Bollards in front of your drive?
- Thread starter Guru
- Start date
The council are still responsible for the roads and the footpath.
No way.
Council should have fit them to begin with.
Not charge extortionate rates to make money (after all that's what they are really doing, it's a complete con you can't get away with)
Why should they have to pay for changing laws and stupid administration of a council.
Class A - retards abound, woop woop. Fail.
How can the council fit them when there's no driveway originally?
Why should I (as a taxpayer) have to pay because you wish to change the way you are using your front garden?
It's absolutely correct that those undertaking changes or using things differently should have to pay the costs involved.
Why should I (as a taxpayer) have to pay because you wish to change the way you are using your front garden?
It's absolutely correct that those undertaking changes or using things differently should have to pay the costs involved.
Most people in the 50's and 60's didnt have driveways, nor did they have need for one. So there was never any need. Now everyone has 3 cars per household and need parking lots. So your answer, is retarded.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jan 2006
- Posts
- 1,541
i dont see how the cost of moving pylon or a phone box can be cheap?
rip everything up, modify the curb, re-route cables, lay foundations, erect new item. its a lot of work and a lot of cost.
"Everyone has 3 cars".
Try make me believe that.
I doubt you even know how all the driveways even got there, I assume you'd have needed planning permission, so why wasn't it an issue then?
How did these driveways literally get there, they just built up over garden area without permission?
Aha, what's that, information not adding up.
Also you are legally allowed to mount a sidewalk to gain access into property, unless they change that law, why should they even bring up "safety issues".
So much of this stinks, is it a "drive way" or not, or is it simply a "garden".
Come on. None of this really makes sense at all.
Last edited:
Our local council were complete dicks when it came to the dropped curb at our old house.
It was a semi with a dropped curb that covered both houses, except it had been made too short after they redid the pavement so didn't cover the entrances to more than 50% of either drive (which were just big enough for a car).
Anyway neighbours knocked down their front wall so their drive was as wide as the house and paid to have to council come in and extend the dropped curb the entire width of the house. We phoned the council and they wouldn't extend ours because now the dropped curb would have been too long, even though they admitted it wasn't done correctly in the first place because it didn't cover enough of the entrance to the drive.
It was a semi with a dropped curb that covered both houses, except it had been made too short after they redid the pavement so didn't cover the entrances to more than 50% of either drive (which were just big enough for a car).
Anyway neighbours knocked down their front wall so their drive was as wide as the house and paid to have to council come in and extend the dropped curb the entire width of the house. We phoned the council and they wouldn't extend ours because now the dropped curb would have been too long, even though they admitted it wasn't done correctly in the first place because it didn't cover enough of the entrance to the drive.
Why drop the kerb anyway? If it isn't broken don't fix it. Such a waste of money putting bollards up, the kerb only need be sloped when it has become damaged. You just know the council are going to be profiting from this. A decent council would be paying to fix up peoples kerbs, not charging them to do it, they are supposed to be responsible for it after all. It's not like they spend money on anything else worthwhile.
Last edited:
Reminds me of when the Council decided to place absolutely massive speed humps all along Corporation Street, here in Stoke. What they didn't think about was the poor sod with his Lotus Esprit who was only able to drive up and down the 100 yards in-between the two offending humps.
Why do it?
Well for one, people damage the kerbs going over them in cars and if they are going over pavement intended for pedestrian usage they damage that, which can cause more serious problems (if it's paved for example and the paving slabs get damaged and someone trips...).
The council won't be making money out of it, far from it it's probably costing them money in the short term to enforce the law and prevent damage to public property.
If people want to park in their front gardens/drives there is a fairly simple, and relatively cheap and legal way to do it - which they aren't doing.
Or to put it another way (in terms that many GD members should get
), why should I pay for Mr I Diot down the road to get the dropped kerb, or repair the damage done by ignoring the law when there are many more important things they could/should be spending it on.IIRC a kerbstone that is properly installed should last decades of normal wear and tear, however if someone is driving over one that isn't meant to driven over (it's not anchored the same) it's likely to require replacing in fairly short order, not to mention the damage done to the payment/road when the kerbstone is pulled loose.
Dont understand people's arguments over this? They say that it's dangerous for people to drive up the pavement onto their drive into their driveway as they may hit a pedestrian so a sloped drive is needed?? The car won't float over the sloped drive. The car is still going over the pavement so the same chance exists to hit the pedestrians!! So the pedestrian danger argument is right out of the window. 
There's been a driveway on this house for nearly 25 years now with no dropped curb, we all drive up and down it countless times a day and the curbstone/surrounding pavement is in as good condition as it was when it was put in initially.
If driving up a non-lowered curbstone is causing it damage then the council didn't fit it properly in the first place.
If driving up a non-lowered curbstone is causing it damage then the council didn't fit it properly in the first place.
No, you're directing insults, having a bad time when someone has good points maybe?
None of your replies make any sense at all, you're just being a big kid with sarcasm.
I could go into detail about each point, but I cant be bothered if all you will do is come up with useless reponses.
None of your replies make any sense at all, you're just being a big kid with sarcasm.
I could go into detail about each point, but I cant be bothered if all you will do is come up with useless reponses.
Last edited:
