundaries are usually a combination of bays and lines. In the latter case the order has to define each bay separately. This is why some councils adopt the approach (incorrectly imo) shown in the picture in Kingsd316's post.

Lorian wrote: »

It does make mention of being able to visit the council to see a draft Order and Plans - it also says this is on their website - but I don't see i anything other thean the document mentioned and a very high level plan.

The document is what counts, it is a legal order, which is why it is important for the restrictions to be correctly defined. In most cases there is no legal requirement for the order to have a plan attached, but most councils will include one in the consultation as a guide to residents. It would be good practice for the council to publish a plan at some point during the consultation which is sufficiently detailed for consultees to understand what kind of bays/restrictions will be in their street.

Lorian wrote: »

I made a cursory approach to the council and they consider this to be the only consultation (now closed) prior to the TRO being implemented.

Having read the full TRO I can see on other roads they actually mention creating bays, but not in this road.

So I guess even though there will be no marked bays outside he will need the kerb dropped to ensure he can get no parking enforced. They do say on their site that they will enforce if the kerb is dropped.

If the order has already been made then there's not much that can be done, other than asking for the kerbs to be dropped if problems happen in the future.