Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
19-05-2019, 19:51   #76
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 23,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
People with buggy’s and wheel chairs would park on the road / path instead of their driveways ?

Doesn’t seem likely
Same happens in my estate. Many parents actually park outside half on the path and let their kids play in the garden if they are too young to be in the road in their own. And I’m in a quiet cul de sac but all it takes is one car so I can see their point.
kceire is offline  
Advertisement
20-05-2019, 01:49   #77
AndrewJRenko
Registered User
 
AndrewJRenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 7,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by nox001 View Post
So what in an estate? Most people walk or wheel buggys on the road regardless. Allowing everyone park and in a way that doesn’t block the road is more important than keeping a very underused footpath clear. It is essential for people to be able to park, walking on a footpath in a fairly low traffic estate is not essential.

Remember it’s many of the people parking on the footpath are the people with buggy’s, I can’t comment on wheelchairs because I’ve never seen a wheel chair in the particular estate I’m referring to but you can be sure they would also park on the path as they would have no option really.

Too many people are detached from reality on this forum. As for legality, one of the neigbous was a guard and parked squad cars, paddy wagons and his private car on the path always same as everyone else in the estate.
Just in case anyone needs reminding of the dangers that arise from pavement parking, this UK campaign would be a good starting point

https://twitter.com/hashtag/pavementsforpeople?s=09
AndrewJRenko is offline  
20-05-2019, 09:33   #78
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 23,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJRenko View Post
Just in case anyone needs reminding of the dangers that arise from pavement parking, this UK campaign would be a good starting point

https://twitter.com/hashtag/pavementsforpeople?s=09
That’s bad alright but in my estate, a car can half park on the path, and a wheelchair or buggy including the modern new age mammy bugaboo mobiles can still fit past.

I think that’s their opinion that they are carrying out a fair compromise (although technically illegal) to allow free movement of traffic into the cul de sac, especially for emergency vehicles.
kceire is offline  
20-05-2019, 09:52   #79
AndrewJRenko
Registered User
 
AndrewJRenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 7,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by kceire View Post
That’s bad alright but in my estate, a car can half park on the path, and a wheelchair or buggy including the modern new age mammy bugaboo mobiles can still fit past.

I think that’s their opinion that they are carrying out a fair compromise (although technically illegal) to allow free movement of traffic into the cul de sac, especially for emergency vehicles.
Is the path designed and built to take the weight of multi tonne vehicles?
AndrewJRenko is offline  
Thanks from:
20-05-2019, 10:03   #80
zell12
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 6,549
Does the motorist inform their insurer that their vehicle is left on the footpath (in breach of RTA) and abandoned on the footpath at night?
zell12 is offline  
Thanks from:
Advertisement
20-05-2019, 11:06   #81
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 23,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJRenko View Post
Is the path designed and built to take the weight of multi tonne vehicles?
The road build up is a whacked layer of Clause 804 hardcore with a 75mm tar pour on top.
The paths are a 225mm thick mass concrete pour. Both in place since 1996. So yes, the paths can take the weight of a 1.5T car is those specific locations.

The point loads from the wheels at the higher point on the path will actually put increased pressure on the side that is still on the road, so the road side actually fares worse in this situation.

Last edited by kceire; 20-05-2019 at 11:13. Reason: spelling
kceire is offline  
Thanks from:
20-05-2019, 11:09   #82
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 23,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by zell12 View Post
Does the motorist inform their insurer that their vehicle is left on the footpath (in breach of RTA) and abandoned on the footpath at night?
It would make no difference. I know this from experience.
kceire is offline  
20-05-2019, 11:34   #83
AndrewJRenko
Registered User
 
AndrewJRenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 7,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by kceire View Post
The road build up is a whacked layer of Clause 804 hardcore with a 75mm tar pour on top.
The paths are a 225mm thick mass concrete pour. Both in place since 1996. So yes, the paths can take the weight of a 1.5T car is those specific locations.

The point loads from the wheels at the higher point on the path will actually put increased pressure on the side that is still on the road, so the road side actually fares worse in this situation.
So this kind of parking puts increased pressure on the road, you're saying? Who's going to pay for the extra road maintenance?
AndrewJRenko is offline  
20-05-2019, 11:45   #84
kceire
Moderator
 
kceire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 23,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJRenko View Post
So this kind of parking puts increased pressure on the road, you're saying? Who's going to pay for the extra road maintenance?
I was hoping you'd mention that.

So you accept that the half parking on the path doesn't effect the structural capabilities of the pavement, doesn't lead to an increased rate of wear and tear, so now you move onto the road damage.

Considering the same road is in place since 1996, I'd imagine the road surface will last a significant time longer. Currently no potholes, cracking or major wear and tear present so it has lasted its constructed life cycle and will last longer.
kceire is offline  
(5) thanks from:
Advertisement
20-05-2019, 14:36   #85
AndrewJRenko
Registered User
 
AndrewJRenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 7,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by kceire View Post
I was hoping you'd mention that.

So you accept that the half parking on the path doesn't effect the structural capabilities of the pavement, doesn't lead to an increased rate of wear and tear, so now you move onto the road damage.

Considering the same road is in place since 1996, I'd imagine the road surface will last a significant time longer. Currently no potholes, cracking or major wear and tear present so it has lasted its constructed life cycle and will last longer.
Great to hear that the damage that typically arises from pavement parking isn't an issue in your one particular case

https://twitter.com/search?q=damage%...20parking&s=09
AndrewJRenko is offline  
20-05-2019, 15:04   #86
Graham
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,603
Mod Note

Back on topic please folks.

So, about that no-parking sign.
Graham is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet