Knowing the street that garnered the most objections, it's chock-a-block (one of the reasons we didn't even contemplate buying a nice house located there – someone blocked the driveway while we were viewing, evidently an not uncommon occurrence, and frankly it looked a mess), including pavements and corners (effectively where they proposed DYL, as ever, narrow street, bin lorries and fire engines can't get around).
Facetiousness aside, I do understand how precious their parking is to them, but equally almost all the objections are BAH, WHERE WILL I PARK and infinite variations thereon? There's finite road space. That's a physical problem, the council cannot manufacture space.
Yes, I'll totally agree that the situation shouldn't have got so bad, restrictions on parking should have been applied many years ago, and more thought put into planning (equally, every planning permission stalls on parking and the solution seems to be to pretend that the sheer number of cars doesn't exist, thus exacerbating the problem further). But the problem is obvious. It's made out of metal and parked outside in considerable numbers. Yet people don't just buy even more cars, despite the obvious, they'll buy bigger cars.
It's the sheer sense of entitlement that the road and pavement outside their houses and near their properties are somehow theirs – it's not, it's a public asset and should be available to all to use safely and conveniently. Frankly, unless you have a place to store it properly, you shouldn't have a car. I can't put a shed out of the pavement because I've run out of space in my garden.
Anyway, the council backpedalled on the objections. So, if there's a fire and the engine can't get around, someone house can merrily blaze until their kids are crispy. Because convenient parking is more important. But then we knew that, so business as usual.
(For the record, the street in question is directly behind the high street, about 5 minutes from a train station and a couple of bus stops.)
