The story outlining the increases in residents’ parking charges seems to demonstrate nothing more than the level to which we seem to have become ‘entitled’, (News Guardian, May 24). Is this really front page news?
While parking is an issue many of us have to manage, the cost of 50p per week (£25 a year) for a permit is surely not exorbitant.
It was interesting to note the way the price rise was, in part, described in relation to two cars, with the reporter seeming to suggest that it might be expected residents would park two cars almost by default.
I’m not commenting specifically on the level of the charge or the way these charges are managed, just the over-reaction to the issue in relation to what is still a great value for money opportunity – not an entitlement.
Parking issues are complex, including at the boundary between streets, with and without residents’ permit parking.
I’m sure some car owners living near these boundaries would be glad to pay for a permit, even at £50 per year, if, amongst other things, it meant the influx of cars parked during the day by those working locally might reduce.
The space in front of an average terraced property is only sufficient for one car so any expectation to park two cars on the street should be treated as a ‘premium’ and something that might leverage a, perhaps not insignificant, charge.
Our terraced streets are full of cars, with very few homeowners using their own space, such as a back yard, to park.