Apologies if this has been asked before on here.

I am in an Online discussion at the moment about cars parking partly on the pavement, for the record I am in favour of it being allowed (defining it as courteous even) but only if enough room is left to comfortably get a pram past, otherwise it is ignorant.

However, the point under discussion at the moment, and used as a last gasp attack on the "pavement parkers", is that drivers doing that "damages the pavement". Personally I would have thought it is theoretically possible but really quite unlikely as each wheel only carries about a quarter of a ton, has the suspension between it and the car's weight and has an air filled tyre round it ! Surely the vast majority of pavement damage is caused by trucks or even skips ? And even more damage will be caused by tree roots, for which reason Sheffield City Council infamously tried to chop down loads of old trees (to massive public outcry ! ).

Don't forget wheelchairs, and the VI.  Anyone with a driveway probably has to drive over the pavement, but should not let it overhang the pavement.

My previous residence was adjacent to a bowling green, and the visiting coaches would park on the tarmac pavement, and allegedly damaged a gas main......

1 minute ago, Paulkp said:

Don't forget wheelchairs, and the VI.  Anyone with a driveway probably has to drive over the pavement, but should not let it overhang the pavement.

My previous residence was adjacent to a bowling green, and the visiting coaches would park on the tarmac pavement, and allegedly damaged a gas main......

Are wheelchairs wider than prams, and if so how much wider ?

What's a VI ?

Sorry, Visually Impaired.

Tarmac, no

Slabs, possible

Broken/cracked slabs yes

There isn't as much of a solid base under pavements as there is for roads.  So yes cars do damage them.  Especially around service covers for water and phone etc.  Always a challenge trying to walk around all the pavement parkers in my area, often right next to streetlights or overgrown bushes as well.  They also damage grass verges.  Huge dirty holes with massive puddles all around my estate.  

I don't agree with pavement parking, but there are too many people, with too many cars, and not enough driveways, so it's not going to change.

25 minutes ago, TomsFocus said:

There isn't as much of a solid base under pavements as there is for roads.  So yes cars do damage them.  Especially around service covers for water and phone etc.  Always a challenge trying to walk around all the pavement parkers in my area, often right next to streetlights or overgrown bushes as well.  They also damage grass verges.  Huge dirty holes with massive puddles all around my estate.  

I don't agree with pavement parking, but there are too many people, with too many cars, and not enough driveways, so it's not going to change.

Where is all this damage occurring because I don't see it ! ? !

Surely if pavements are so weak that a car might damage them they must be so weak that every time a skip is placed on it, or a truck drives up on it it would be seriously damaged ?

>>I don't agree with pavement parking<<

It's not ideal, but, to me, it's a matter of degree. Just so long as there is enough room left (primarily enough for room for a pram as they are relatively common) then personally I think it is acceptable. It may even positively courteous as it means more room for the cars on the roads. If all the cars near us parked strictly on the road then even cars would struggle to get past, vans would almost never be able to, and trucks (or fire engines...) never.

 

1 minute ago, Justin Smith said:

Where is all this damage occurring because I don't see it ! ? !

Surely if pavements are so weak that a car might damage them they must be so weak that every time a skip is placed on it, or a truck drives up on it it would be seriously damaged ?

>>I don't agree with pavement parking<<

It's not ideal, but, to me, it's a matter of degree. Just so long as there is enough room left (primarily enough for room for a pram as they are relatively common) then personally I think it is acceptable. It may even positively courteous as it means more room for the cars on the roads. If all the cars near us parked strictly on the road then even cars would struggle to get past, vans would almost never be able to, and trucks (or fire engines...) never.

 

I see it all over my estate.  Sunken pavements, cracks, holes, damaged service covers, service shafts end up above the pavement level.  I can't speak for your area but there are constant trip hazards here.

Skips shouldn't be placed directly on tarmac.  They are usually placed on pieces of wood.  However, I've never seen one on the pavement anyway.  I don't know how they'd get permission for that.  Yes, trucks damage pavements, they shouldn't be on them unless it's completely unavoidable.

Pavements must be wide in your area.  There's no chance of pram space next to a pavement parker where I live.

I don't believe it is better for most road users.  Having half a car in the road still doesn't allow enough space to drive past while remaining this side of the centre lines.  So it's no better than the full car being there.  If it's causing an obstruction, it shouldn't be there at all, regardless of being half on the pavement or not.  (This is one of my main bug bears for people who have driveways but choose to park on the road instead for some inexplicable reason!)

Bin lorries and fire engines may benefit from cars being half parked on the pavement, but they will also be hindered by cars parked on the pavement, so again, it would be better if the car wasn't there at all, rather than being half on the pavement.

3 hours ago, Justin Smith said:

Where is all this damage occurring because I don't see it ! ? !

Surely if pavements are so weak that a car might damage them they must be so weak that every time a skip is placed on it, or a truck drives up on it it would be seriously damaged ?

 

 

A skip's weight is spread over the whole area of the bottom of the skip whereas a vehicle's weight is concentrated, obviously, on 4/6/8... tyres. And, yes, driving a truck over a slabbed pavement will break it! 

Absolutely spot on Tom - "Having half a car in the road still doesn't allow enough space to drive past while remaining this side of the centre lines.  So it's no better than the full car being there.  If it's causing an obstruction, it shouldn't be there at all, regardless of being half on the pavement or not"

All veh on road, or half veh on road = still same problem - no two way traffic, so park all of veh on road and don't block pavement.

16 hours ago, TrevorB said:

Absolutely spot on Tom - "Having half a car in the road still doesn't allow enough space to drive past while remaining this side of the centre lines.  So it's no better than the full car being there.  If it's causing an obstruction, it shouldn't be there at all, regardless of being half on the pavement or not"

All veh on road, or half veh on road = still same problem - no two way traffic, so park all of veh on road and don't block pavement.

But you are forgetting there is often a car parked on the other side of the road !
Which raises an interesting question.....
Assuming the parking is where there are no yellow lines, if a car is parked on one side of the road and another parks on the opposite side of the road, but then blocks the road, is that obstruction ? And if so, how would the police officer determine which car got there first ? And if that was impossible to prove (which it probably would be), how could anyone be prosecuted for it ?
And what would be one's definition of obstruction anyway ? 
Not enough room for a car to pass ?
Not enough room for a van to pass ?
Not enough room for an ambulance to pass ?
Not enough room for a fire engine to pass ?

>>Having half a car in the road still doesn't allow enough space to drive past while remaining this side of the centre lines<<

Are you saying all vehicles should wait behind any obstruction if they cannot pass it and stay on the same side of the road (whilst a vehicle is coming in the other direction) ?
If you are I hate to think how much slower that would make traffic, particularly in the peak periods. Would towns and cities literally grind to a halt with gridlock ?
 

16 hours ago, Turvey said:

A skip's weight is spread over the whole area of the bottom of the skip whereas a vehicle's weight is concentrated, obviously, on 4/6/8... tyres. And, yes, driving a truck over a slabbed pavement will break it! 

The skips weight is spread, but on the other hand it's impact force is not lessened by any suspension, nor has it an inflated rubber pad underneath it !

19 hours ago, TomsFocus said:

I see it all over my estate.  Sunken pavements, cracks, holes, damaged service covers, service shafts end up above the pavement level.  I can't speak for your area but there are constant trip hazards here.

I see uneven pavements yes, but I would dispute how much of that is caused by cars, as opposed to heavier vehicles, weather damage, subsidence etc etc.

19 hours ago, TomsFocus said:

Skips shouldn't be placed directly on tarmac.  They are usually placed on pieces of wood.  However, I've never seen one on the pavement anyway.  I don't know how they'd get permission for that.

I have seen skips on pavements, though it's not common I admit.
Whether they'd get permission for it or not is a bit of a moot point on a back road somewhere.
I cannot remember ever having seen a skip with wood placed under it.

40 minutes ago, Justin Smith said:

I have seen skips on pavements, though it's not common I admit.
Whether they'd get permission for it or not is a bit of a moot point on a back road somewhere.
I cannot remember ever having seen a skip with wood placed under it.

Perhaps people here value their driveways more than up there.  I see it regularly, either 3 or 4 blocks crossways underneath smaller skips, or one or two large sheets of ply under larger ones.

If it's on a back road where no-one's going to be walking to report it on the pavement then I suspect there wouldn't be much vehicle traffic either.  That seems an unnecessary scenario to use.

 

54 minutes ago, Justin Smith said:

I see uneven pavements yes, but I would dispute how much of that is caused by cars, as opposed to heavier vehicles, weather damage, subsidence etc etc.

Fair point, it's difficult to prove either way without some long timelapse video.  Although in my case, I do see it around dropped kerbs for pedestrians only, which are not near any driveways, but used as a ramp for the cars parking on the pavement.  It's the same cars in the same places so I can fairly safely say there aren't any trucks doing the same thing.

1 hour ago, Justin Smith said:

The skips weight is spread, but on the other hand it's impact force is not lessened by any suspension, nor has it an inflated rubber pad underneath it !

One more point about the skips weight being spread. That only applies if the surface it is placed on is perfectly flat (and only in the case of the bottom of the skip being perfectly flat), which it almost never would be.

Pavement parking is completely illegal in Scotland now. It's not particularly well enforced but that's more down to how horrendously we are run as a country to the point the police don't have the funds to facilitate enforcement. 

Majority of people generally don't do it though. When you do see it though it is not arguable that it puts pedestrians at risk. If the parked car has left sufficient room fine but as Tom says generally they aren't thinking about that & if you can't get passed then pedestrians have to enter the road to go about their day.

To me there is no need to be putting cars on pavements & if the road isn't wide enough for a vehicle of any size to pass if cars are parked on both side the council should be implementing yellow lines on one side so only one side is obstructed. (several areas near me have this sort of system in place)

Regarding a skip, it is more likely to scrape the pavement than cause sinking. Whether the skip is level or not the weight is still distributed over a larger area & as again as Tom says generally they are on battens or sheet wood.

I drive through a fairly quiet village every morning on my commute that has street parking on it's main road. Vehicles coming from both directions & generally the flow of traffic is never that bad. Sitting stationery usually feels 100x longer than it actually is. I find drivers who can't read the road so brake for every slight bend etc far worse for causing poor traffic flow.

Obviously I'm in Scotland so numbers of everything are reduced but generally the points are still valid. I also understand where you are coming from but you are making the poor assumption that everyone would park on the pavement with courteous intentions but I think what needs to be remembered is that most people are just parking/driving for their own convenience.

1 hour ago, Jam228 said:

Pavement parking is completely illegal in Scotland now. It's not particularly well enforced but that's more down to how horrendously we are run as a country to the point the police don't have the funds to facilitate enforcement. 

Majority of people generally don't do it though. When you do see it though it is not arguable that it puts pedestrians at risk. If the parked car has left sufficient room fine but as Tom says generally they aren't thinking about that & if you can't get passed then pedestrians have to enter the road to go about their day.

To me there is no need to be putting cars on pavements & if the road isn't wide enough for a vehicle of any size to pass if cars are parked on both side the council should be implementing yellow lines on one side so only one side is obstructed. (several areas near me have this sort of system in place)

Regarding a skip, it is more likely to scrape the pavement than cause sinking. Whether the skip is level or not the weight is still distributed over a larger area & as again as Tom says generally they are on battens or sheet wood.

I drive through a fairly quiet village every morning on my commute that has street parking on it's main road. Vehicles coming from both directions & generally the flow of traffic is never that bad. Sitting stationery usually feels 100x longer than it actually is. I find drivers who can't read the road so brake for every slight bend etc far worse for causing poor traffic flow.

Obviously I'm in Scotland so numbers of everything are reduced but generally the points are still valid. I also understand where you are coming from but you are making the poor assumption that everyone would park on the pavement with courteous intentions but I think what needs to be remembered is that most people are just parking/driving for their own convenience.

Surely it's a matter of proportionality ?
As we have all agreed parking partly on the pavement is not ideal, but, in our crowded towns and cities (most of which were not built for cars) it is pretty much a necessity. Banning it completely would cause much inconvenience, maybe even distress for some if they simply cannot find anywhere to park. It is easy to say ban it if one has off road parking (which we do BTW ! ), not so much if one is dependent on on road parking, esp if living on a busy narrow street.

I actually find the vast majority of motorists do leave a reasonable amount of room when they partly park on the pavement, those who don't should be issued with a ticket. 
The best system, which I have seen in use outside the old Ripon swimming pool (which was desperately short of parking), was a line on the pavement with a sign saying it was illegal to park beyond it.
There is an even simpler way to deal with it is to say a minimum of 3ft (or whatever) must be left or you are parking illegally and at risk of a ticket.

The skip may well cause damage if the surface it is placed on is not flat. I'd have thought this particularly likely in hot weather when the tarmac is soft, or wet weather if the undersoil gets soaked ?

Parking outside someone’s house

It is perfectly legal to park outside someone’s house, unless the vehicle is blocking a driveway or a wheel is over a dropped kerb. Where no parking controls exist, drivers do not have an ‘automatic spot’ for parking outside their homes.

If your vehicle is on your driveway and another car is parked on a public highway and blocking your access out of your driveway, the council has the power to act. But if that other car is on a drive, it’s technically on private property – and the council has no authority to remove it.

Other situations in which parking isn’t permitted include streets governed by residents’ parking permits or any of the restrictions outlined above, i.e. double yellow lines.
Parking on the pavement

Parking on the pavement

The Highway Code states that you must not park partially or wholly on the pavement in London and Edinburgh, and should not do elsewhere unless signs permit it.

Parking on a pavement can obstruct and inconvenience pedestrians, people in wheelchairs, those with visual impairments, and people with prams and pushchairs.

The key here is ‘must not’ and ‘should not’.

In other words, offenders in London and Edinburgh are committing a punishable offence and are liable to receive a parking ticket.

Elsewhere, drivers aren’t necessarily committing an offence, but it is an offence to drive on the pavement.

This means the law is a little fuzzy, as outlined by the Ask The Police website. It says: “Despite the obvious inference that a parked vehicle has been driven on the pavement prior to being parked there, witnesses to the driving will probably be needed to secure a prosecution - this can be problematic.”

If parking on the pavement is permitted, it will be marked by a blue and white sign.

If the car is wholly on the pavement, then vehicles may be parked entirely on the verge or footway.

If the car is half on the pavement, vehicles may be parked partially on the verge or footway.

Outside of London and Scotland, we advise people to use common sense when faced with no other option but to park on the pavement.

If you are parking along a narrow road, where parking wholly on the road would stop other cars, and particularly emergency vehicles, from getting through, then it is a sensible option to park partially on a pavement, providing there are no parking restrictions and providing you are not blocking a wheelchair user or pram from using the pavement.

If there are restrictions, or your parking would cause wheelchair users or people with prams to have to walk into the road, then you should find somewhere else to park.
Parking on the road - what the Highway Code says

The Highway Code isn't the law, but many of its rules are in fact legal requirements under the Roads Traffic Act, which you can be prosecuted for contravening.

You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence, disqualified from driving, or even sent to prison.

Here's what the Highway Code says for parking on the road:

    Do not park facing against the traffic flow
    Stop as close as possible to the roadside
    Do not park too close to a vehicle displaying a Blue Badge
    The engine, headlights and fog lights must be switched off
    The handbrake must be applied before leaving the car
    You must look out for other road users when you open your door
    Passengers should exit the vehicle on the side next to the kerb
    Valuables should be out of sight and the car locked

Parking lights must be used on a road or layby on a highway with a speed limit higher than 30mph.

Check your vehicle’s handbook to find out how to operate them: often, they are engaged by clicking the indicator stalk either left or right as you leave the car, but some models have dedicated parking light buttons.

53 minutes ago, Justin Smith said:

Surely it's a matter of proportionality ?
As we have all agreed parking partly on the pavement is not ideal, but, in our crowded towns and cities (most of which were not built for cars) it is pretty much a necessity. Banning it completely would cause much inconvenience, maybe even distress for some if they simply cannot find anywhere to park. It is easy to say ban it if one has off road parking (which we do BTW ! ), not so much if one is dependent on on road parking, esp if living on a busy narrow street.

I actually find the vast majority of motorists do leave a reasonable amount of room when they partly park on the pavement, those who don't should be issued with a ticket. 
The best system, which I have seen in use outside the old Ripon swimming pool (which was desperately short of parking), was a line on the pavement with a sign saying it was illegal to park beyond it.
There is an even simpler way to deal with it is to say a minimum of 3ft (or whatever) must be left or you are parking illegally and at risk of a ticket.

The skip may well cause damage if the surface it is placed on is not flat. I'd have thought this particularly likely in hot weather when the tarmac is soft, or wet weather if the undersoil gets soaked ?

I get you but you are selecting very specific situations where you are right it may well be required to park on the pavement. But you can't generate a rule that captures it. You would have to define at what width of road parking because acceptable. You'd have to define what would be an acceptable amount of a vehicle can go on the pavement. You would then have to look at the costs for implementing the policies, road markings, signage etc that when being rolled out would all be exclaimed to be a waste of taxpayers money (I'd be one of them btw)

I think there probably are situations where it would maybe make sense but allowing sometimes but not always you open it up to interpretation which is the worst situation to get in.

At the end of the day it's on the local council to analyze the scenarios within their area & make the call on whether they want  to make changes. With the view most councils have on cars these days I'd imagine they'd implement a policy of if you park on the pavement your car will be impounded & crushed. They will then supply you with a £50 Halfords voucher toward a bicycle. Joking obviously but I don't think anything in favour will be voted through a council for a long time.

1 hour ago, eddie eastwood said:

If you are parking along a narrow road, where parking wholly on the road would stop other cars, and particularly emergency vehicles, from getting through, then it is a sensible option to park partially on a pavement, providing there are no parking restrictions and providing you are not blocking a wheelchair user or pram from using the pavement.

I agree with this 100% (or 110% if I were a professional footballer).