Pavement Parking
The Scottish Parliament has now passed the Bill, now the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019, which prohibits and potentially criminalises parking any motor car wheels on pavements, as is commonly practised in our Avenues. Rather than try to investigate all the issues in this short article, we have made a podcast explanation which you can view below, in the section labelled Exceptions.
Please help us to help the local community to deal with the problems which are likely to arise as and when these regulations come to be enforced in our area by contacting us by email at info@scara.org.uk with any relevant insight or information or opinion which might be of assistance. While the Act clearly prohibits motorists from putting wheels up on pavements, the law is not yet in force because it requires the creation of ministerial regulations authorising local authorities to create enforcement schemes in their local areas. Ministerial regulations have now been created but I am not aware of there being enforcement schemes in any areas. Anyone who knows about any such schemes is invited to let me have the details for publication. About two weeks ago I made my first journey out of Scotland since the beginning of the pandemic when I went down to London. They have the same pavement parking problems and, no doubt, the same regulations to deal with. See the photograph which shows how the owners of terraced houses, not unlike the Scotstoun Avenues, have converted their front gardens into parking areas. Not very pretty but effective. Notice also however, that the local authority appears to have marked off parking places which permit the placing of two wheels on pavements, as long as the vehicles are parked within the marked area. I am not certain but it might be that this is possible as long as a certain minimum pavement width, possibly two metres, is left for pedestrian passage. If you think that this is a scheme which might usefully be recommended to our own Council, then please indicate your support for this by send an email to that effect to info@scara.org.uk
As at 20th June 2023 none of our members have been in touch with us about the prospect of a ban on pavement parking. However, we would now draw youir attention to a current Scottish government survey which is due to close on 28th July 2023 and to which you might wish to submit your views. You can access the survey through the following link :-
https://consult.gov.scot/transport-scotland/enforcement-regulations-for-local-authorities/
I suggest that, if you make a return to this survey, you copy it to SCARA so that we might be able to make a significant community submission to the survey.
Clearly, there are advantages and disadvateges in banning pavement parking and it may be that we are aiming to establish a middle ground in which pavement parking may be permitted where sufficient room (1.5 metres ?) is left unobstructed to allow passage of pedestrians, prams, wheelchairs etc. Our evidence above seems to indicate that there is precedence for such regulation.
Here is an update on the pavement parking issue as at 6th February 2022. If you have any further information that would be of interest to our members or if you wish to raise any queries or make any suggestions, then please contact this website by email at info@scara.org.uk
23rd July 2023 We have submitted the following response to the survey following advertisement and discussion.
Submitted to Scotland's pavement parking prohibitions - consultation on enforcement regulations for local authorities Submitted on 2023-07-18 20:15:52 Enforcement regulations: proposed provisions under section 59(1) of the Act
1 Do you agree or disagree that the content of a PCN for a parking prohibition contravention should be as set out above? Disagree Please explain your answer.:
We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with the contents of such a notice. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area Method of notification of a PCN
2 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed method of the notification of a PCN as set out above? Disagree Please explain your answer.:
We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with the proposed notification of penalty. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area.
3 Do you agree or disagree with the proposal for a local authority to be able to issue a PCN to the registered keeper of the vehicle by post, if they have not been able to affix it to a vehicle or give it to the driver? Disagree Please explain your answer
.: We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with the proposed notification of penalty to the registered keeper. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area. Removal or interference with a PCN
4 Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to make the removal or interference with a PCN, by anyone other than the vehicle owner/person in charge of the vehicle or the enforcement authority, a criminal offence? Disagree Please explain your answer.:
We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with the issue of notification of penalty or with the criminalisation of interference of a notice which should not have been issued in the first place. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area
. 5 Do you agree with the level of fine which is being suggested? Disagree Please explain your answer.
: We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with any level of fine. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area. Timing and manner of payment of a penalty charge
6 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed timing and level of discounts and surcharges of a PCN for a parking prohibition contravention as set out above? Disagree Please explain your answer.
: We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with any imposition of fine or with any timing of payment of fine or with any discount of a fine which should not have been issued in the first place. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area. The amount of a PCN in relation to pavement parking, dropped kerb parking or double parking
7 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed level of penalty for a PCN issued for a pavement parking, dropped kerb or double parking prohibition contravention as set out above? Disagree Please explain your answer.:
We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with any level of a fine which should not have been imposed in the first place. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area. Responsibility for paying the PCN
8 Do you agree or disagree that the registered owner of a vehicle should be responsible for the payment of a PCN for a parking prohibition contravention as set out above? Disagree Please explain your answer
.: We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with any imposition of fine which should not have been imposed in the first place. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area.
9 Do you agree or disagree that if a vehicle trader commits a parking prohibition contravention, they should be responsible for the payment of a PCN even if they are not the registered keeper? Disagree Please explain your answer.
: We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with any imposition of fine which should not have been imposed in the first place. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area. Reviews and appeals (including grounds of review or appeal) in connection with the imposition of penalty charges
10 Do you agree or disagree that the process for appealing a PCN for a parking prohibition contravention as detailed above? Disagree Please explain your answer.
: We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with any imposition of fine which should not have been imposed in the first place and therefore with the need for any appeal process. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area. Enforcement regulations: proposed provisions under section 66 of the Act
11 Do you agree or disagree that local authorities should be required to keep accounts for a parking prohibition contravention, similar to the process, detailed above? Disagree Please explain your answer.:
We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with the imposition of fines which should not have been imposed in the first place and therefore with the need for any accounting for alleged contyravention. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parkingand we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area
. 12 Do you agree or disagree that any surplus made by local authorities for the enforcement of the parking prohibitions should be ring-fenced and used for certain transport-related purposes, similar to the process detailed above? Disagree Please explain your answer
.: We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with the imposition of fines which should not have been imposed in the first place and therefore with the application of any surplus arising. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area.
13 Do you agree or disagree that local authorities should be required to submit their accounts in relation to the enforcement of the parking prohibitions, similar to the process, detailed above? Disagree Please explain your answer.:
We do not agree that pavement parking should be subject to blanket prohibition to the extent proposed in the legislation and therefore we do not agree with the imposition of fines which should not have been imposed in the first place and therefore with the need for the submission of accounts. This is an example of a leading question ie one which contains its own answer which is approval of the blanket prohibition of pavement parking and we cannot agree with any form of process until the regulation has been made consistent with the reality of parking requirements in our area.
About you What is your name? Name: Michael Sheridan
What is your email address? Email: msheridan25@hotmail.com
Are you responding as an individual or an organisation? Organisation
What is your organisation? Organisation: ScotstounConservation Area Residents Association (SCARA)
The Scottish Government would like your permission to publish your consultation response. Please indicate your publishing preference
: Publish response with name
We will share your response internally with other Scottish Government policy teams who may be addressing the issues you discuss. They may wish to contact you again in the future, but we require your permission to do so. Are you content for Scottish Government, including Transport Scotland, to contact you again in relation to this consultation exercise?
Yes
I confirm that I have read the privacy policy and consent to the data I provide being used as set out in the policy. I consent
Evaluation Please help us improve our consultations by answering the questions below. (Responses to the evaluation will not be published.) Matrix
1 - How satisfied were you with this consultation?: Very dissatisfied Please enter comments here.:
Our organisation has no formal representative function but this response represents the balance of views which we have received during the period of consultation and it is felt that the consultation assumes the approval of the extent of the prohibition of pavement parking set out in the current legislation. The agreed views of those who participated in discussion within our organisation are as follows
: 1. Scotstoun is an Conservation area in which the streets are relatively narrow and the pavements which are typically up to 2.8m wide are furnished with large, mature, preserved trees. The majority of residents own at least one car which requires to be parked adjacent to the properties
. 2. If all wheels of a car are on both sides of the road, there is not sufficient space for an emergency vehicle to drive down the road.
3. There is no viable alternative parking in the area.
4. We object strongly to a blanket proposal regarding regarding penalties for pavement parking where it would be impossible for residents to have four wheels of their car on the road due to the above reason.
5. The Council should carry out a survey well in advance of any imposition of penalites where the residents have put forward valid objections.
6. One solution to the problem could be to define a clear width of the pavement (i.e. 1.5m ) which would then permit cars to park up to this defined marker. We refer to the Scottish Government Street Policy Statement, dated 22 nd March 2010 for Lightly used / Residential Streets and also as practised in othe jurisdictions within the UK which should be inspected and taken into consideration.
7. A different solution would be to exempt Conservation areas altogether.
Matrix 1 - How would you rate your satisfaction with using this platform (Citizen Space) to respond to this consultation?
: Slightly satisfied
Please enter comments here.: The platform seems to operate satsfactorily bu we consider it to have been abused by having been used to create a consultation on pavement parking which contains anodyne questions to which most or all of the answers in the normal course would have been given in the positive but which positivity may then be used to support a policy with which the overwhelming sentiment of our members appears to be in disagreement
Added at 17th March 2024.
Exceptions to Pavement Parking prohibitions
Transport (Scotland) Act 2019
Section 55 Exceptions to pavement parking prohibition and double parking prohibition
(1)This section sets out exceptions to the pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition.
(2)The pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition do not apply where (a)[ the motor vehicle is being used— (i)for police purposes, including for the purposes of the National Crime Agency, (ii)for ambulance purposes or for the purpose of providing a response to an emergency at the request of the Scottish Ambulance Service Board, (iii)for or in connection with the exercise of any function of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service or Her Majesty's Coastguard, or (iv)for naval, military or air force purposes, (b)the achievement of the purposes, or the exercise of the function, would be likely to be hindered if the vehicle were not parked on a pavement or, as the case may be, as mentioned in section 54(1), and (c)no part of the vehicle is within 1.5 metres of the pavement edge which is furthest away from the centre of the carriageway (however that edge is bounded).
(3)The pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition do not apply where the motor vehicle— (a)is being used for or in connection with— (i)the undertaking of works in roads, (ii)the removal of an obstruction to traffic, (iii)the collection of waste by or on behalf of a local authority, (iv)postal services (within the meaning of section 125(1) of the Postal Services Act 2000), (b)cannot reasonably be so used without being parked on a pavement or, as the case may be, as mentioned in section 54(1), (c)is so parked for no longer than is necessary for that use, and (d)no part of the vehicle is within 1.5 metres of the pavement edge which is furthest away from the centre of the carriageway (however that edge is bounded).
(4)In subsection (3)(a)(i), “works in roads” includes— (a)road works within the meaning given by section 107(3) of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991, (b)works for roads purposes within the meaning given by section 145(2) of that Act, (c)major works for roads purposes with the meaning given by section 145(3) of that Act, (d)cleaning, placing, removing or adjusting by or on behalf of a roads authority (within the meaning given by section 151(1) of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984) of any equipment or structure which is placed on or over a road.
(5)The pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition do not apply where— (a)the motor vehicle is being used by a registered medical practitioner, registered nurse or registered midwife for or in connection with the provision of urgent or emergency health care, (b)the provision of the care would be likely to be hindered if the vehicle were not parked on a pavement or, as the case may be, as mentioned in section 54(1), (c)the vehicle is so parked for no longer than is reasonable in connection with the provision of the care, and (d)no part of the vehicle is within 1.5 metres of the pavement edge which is furthest away from the centre of the carriageway (however that edge is bounded).
(6)The pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition do not apply where— (a)the motor vehicle is, in the course of business— (i)being used for the purpose of delivering goods to, or collecting goods from, any premises, or (ii)being loaded from or unloaded to any premises, (b)the delivery, collection, loading or unloading cannot reasonably be carried out without the vehicle being parked on a pavement or, as the case may be, as mentioned in section 54(1), (c)no part of the vehicle is within 1.5 metres of the pavement edge which is furthest away from the centre of the carriageway (however that edge is bounded), (d)the vehicle is so parked for no longer than is necessary for the delivery, collection, loading or unloading and in any event for no more than a continuous period of 20 minutes.
(7)The pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition do not apply where the motor vehicle is parked wholly within a parking place that is— (a)authorised by order under section 32(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, or (b)designated by order under section 45 of that Act.
(8)The pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition do not apply where the motor vehicle is parked in accordance with permission given by a constable (within the meaning given by section 99(1) of the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012) in uniform.
(9)The pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition do not apply where— (a)the person has parked the motor vehicle for the purpose of saving life or responding to another similar emergency, (b)the achievement of that purpose would be likely to be hindered if the vehicle were not parked on a pavement or, as the case may be, as mentioned in section 54(1), and (c)the vehicle is so parked for no longer than is necessary for that purpose.
(10)The pavement parking prohibition and the double parking prohibition do not apply where— (a)the person has parked the motor vehicle for the purpose of providing assistance at an accident or breakdown, (b)the assistance could not be safely or reasonably provided if the vehicle were not parked on a pavement or, as the case may be, as mentioned in section 54(1), (c)the vehicle is so parked for no longer than is necessary for that purpose, and (d)no part of the vehicle is within 1.5 metres of the pavement edge which is furthest away from the centre of the carriageway (however that edge is bounded).
(11)In this section, “carriageway” has the meaning given by section 51(6). (12)The Scottish Ministers may by regulations modify this section. Textual Amendments F1 Words in s. 55(2) omitted (27.11.2023) by virtue of The Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 Amendment Regulations 2023 (S.S.I. 2023/347), regs. 1(1), 2(5)(a) F2 Words in s. 55(2)(a) inserted (27.11.2023) by The Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 Amendment Regulations 2023 (S.S.I. 2023/347), regs. 1(1), 2(5)(b)
Section 51Exemption orders
(1)A local authority may make an order (in this Part, an “exemption order”) providing that the pavement parking prohibition does not apply to a footway within the local authority’s area which is specified in the order. (2)A footway may not be specified in an exemption order unless it, or the carriageway with which it is associated, has the characteristics specified by the Scottish Ministers in a direction under section 67(1). (3)An exemption order— (a)may apply to all or part of a footway, (b)must apply— (i)at all times, and (ii)to all motor vehicles, (c)may not be subject to conditions. (4)If the local authority is not the traffic authority for the footway to which an exemption order is to apply, the local authority may not make the order unless the traffic authority for the footway consents to the making of the order. (5)Subsection (4) applies to an order amending or revoking an exemption order as it applies to an exemption order. (6)In subsection (2), “carriageway” is to be construed in accordance with section 151(2) of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1980Section
Email by Scott Donaldson, Chair of Scotstoun Community Council 28th February 2024
Dear Councillors, As you know, Scotstoun Community Council has been pressing for GCC to consider an exemption from the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 Pavement Parking prohibitions for the Scotstoun Conservation Area (with the possible exceptions of Duncan Avenue & Dane's Drive) since long before they actually went live. We believe that most of the roads qualify under not just 1 of the general criteria for exemption but often both. I have previously presented you with some measurements, calculations & observations showing this (I know that Councillor Cunningham, at least, has done similar). Frankly, without it chaos would ensue. At a public meeting last summer called by the Scotstoun Conservation Area Residents Association there was not 1 person in favour of the prohibition within the SCA. We were told that there would be a citywide audit before enforcement (that probably post-May) but a recent update to the GCC website does not read like that. https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=30579 https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=30597 "Can my street be exempt from these rules? There will be no immediate exemptions proposed to allow parking on pavements. We will monitor the impact of the new parking prohibitions over the coming months and find out if any mitigation measures are needed. In order to get a pavement parking exemption, your street needs to meet the following criteria: There is insufficient width of the carriageway to allow emergency service vehicles to pass when vehicles are fully parked on the carriageway. The footway needs to be wide enough to host the parked vehicle and have an unobstructed space of 1.5 metres between the vehicle and the edge of the footway furthest from the carriageway for pedestrians. Each street may present a particular situation that needs to be tackled differently. If you think you have a valid reason for a location to be considered for an exemption, and it meets the above criteria, you can complete the online form. Your request will be logged and assessed." Why would the council get everybody to apply for exemption individually across the city? There are ~ 650 buildings in the Scotstoun Conservation Area alone & it won't be the only one in the city. Indeed, the SCA is not the only area within Scotstoun alone that has roads that may qualify. That is a lot of extra work for GCC staff to process. The online form itself has issues e.g. it only allows you apply for 1 side of the street & asks for street nos. ( I put "full length"). When I tried to submit a more expanded reasoning in the "Reason you wish this area to be exempt?" box it would not let me, coming up with some error message such as "invalid response" or similar. I had to submit a much reduced (& therefore less clear) reason. Further, I was told over the weekend by somebody that cars had been seen up by the Kingsway end of Danes Drive with warning notices (apparently official GCC rather than some vigilante pavement parking warrior) on their windscreens re. pavement parking. Can Councillors please confirm the current state of play re. this within GCC & a likely timetable? Is there any indication of likelihood of an exemption being raised for the SCA or of a site visit & walkaround for the audit which we could attend? Yours, Scott Donaldson Chair, Scotstoun Community Council p.s. in my opinion there are other roads/traffic-related issues within the SCA that are more woAN email received fromally invisible road markings/speeding & rat-running/parking right up to the corners of junctions greatly reducing visibility for both pedestrians & drivers & general condition of the roads (potholes & block paving breaking up).
An email received froma helpful councillor :-
Thanks for your email and I appreciate your concerns. I could give you the official position but in broad terms it's a 'holding' one at the moment. Officers are doing an 'audit' of the city's streets to establish how they go about imposing and enforcing a ban. In that regard, there are two very relevant grounds for exemption and these are set out in the legislation, namely: An area of pavement can only be considered for exemption if:its layout or character would allow for a width of 1.5 metres of the footway to remain unobstructed when any part of a vehicle is parked on it, orthe layout or character of the carriageway associated with the footway is such that the passage of an emergency vehicle would be impeded by the presence of a vehicle parked on the carriageway. Another resident of Earlbank Ave went to the trouble of measuring his road and advised me of the following:
- pavement width ~ 2.85m
- road width ~ 5.70m
I am told that a typical car is ~1.8m wide so even 1/2 on (& most would usually be less, probably 1/3 on) allows for an unobstructed pavement width of 1.95m, well in excess of the minimum requirement in the first criteria for exemption. Its also worth considering that the width of a standard fire engine in the UK is 2.3 metres. If we assume cars are parked fully on either side of your road, that would take up at least 3.6 m, leaving only 2.1 m of space. On this basis, an emergency vehicle would not be able to access the street. I am clear that until such time as the Council comes to a final decision and residents are duly notified, nothing will change. I believe that a phased introduction is likely but again the detail of this is some months away. While I am supportive of a ban I am also clear that it needs to be proportionate and always bear in mind the issue of 'are pedestrians able to use the pavement safely'. As you can see from the above, this is explicitly set out in the legislation.
