The joys of town centre living Options

[spartacus]

I have friends who live in city centres. They love it.
I couldn't stand it personally.

The convenience of having shops immediately to hand is a big plus for them, as is being able to walk to their choice of pubs, clubs and other sources of entertainment, have a drink or three then walk/stagger home. Several of them don't have cars and haven't owned one for years as they're also just by a rail or bus station. "There's always a taxi if you need one" they say.

Fair enough. I'm an out-of-townie myself and couldn't think how I'd survive without a car. I'm convinced I'd need one and if I had a house or flat in a city or town centre I'd need to have a place that had parking.

Which brings me onto this recent article in the local rag I came across as I was tearing the NWN to bits to use as firelighter for my woodburner... Amongst all the complaints about the new parking in the town it seems the new residents of a street right in the middle of the town are also complaining that they can’t park outside their homes (see attached file).

Residents' fury as street park charges rolled out
Kings Road West homeowners says it is now 'almost impossible' to park outside their own homes due to new restrictions
(article goes on...)

NWN article

Now when you buy a house or a flat in a town centre and it doesn't come with any parking you might think that if it's that important to you to keep your car then maybe the property isn't for you. Don't you think?

These properties were only very recently converted from business use into residential.
These new residents bought the houses with no parking provided, so why should valuable town centre space now be set aside for their exclusive use? It was presumably a conscious decision for them to buy without parking so why should it now be the Council's responsibility to provide them something for free?

I get this sort of thing where I work in Reading. Online trade is increasingly affecting small businesses and they fold. The shops are then converted to residential as part of a bid to regenerate a run down area of town and the residents then demand parking once they're in. This squeezes out the road space so that those shops that are left don't have any space for their customers. And those shops fold like dominoes..... I don't know that there's an answer other than for Councils to say "That's what you bought and the price you paid reflects that" but the current complaints by these residents are not giving the whole picture imho

Attached File(s)

 P_D.jpg ( 66.16K ) Number of downloads: 1

 

[Andy Capp]

Perhaps change of use shouldn't be allowed. After all, living somewhere presumably means an inevitable need for people who visit to park, whether friends or others like doctors, etc.

[spartacus]

I accept that, but why should valuable town centre parking space need to be set aside for their exclusive use during the day? If they have friends visiting they could use the town centre car parks (which there are many). These residents could also presumably buy a season ticket for the car park if they have a desperate need to continue to own a car despite all the joys of the town centre?

I don't see why they should be able to park directly outside their homes during the working day when they choose to live in (what we hope is) a busy bustling town centre.

[blackdog]

Car free living may be viable in a large city - but Newbury? Some will do so because they can't afford a car, some will do so because they have a ideological dislike of cars - but most will have a car.

The problem is the planning system that allows development without adequate provision of car parking. It's not only in the town centre - the part-built racecourse development is already showing that there are nowhere near enough parking spaces.

[spartacus]

At least the properties in The Racecourse development come with some allocated parking. Not enough maybe.

These properties in Kings Road West came with none at all, yet it's still apparently "someone else's fault" that the people who bought the things now discover they have nowhere to park and "the council need to do something about it". The owners got themselves in this position. THEY need to do something about it.

If people didn't buy these properties in the first place builders would think twice before building them.

[On the edge]

I wouldn't worry too much; it's just noise. It takes a bit of time before the penny drops, but it does eventually. London is already there. Live there and you'd be daft to 'own' a car - unless it was a hobby! Sure, London has superb public transport provision. However, we probably don't need that in Newbury - so long as the target residents can walk or bike to the shops and the station now and again all is good. For High days and galas, we have a big taxi population. Hasn't anyone wondered why there is such an emphasis on retirement living round here? There is a subscript, a good few apartments for new couples who quite like a bit of peace and quiet - with the opportunity for long walks at weekends to commune with nature. Where is the car in that lot? Country folk obviously do need cars - but they are the very people the shopping and entertainment nodes like Reading, Basingstoke or Swindon are falling over themselves to attract. All our beloved local authority need do to satisfy them is keep the roads out of the district good fettle.

[Andy Capp]

At least the properties in The Racecourse development come with some allocated parking. Not enough maybe.

These properties in Kings Road West came with none at all, yet it's still apparently "someone else's fault" that the people who bought the things now discover they have nowhere to park and "the council need to do something about it". The owners got themselves in this position. THEY need to do something about it.

If people didn't buy these properties in the first place builders would think twice before building them.

Perhaps, but one is inclined to be upset when subsequent decisions are made (like the council's parking policies) after the fact (buying or renting a home).

Personally, I say serves you right for voting or not voting as you do.

[On the edge]

...it's exactly the same as someone buying a house in a 'nice little village' and then getting upset because the pub and the shop close. Do people honestly think things will stay exactly as they are, simply because they've purchased a house? What gives anyone the right to park outside their house, let alone object to others?

[Rdg]

Council can't refuse change of use currently

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25107646

[Andy Capp]

...it's exactly the same as someone buying a house in a 'nice little village' and then getting upset because the pub and the shop close. Do people honestly think things will stay exactly as they are, simply because they've purchased a house? What gives anyone the right to park outside their house, let alone object to others?

I'm not talking about a right, but it can be expect to upset people, as is evident.

[Turin Machine]

Buys a house next to the church, complains about noise from bells, council issues noise abatement notice. Nice!

[On the edge]

I'm not talking about a right, but it can be expect to upset people, as is evident.

Of course, but what is in effect self interest driven nimby ism shouldn't be a surprise and shouldn't influence policy.

[Simon Kirby]

I have sympathy with the car-owning householders here. I think it's genetally fair to expect people to own cars wherever they live in Newbury and if there isn't parking provision I see this as a failure of the planming system. I would draw a parallel with the unforyunate folk who buy houses on flood plains and complain when their houses flood - sure, you can argue that it's reasonably foreseeable but I would also say that people have a reasonable expevtation not to have their housrs flood and the planning system is supposed to protect them from unscrupulous developers and the exploitation of their indigence.

[Andy Capp]

Of course, but what is in effect self interest driven nimby ism shouldn't be a surprise and shouldn't influence policy.

But it will influence policy: our democracy is based on it. Come election time, everyone is a nimby.

[spartacus]

Say a house was sold without a bathroom and the developer or estate agent gave the flannel to potential buyers that they wouldn't need one with the house as the gym across the road had great facilities they could use....

Or if a property had no kitchen but the same estate agent told the mug buyer they wouldn't need one with the property as there were so many places to eat out in town... (sounds far fetched but increasing number of bedsits are no more than dormitories)

...and then the gym closed......and the local takeaways shut up shop...... What sympathy would anyone have I wonder.

These properties had no parking. "Don't need anything with these houses as you can just park on the street.... for free" says estate agent. The residents all moved into this street just a year ago. Situations change. My sympathy meter is showing a LOW reading.

[spartacus]

Buys a house next to the church, complains about noise from bells, council issues noise abatement notice. Nice!

As happened in Scotland when someone moved into a town in the Borders and set up a B&B in the town centre and promptly complained about the war memorial clock, whose bells had chimed since 1928, saying it was ruining their business.

The bells were silenced....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_...and/7523436.stm

[Andy Capp]

These are not like for like comparisons. When the homes were built, parking was available. With your examples, the nuisance pre-existed; not to mention Spartacus's familiar building his own argument to demolish method.

[x2lls]

Buys a house next to the church, complains about noise from bells, council issues noise abatement notice. Nice!

Who did?

[x2lls]

As happened in Scotland when someone moved into a town in the Borders and set up a B&B in the town centre and promptly complained about the war memorial clock, whose bells had chimed since 1928, saying it was ruining their business.

The bells were silenced....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_...and/7523436.stm

Well, we all have to adhere to the rules, and if the sound was above the limit, then so be it.

[Andy Capp]

As happened in Scotland when someone moved into a town in the Borders and set up a B&B in the town centre and promptly complained about the war memorial clock, whose bells had chimed since 1928, saying it was ruining their business.

The bells were silenced....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_...and/7523436.stm

...during typical sleeping time.

"After an investigation by environmental health, it has now been decided the chimes will be stopped between midnight and 7.15am.

I see nothing unreasonable here.