Labour-led council bans pensioner from parking on his own driveway
Bob Howes, 73, parked outside his home in Southampton, Hampshire, for 20 years until receiving a letter that told him to stop.
Southampton city council officials informed him that he could no longer park on his driveway because it had no dropped kerb.
But after spending £160 on an application to have the kerb installed, which would cost him another £3,000, he was told no.
Instead, Mr Howes has to pay £30-a-year for a permit to park on the other side of the 'busy' street.
Mr Howes and his wife Dawn, who have lived in the house since 1984, have 'parked on the drive for at least 20 years', he said.
The pensioner described his 'embarrassment' at having to park on the street. He said: 'We have off-road parking and we've had to explain to neighbours why we're no longer parking there'.
Motorists can be fined if parking across a pavement or verge without a dropped edge.
Enforcement action differs across councils but fines can be as high as £1,000, according to Waltham Forest council.
Mr Howes said he was 'willing to pay to have the work done'. However, the application was rejected because the 4.3-metre space was just below the required 4.8 metres, despite Mr Howes' Hyundai i10 being only 3.6 metres long.
Mr Howes said 'it would take decades before they (the council) receive £3,000' at the rate of £30-a-year.
Cllr Eamonn Keogh, the cabinet member for environment and transport, said: 'The minimum space requirements ensure that we meet our duty, as the Highway Authority, to ensure that all users of the highway can use the footway'.
The measurements are 'enough to accommodate the average estate car at 4.7m long and the overall average car length of 4.4m,' he said.
He added overhanging vehicles can make it 'difficult for some users such as parents with buggies or people with a mobility aid'.
The retired civil servant is not the first to be affected by the rule.
In August last year Ed Fisher, 78, was banned from using his driveway after 50 years.
Speaking to the MailOnline, Mr Fisher said: 'We have to be responsible for paying for the dropped kerb ourselves. It smacks of 'we haven't got much to do, so we'll go and get em''.
Earlier this month, Lambeth Council, another majority Labour council in South London, identified more than 200 properties where motorists were illegally parked.
Residents were told they would have to pay an estimated £7,000 to add a dropped kerb, including £4,000 for the application.
The new restrictions could generate up to £1 million for the south London council.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
13 hours ago
- Business Insider
Joby's flying taxi made a 'major step' with its first test flight between two US airports
An air taxi company has completed its first test flight between two US airports as the budding industry moves toward commercial service. Joby Aviation said Friday that its electric aircraft, which can take off and land vertically, flew between two public airports in California. It took about 12 minutes to fly from Marina to Monterey, whose airports are 11½ miles apart. The company called the flight "a major step as part of Joby's commercial market readiness." Flying in controlled airspace, the aircraft spent five minutes in a holding pattern to let an airliner arrive at Monterey, Joby said. In addition to working with air traffic control, the flight showcased some key capabilities of the electric vertical-takeoff and landing vehicle (eVTOL). It has six propellers, which tilt depending on whether it's flying vertically. While Joby said it was the first eVTOL flight between two public airports in the US, the British firm Vertical Aerospace said it operated the world's first flight between two public airports last month, flying 17 miles from a small English airport to an air force base. eVTOL companies are looking to transform commuting, with the first planned commercial services expected to be between airports and downtown cities. Joby said it could fly from downtown New York City to JFK Airport in seven minutes compared to 49 minutes by car. Its eVTOL became the first to fly in the city with an exhibition flight in 2023. Being powered by electricity is not just a sustainability benefit but also means it can fly relatively quietly, unlike helicopters, which are heavily regulated in New York and other cities due to their noise. However, eVTOLs can require additional landing infrastructure when taking off and landing in cities. Vertical takeoff also requires more energy than horizontal flights, which, in combination with battery constraints, can limit passenger capacity. While prices are yet to be announced, industry players have compared the cost of one seat to a premium Uber. Joby has partnered with Delta Air Lines and Virgin Atlantic to help launch air taxi services, while rival firm Archer has received an order worth up to $1.5 billion from United Airlines. Both companies are planning to first carry passengers in the United Arab Emirates. Archer hopes to take off in Abu Dhabi before the end of the year, while Joby plans to launch in Dubai in early 2026. Joby plans to begin flight testing with Federal Aviation Administration pilots early next year as it works to be certified in the US, and would first operate in Los Angeles and New York.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
The GP1 Looks Like a Greatest Hits Album of Analog Supercars
A British outfit called Garagisti & Co. is making some waves this week with gorgeous renderings of its super-limited, super-expensive hypercar called the GP1. The design is supposed to be inspired by 'icons of the '80s, '90s, and early 2000s,' and the spirit is all old-school sports driving awesomeness. Non-turbo V12, six-speed manual, rear-wheel drive, and an interior like a midcentury modern psychiatrist's office. Or maybe I'm just projecting that last bit—because it looks like driving this thing would be deeply therapeutic after being bombarded by screens in any other modern vehicle. The car looks complete in these images, and looking at them on a small screen, I thought they were photos at first myself. But the company's press release confirms that they are, in fact, digital renders. Garagisti & Co. states that the car is 'now in advanced stages of engineering and production.' I'm guessing the company's people wanted to roll out the idea to be part of the hypercar hype-wave that is Monterey Car Week, which is currently underway. Unfortunately, few of us will ever see one of these in person anywhere, let alone drive it, as the GP1's creators are only planning to make 25 and charging over $3.3 million (£2.45 million, to be exact) each. Still, it's a very pretty interior and exterior design that simultaneously looks unique while reminding me of a few different cars in the elite class of low-production performance machines. I see a lot of Ford GT, some Lamborghini, Lancia, some Ferrari … any elements look particularly familiar to you? Garagisti & Co. has some big-name supplier collaborators, like Brembo (brakes), Öhlins (suspension), and Xtrac (transmission). But the fact that it's making a 'completely new and bespoke' engine is exceptionally wild. And probably a big part of why the price is so high. I think it's madness to make an entirely custom engine just for 25 cars—how the heck is anybody supposed to find parts for this in five years? Very cool, extremely impractical. I guess that's what cars at this level are kind of all about, though. The V12 will have 6.6 liters of displacement, rev to 9,000 rpm, and claim 800 horsepower (and 'over' 516 lb-ft of torque). Since the car is only supposed to weigh 2,200 pounds (dry), that should be enough juice to enter orbit. It's not clear where the motor's at in development, but conceptually, it sounds awesome. So does the ethos behind the whole project. 'Our vision for Garagisti was born from a simple question,' said Garagisti & Co. co-founder Mario Escudero in a press release. 'What if the golden age of analogue supercars never ended? What if icons like the Countach Evoluzione had sparked a lineage rather than a dead-end? What would the great cars of the '80s, '90s and early 2000s look like today if they'd evolved with new technology but kept their analogue soul? We brought together some of the best minds in the world and answered that question with our hands, our hearts, and our passion. The GP1 is our answer.' Swipe through here to see some more renders of this magnificent beast: The company describes itself as 'a coalition of specialists, not generalists,' listing out key collaborators: Italtecnica Srl (engine development and calibration) DEXET Technologies (chassis, monocoque, and aerodynamic development) Angel Guerra (exterior and interior design) I like this trend of super-fancy cars leaning into the ideas of tactility and analoginess. Here's hoping the notion trickles back down to more basic brands and old-world warmth makes a comeback over the kitchen appliance aesthetic so many mid-range cars are leaning into these days. Got a tip? Send us a note at tips@
Politico
2 days ago
- Politico
Driverless cars hit a regulator gap
For Silicon Valley, the promise of the second Trump administration is that it would cull all those pesky bureaucrats impeding innovation. But sometimes, a new industry needs bureaucrats to cut red tape. The autonomous vehicle industry could soon face this catch-22. As driverless cars continue to roll out in American cities, AV companies need the help of federal regulators to deal with the landscape of safety rules. Yet my colleague Pavan Acharya reported last week that the Transportation Department's Office of Automation Safety, which helps regulate AVs, is on the verge of becoming a ghost town. The Republican-led Senate Appropriations Committee noted in a report that the office had 'lost almost all of its staff,' and encouraged the department to prioritize hiring. Silicon Valley has generally pooh-poohed regulators as getting in the way of both moving fast and breaking things. However, it's regulators who are trying to work around policies designed for analog cars, so that AVs can start operating legally within the federal highway rulebook. '[The Transportation Department] is taking away existing regulations that would stand in the way of autonomous vehicles,' said Ryan Calo, a University of Washington law professor who specializes in tech policy. 'They're trying to figure out how to revise their own code so that this is possible. Reducing personnel is just stupid.' The Trump administration has been going all out on kneecapping the bureaucratic state, cutting tens of thousands of people from the federal workforce. Tesla CEO Elon Musk's DOGE is central to these efforts, and the tech industry has cheered it on. In fact, Musk is apparently responsible for the exodus of AV regulators. The Financial Times reported in April that DOGE had dismissed about 30 people from DOT's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, many of whom were employed at its Office of Automation Safety. NHTSA has been a cloud over Musk's dream of deploying fully self-driving Teslas, recalling 2 million of its vehicles in 2023 for issues with its autopilot feature. The FT reports that Musk felt regulators were being unfair, though there were also concerns within Tesla that gutting the automation safety office could backfire. (Tesla did not respond to DFD's inquiry.) Those concerns may be merited. The Biden administration launched the safety office in 2023 specifically to help the AV industry overcome regulatory hurdles. It fields petitions from manufacturers for exemptions to the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, which sets performance and design requirements for cars operating in the U.S. The industry has long complained that the Transportation Department has been slow to process the petitions. 'It takes a lot of people to work through [exemption petitions] point-by-point,' said Philip Koopman, a Carnegie Mellon professor who has been the architect of industry safety standards for AVs. 'It's just labor intensive.' He cautioned, however, that the department could simply relax the exemption standards to the extent that you'd need just enough staff to press a rubber stamp. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has already broadened exemptions to cover a wider range of AVs. The department just issued its first exemption under the expanded standards last week for Zoox, Amazon's robotaxi subsidiary – but the company is only allowed to test the vehicles. Getting an exemption to sell AVs or charge consumers for their services is a more rigorous process, though Duffy is working to streamline that too. When DFD asked about the Senate appropriations report, NHTSA said in a statement that it has 'aligned resources accordingly, including staff, to add engineers to the Office of Automation Safety.' Another reason why the industry might want the automation safety office to be staffed is that it could help clarify rules around AVs. With the advent self-driving cars, companies face a conundrum when it comes to state versus federal laws. The current paradigm generally has the federal government setting nationwide standards for vehicles themselves. States then determine whether someone is qualified to operate those vehicles by issuing driver's licenses and operating permits. (My colleague Christine Mui recently reported on Tesla's troubles with California permitting.) That regulatory divide gets fuzzier with AVs, especially for interstate travel, since the vehicle's AI becomes the driver. 'The design and construction of an autonomous vehicle, and driver competency is intertwined,' said Michael Brooks, executive director at the Center for Auto Safety. 'You can't really separate it into the traditional areas.' So when companies deploy a federally approved AV for a cross-country road trip, they don't necessarily know whether they're violating a patchwork of state laws. Congress could resolve the ambiguity by passing legislation that empowers the Transportation Department to override state laws, according to Brooks, but there doesn't seem to be much progress on that front. In the meantime, having more federal automation safety staff could help the department proliferate nationwide regulations in a bid to assert its authority over the states. That would give AV companies a bit more legal certainty. To be sure, staffing up the automation safety office wouldn't necessarily be a clear-cut benefit for the self-driving car industry. More regulators in general could mean more requests for data that companies would consider to be trade secrets, and more meticulous investigations of product defects. But looking past the immediate policy barriers, having enough regulators to make sure that AVs are actually safe benefits all parties involved. 'If a driverless car is involved in an accident, people are going to get nervous about them,' said Calo. 'They need a trusted expert body that's impartial, like the Department of Transportation, to be able to look at those situations in a sober ride way and determine [...] what to do about it.' STATE DEPARTMENT GETS INTO THE ONLINE SPEECH ARGUMENT The GOP campaign against social-media moderation has trickled into formal American diplomacy: The Trump administration is now saying human rights in the United Kingdom 'worsened' in 2024 due to speech restrictions, particularly those online, POLITICO's Mizy Clifton reports. The State Department on Wednesday released its annual assessment of countries' human rights practices in which it criticized the U.K. for chilling speech on social media surrounding incidents like the 2024 stabbing of three children in Southport last year. The report also targeted the country's Online Safety Act that rolled out last month, which requires platforms to verify users' ages in an attempt to prevent children from seeing violent or sexual content. The department suggested that the act could lead to 'government regulation to reduce or eliminate effective encryption (and therefore user privacy) on platforms.' The safety act has already drawn criticism for age-gating certain content, such as posts on X about violence in Gaza or Reddit content on cigars. (Wikipedia also lost a case on Monday challenging the act's identity verification rules.) A congressional free speech delegation traveled to meet with U.K. officials about the act late last month. Sen. Ted Cruz pushes for AI sandboxes Senate Commerce Chair Ted Cruz wants to spur the development of artificial intelligence by exempting the tech from existing regulations, according to details of a draft bill shared with POLITICO's Benjamin Guggenheim and Anthony Adragna. The bill would allow federal agencies to grant temporary waivers on their rules for companies to pilot AI systems. States have previously granted such exemptions for therapy chatbots and diagnostic tools that use the technology — an idea that tech companies love, but which critics say has some real flaws in practice. Cruz prefers a light-touch approach to AI regulation. He was one of the main advocates for including a 10-year state AI law moratorium in the Big Beautiful Bill this summer, though the provision was dropped amid Republican infighting. Cruz's new legislation dovetails with President Donald Trump's call for regulatory sandboxes in his AI Action Plan to 'rapidly deploy and test AI tools.' post of the day THE FUTURE IN 5 LINKS Stay in touch with the whole team: Aaron Mak (amak@ Mohar Chatterjee (mchatterjee@ Steve Heuser (sheuser@ Nate Robson (nrobson@ and Daniella Cheslow (dcheslow@
