Reply to THIS thread
Start a NEW Talkback Thread
Talkback Home

Double yellows - 2 cars (24th May 2016 - 08:33:38) Why have the council come and painted double yellows down the other side of the road that runs past the new maple park development? They approve large houses with one driveway parking space then stop people parking on the road? Where are we supposed to park? Most working families have two cars. Perhaps it is to stop people parking there for the station, but surely a residents permit would be a better idea?

Re: Double yellows - sarah (24th May 2016 - 09:50:02) You'll need to direct this question to Hampshire CC as they are the ones responsible for yellow lines. In terms of planning I imagine that if your property is 3 or more beds as well as the driveway you have a garage. Garages in planning terms are for parking cars, but the reality is that they are used for storage (because the homes themselves, irrelevant of no. of bedrooms come up significantly smaller than houses throughout the rest of Europe and developers are reluctant to embrace minimum house sizes). As someone in the business I constantly argue with developers for more parking in more appropriate locations to minimise on street parking which can have other unintended consequences. Most developers see the benefit of providing additional in curtilage parking as it commands a price, sadly others do not. On top of this buyers don't always consider the reality/practicality of their parking needs.

Re: Double yellows - Dawn Hoskins (24th May 2016 - 15:16:19) Unfortunately, the number of parking spaces per home is governed by the paltry 'minimum' standard which was set in the 1950's and has never been updated. As is the minimum size for a garage and a parking space - most of which are now too small to park a modern car in. Garages are just glorified cupboards these days. The Government has no plans to make changes as it would upset big businesses from making as much profit. The government doesn't build houses or invest in housing - it is only private businesses that build houses and as we need more and more of them to meet the housing shortage - no one is going to upset them in a hurry. Until the planning laws are altered to take into account the pestilence (that is cars dumped along every road in every town and village because they can't park on their own grounds) - nothing will get better. Currently, planning departments can take into account only a very small number of criteria - parking spaces is NOT one of them! I expect there was a traffic movements survey produced that said there would be negligible impact!!! Complete load of bull****. There is no such thing as 'joined up thinking' when house building and town planning is concerned. Every normal brained person could foresee a problem - but not the powers that be.

Re: Double yellows - Canadian Development Resident (24th May 2016 - 15:43:19) The double yellow lines are long overdue. For years, those commuters, with their banker salaries have parked their cars along the road, pleading poverty as a cause for not parking in the station car-park. The parked cars are dangerous, particularly so close to the green. I am a little surprised with the 2 cars comment - surely the number of parking spaces and allocated garage spaces were part of the plans for each of the houses. Indeed, I distinctly remember talking to the sales lady at Taylor Wimpy, who stated very clearly and definitively, they were going to apply for double yellow lines. Hurrah for the double yellow lines

Re: Double yellows - ian (24th May 2016 - 16:20:03) It does appear that the station car park has got a lot busier in recent years and with the exception of Fridays is now quite often full. Therefore where should train users park? We are often moaning about how many cars are on the roads but unless people stop travelling altogether there is no answer, either more cars congesting the roads or better parking facilities to encourage train use. I guess an answer would be to have a multi storey car park built at the station, double yellow line all roads within a 1 mile radius and introduce resident parking (which normally means an end to free parking outside your home for residents). Not an easy problem to find a solution to! Of course there will be some regulars on Talkback that would suggest a ban on all 'outsiders' coming to the village, a population cull and build a big wall to turn the village into "Fortress Liphook - No Admittance Allowed"

Re: Double yellows - liz (24th May 2016 - 16:22:42) Because of all the new developments commuter parking in Liphook has become a real problem and can only get worse. Yet the land next to the railway is being developed for more housing with no sign of increasing the number of car parking spaces at the station, as far as I am aware. I cannot believe that the local authorities have no powers to insist that adequate station parking is provided. Yes, I know some won't park in the station car park because of the cost but parking restrictions limiting parking to a few hours per day and residents' parking could help resolve that.

Re: Double yellows - Dan (24th May 2016 - 16:50:30) All this will do though is push the parking further up Canada Way , to where the double yellows stop.

Re: Double yellows - Maple Park Resident (24th May 2016 - 17:28:53) Just for clarification most if not all of the properties in Maple Park have 2 allocated spaces, whilst there is no doubt some of these cars parks may have been residents the vast majority are commuters and make it hazardous to pull out from the junction onto Canada Way.

Re: Double yellows - Grant (24th May 2016 - 17:35:00) Dawn, suggest you read up on parking standards for EHDC, plus Hampshire Highways dictate the size of garages not EHDC. The minimum garage sizes are more than adequate. Perhaps we should cut down on the 4x4s?although the Land Rover has been around for sometime? Too many cars per household?!

Re: Double yellows - PaulRobinson (24th May 2016 - 19:20:08) I seem to recall that the double yellow lines were requested by the residents to deal with displacement parking by commuters which is indeed a problem to the area which extends down Station Road and onto the Portsmouth Road. I suggested to E.H.D.C. that they should consider buying the land at Bleaches Yard behind the shops in Station road and making it a pay and display car park to ease the problem. The proposed development of between 2.5k and 5k houses on the Army land at Bordon will only add further parking problems for those wishing to use the station. Paul Robinson

Re: Double yellows - hadrian (24th May 2016 - 19:22:11) A big wall now thats a good idea how about passports for Liphookonions those who where born here all the rest of the imposters out out out we could have our own money, stamps etc the liphook grump as a currency whos head on the stamp ? how about charging people a toll too drive thru the village and body caught on a phone while driving put in the village stocks new addition to square where chestnut used to be or how about ban all cars from the village build a huge multistorey car park on national park ground oo we going to have soooo much fun

Re: Double yellows - Dollypops (24th May 2016 - 22:22:06) And were the pigs flying tonight? What fun! Attempts to remove us from cars and convenience have failed for 30/40 years. Give up and stop wasting our money; address the problem of car parking and spaces insteaD. The Victorian introduction of trains seems to have been accepted as a brilliant idea, despite being built in the back gardens of houses and carving up the countryside throughout the land. And do you you remember all that coal and steam pervading everywhere? So what is wrong with the next invention (the motor engine) and its accommodation? Or do we want to stultify and not move forward?

Re: Double yellows - TLTB (24th May 2016 - 22:40:22) The Breakdown Working families = Politics Glorified cupboards = Excessive prose Long overdue = Frustration Dangerous = "Oh think of the children" Banker salaries = Jealously 4x4s = Media bandwagon Liphookonions = Word of the post, both funny, apt and does anyone have any of these liphook onions as they sound tasty

Re: Double yellows - Dawn Hoskins (25th May 2016 - 08:52:19) Hi Grant. I have no objection to parking restrictions. However, I do object that family houses are not given family parking provision. This SHOULD be taken into consideration at the planning stage before the houses are built. At present this is not the case. I'm well aware of how big new garages are, we were cursed with one that we could not park a small car in [and open the doors to get out] - so we had to add to the congestion at that time and have one on the drive and one blocking the narrow road. My response was only about the new houses and where the occupants are now going to park their cars since they can't get them in the garage [without exiting through the sun roof]. It was not about commuters or anyone else parking inconsiderately. Below are some articles with photos of modern garages and modern cars. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/... www.stokesentinel.co.uk/...

Re: Double yellows - liz (25th May 2016 - 08:57:06) TLTB The breakdown is we need more parking in Liphook, particularly for the station. It's becoming quite a serious issue (although you wouldn't know it from some of the comments on this post!) As long as we can all be lighthearted about it the local authorities need to do nothing ..........

Re: Double yellows - simon coyte (25th May 2016 - 10:43:18) The answer is simple Network Rail and SW Trains should provide parking for their customers as other business do ie; Supermarkets, DIY Stores, Pubs etc. There is no reason why the station car park shouldn't be decked over to increase capacity, even make it three tier. We could then control commuter parking in the area with restrictions on nearby roads and proper enforcement, without the need for a total ban on parking for residents and locals Simon Coyte

Re: Double yellows - grant (25th May 2016 - 14:37:19) Dawn, New development (planning policy EHDC) 2-3 bedrooms require 2 x parking spaces. 4 plus bedrooms require min 3 parking spaces. Min garage sizes HCC 6x6m double, 6x3m single, significantly bigger than your examples on your link. The point is that your stats are incorrect, EHDC and HCC do have reasonable policies in place. I cross swords with them on a regular basis, to gain planning permissions for my clients. At the end of day its the volume of car users that cause the problem, it's not all about new development and government planning policy.

Re: Double yellows - roo (25th May 2016 - 15:20:42) It doesn't matter how much parking is put at liphook station people are not going to use a car park they have to pay for when they can park somewhere else for free. And why should residents have to pay for permit parking to stop people parking where they shouldn't.

Re: Double yellows - Ian (25th May 2016 - 16:06:15) Roo, the problem is commuters are not parking where they shouldn't. If there are no parking restrictions then they can park wherever they want. Now I get very irritated when I cannot park immediately outside my house BUT I do not own the road outside my house and I have no possessive claim over it, so as much as it annoys the hell out of me I just have to accept that anyone can park there. For example a neighbour had a family member park their car outside my house and then went on holiday for 2 weeks using the street as a free car park, annoying yes but illegal, no. Resident parking schemes are quite complex but I saw a good scheme in Weybridge where there were restrictions in place for cars that were parked between 6am and 9am which made it difficult for commuters to leave there cars on the roads all day but for other users (ie residents) there were minimal restrictions and no cost. I cannot remember how it worked exactly but it did seem to work

Re: Double yellows - D (25th May 2016 - 16:46:33) I travel around a lot, including London, and parking can be a nightmare but I realise it goes with my job so just have to get on with it. The best form of parking restriction I come across, to stop long term/all day parking and help local residents, is a single yellow line with plates that advise the restriction is in place for just 1 hour, say between 11.00 and 12.00 or maybe 14.00 and 15.00. Stops all day parking by commuters, as they can't get back to move their cars, but allows local shops and residents chance to park to go shopping etc. The double yellows outside Maple Park have been proposed for a long time and should have been in place before Maple Park was built but were delayed because of the building work going on.

Re: Double yellows - roo (25th May 2016 - 20:35:35) Ian as you are being picky about parking, maybe its not where they shouldn't. its where they are being inconsiderate to house owners and also as on Midhurst service rd dangerously which one day cause an accident but why pay for parking when you can get it for free and also cause other people danger and inconvenience. And also look at the cars parked on the roads at 5.30 in the morning and how many are parked in the station car park.

Re: Double yellows - Ian (25th May 2016 - 22:21:13) Roo, clearly no-one would defend those that park dangerously or inconsiderately but this is different from those commuters (and others) that choose to park for free where there are currently no restrictions. Just because you don't want someone parking outside your house to avoid paying to park in the station car park does not mean they are parking dangerously or breaking any laws, they are simply exercising their right to park wherever they are allowed to, after all, it s a free country! I would also add that I am not a commuter, and I am often forced to park away from my house. However I do not have this tribal instinct that so many residents seem to have of claiming rights that are not mine to claim. (i.e the road outside my house!)

Re: Double yellows - Lucy (25th May 2016 - 22:27:46) I am sure that when the 3k houses are built in Bordon the problem will only increase. It is Network Rail who are responsible for providing the carparking for the station, a double decker system is a good idea. Perhaps the people who cannot now park in Canada Way will write to Network Rail about more spaces at the station.

Re: Double yellows - mystic meg (26th May 2016 - 13:27:30) A little while ago I wrote that if it carries on going at this rate it won't be long before people are asking for a multi storey car park in Liphook. Well now people are making the case, even I didn't think it would be this soon! A few new housing estates here, some infill there, a row or two or three of houses by the station, the odd field that is 'underused', two houses where there used to be one, gardens concreted over and of course several thousand homes due up the road in Bordon. No new roads or infrastructure, double yellow lines are the prelude to parking meters etc. So for my next prediction people will soon be making the case for a tower block or two somewhere near the station and I have an idea where!

Re: Double yellows - Canadian Development Resident (30th May 2016 - 21:45:42) I note we have a few vigilante Maple Park residents, whose cars have been seen parked on the double yellow lines. Fortunately, it my nine years of living here, I have never seen a traffic warden. So long as this is the exception and the commuters don't return......

Re: Double yellows - Hib (30th May 2016 - 23:57:21) Grant, can you point me in the direction of where those regulations are written? My brand new house does not comply with them.... I'd line to take it up with EHDC

Re: Double yellows - lucy (31st May 2016 - 15:45:46) I am sure that your solicitor would have picked up something like that? if it does not comply with minimum standards? I have not seen many new 4 bed houses with 3 parking spaces do not think that is correct?

Re: Double yellows - Paul (31st May 2016 - 18:51:29) The properties in the new development facing the green where the double yellows have been painted all have allocated parking spaces. They are to the rear of the properties, accessed by side gates and alley-ways, and have the advantage of being close to the properties and allocated to them only. I understand that they have a minimum of 2 per property, including a garage (I will stand corrected if not).

Re: Double yellows - Jonathan (31st May 2016 - 20:10:50) Some only have 1 space and a garage, some have 2 spaces and a garage, some just 2 spaces, some just 3 spaces... It seems a bit random, but was clearly laid out in the development brochure (I have a PDF copy) before purchase. Of all the houses on Canada Way and Midhurst road, only 3 seem not to have a garage.

Re: Double yellows - Maple Park Resident (1st Jun 2016 - 15:17:02) I have to say that while I understand the parking issues such a move would create I was well informed by Taylor Wimpey that double yellows were to be installed so wasn't a surprise to see them being put down. There is a through road that can be used for visitors as there are only 2 visitor spaces but everyone knows that parking is much more restricted on new developments these days so 2 spaces per house doesn't seem too bad to me. It would be good if the 2 cars still parking there could be moved so that the works could be completed though. From a safety and visibility point of view it is a good move as the vehicles parking there were causing visibility issues when leaving the development and possible safety issues for children/adults crossing in between the cars and being a parent cant help but think this was a good move. My wife informed me that parking costs in the station were £4.50 all day before 10 and £2.00 all day after 10 which doesn't seem too bad. When I was in and around Heathrow it was more like £10-15 and if commuters are using the station their London allowance should more than cover an expense such as this. I'm guessing that such restrictions are difficult to police as there doesn't seem to be many official parties patrolling the area to penalise anyone parking there! Adam

Re: Double yellows - Susan (1st Jun 2016 - 17:31:21) It appears that the double yellow lines are upsetting the commuters more than the residents. Interesting to see from Adam's post the cost of parking at the station. I agree it seems reasonable when you consider how much for instance Guildford Hospital charge for parking. Obviously parking is limited at the station but I am sure some commuters could walk to the station. We lived a mile away when I was growing up and my father walked to and from the station everyday winter and summer. No choice really, we didn't have a car and there wasn't a bus and no we didn't live in the country. I would think if more exercise were taken and this would be a great way to do it, there wouldn't be so many unhealthy and overweight people around. When it was not the norm for a family to have a car I am sure on balance as a nation we were healthier as we had to walk much more.

Re: Double yellows - Another maple park resident (1st Jun 2016 - 19:37:03) We to were well informed by Taylor Wimpey that there was going to be double yellow lines on the road, and knew prior to building works that they were going to be done. Noticed works have now been completed, but still this vehicle is parking there, you never know when the parking enforcement officer is going to turn up, but they certainly do patrol the area, don't think you will get special preference to be able to park there !

Re: Double yellows - tony (2nd Jun 2016 - 02:45:14) Until the lines are completed and finished off with a T line, they aren't compliant, so as long as he keeps his van parked there we should be OK, but don't quote me on that. I think they're making the pavement into a cycle path too.

Re: Double yellows - Iwik61 (2nd Jun 2016 - 08:30:31) Since double yellow s in lindford people are being ticketed Sundays as well the parking enforcement is shared with havant council.You have been warned.Also just because you aren't actually on double yellow adjacent to on pavement is a offence (on the grass )

Re: Double yellows - Maple Park resident (6th Jun 2016 - 21:21:56) Taylor Wimpey clearly informed us and the other residents about the double yellow lines before we purchased. Personally think it should be single yellows so that residents can park on the road in the evenings and weekends. Unfortunately I have seen Commuters parking within Maple Park resident parking areas anyway...this is a larger problem which the lines do not solve.

Re: Double yellows - maple park (8th Jun 2016 - 14:24:33) I also live on maple park and agree with the above. It is great to finally have the double yellows which we were told about when buying the property. There has been numerous times when I have almost had a crash struggling to exit the development and struggling with a pushchair to cross the road. It seems silly there is still one person parking on the double yellows, I'm sure they will get a ticket soon as they regularly go to the car park for the max stay of 5 hours so hopefully they will wonder down and ticket the person. Everyone has two parking spaces and when purchasing the properties that was very clear.

Re: Double yellows - Jonathan (8th Jun 2016 - 16:40:49) Not all of the properties have 2 spaces. Several of the houses at the Redwood Terrace end of the development have one space and a garage. Logic doesn't seem to come into it regarding house size and space allocation! I have uploaded a copy of the plan from the original brochure here where the space allocations are clearly set out: maplepark.uk/plan/

Re: Double yellows - Maple park (8th Jun 2016 - 21:59:56) Surely when buying a property though people with one space and a garage would of known this when purchasing the house therefore that was their choice when buying. Also as people have previously said buyers were told by Taylor Wimpey that double yellow lines would be put outside the properties.

Re: Double yellows - Richard (9th Jun 2016 - 07:45:56) A the previous correspondents have highlighted, the lines were expected. If people choose not to buy these type of houses because of the parking and garaging arrangements, then the developers will be forced to reconsider, or end up with unsold housing. Market forces can be used to drive a change here, but by buying the houses, as they are, then the people who own them have effectively elected to live with the shortcomings of the design

Re: Double yellows - Another maple park resident (10th Jun 2016 - 13:34:59) We looked at a number of houses, both new build and 'preloved' houses, before buying at maple park. Parking isn't just a new build issue. There were plenty of older three bed properties we viewed that only had driveway space for one car and to park a second car or visitor's cars would be luck of the draw on the road. Plus very often they were tiny cramped roads with parking only available one side. It's different if you have the money for houses on large plots with driveway parking for multiple cars. Not everyone does and a lot of our housing stock is on narrow roads built pre car era. We were also happy to see the yellow lines as the road had become so difficult to get out of with cars parked all along (no pulling in space if you met a car going the other way) and cars parked on the corner. It might be helpful if there were more visitors spaces at maple park but the reality is that either selfish residents would utilise them as their second/third car space or commuters would nab them.

Reply to THIS thread
Talkback Home