AIBU to let my daughter’s boyfriend use marked visitor parking regularly?

[NBParking]

NC’d as outing.

Recently moved onto a new build estate, up the road from us is three terraced houses with five parking spots in front of them. Each of the three houses have one and two are very clearly marked as visitor spots.

My DDs boyfriend visits us regularly, can vary from one night a week to 2/3 nights depending on both their shift patterns. She has been parking in one of the visitor spots.

The first of the three residents moved in last week. Yesterday one of the site managers knocked on the door and asked DD to move the car as the houses are now lived in and the resident had complained (some people / contractors park on the still empty houses). DD explained that it was visitor parking and that is was our visitor parked there. Site manager said he would need to go away and look at the plans (thought he would have done this before coming over tbf).

So AIBU to tell him to continue to park there? Legally he can, rules are visitors up to 48 hours at a time (I’ve checked the convents we signed). I would HATE someone effectively parked on my drive, outside my window etc but I would never have bought that house. Resident must have seen and signed the same plans as us?

If the resident comes over to speak to us, how would you respond?

Site plan attached.

Next time I’m on a flight, I’m going to go straight to the first class section and take a seat. It’s honestly so entitled of those people who have paid extra for the space, and they have no sense of community by not allowing me to be there just because I haven’t got the money to pay for it.

What number do you live at?

those spaces look like they’re intended to be visitor spaces for the terraced houses. So 5 spaces for 3 houses. The other houses have 2 each, because they’re larger houses probably. Expect it’s to do with parking ratios in the planning process.

can he park away from the estate and your dd pick him up / or she leaves her car somewhere else and he parks on your drive?

Well they are visitor spots and your guest presumably qualifies as a visitor so I don't see any issue.
You should all collectively be mad at the developer though as that estate is going to become a parking nightmare in short order.

So my DS shouldnt have a car because it'll mean him parking it legally on the public road? 😂

To be fair for delivery drivers I think they'll stop anywhere. Middle of the road blocking traffic won't bother them.

Regarding stopping people having cars - I just think it goes back to the car sharing point. Previously, it was normal to share one car between two adults and maybe a child. It wasn't seen as normal for everyone to have their own car. I don't think it is normal or reasonable for everyone to have a car that takes up public space. I think we should de-normalise that. And that isn't reliant on public transport (which should be improved but I think is a separate point that probably doesn't have much resistance!).

Walk, cycle, get a cab or just compromise a tiny bit of your convenience and share cars - it's what I had to do when I lived with my parents.

My view for what it’s worth is that the boyfriend is a visitor to OP’s home (albeit a regular one) and is using the space for the purpose intended (providing of course he’s not taking up a space meant only for use by visitors to the terrace houses).
Annoying though his parking may be for those who live in the terrace, the visitor spaces are surely not intended for use by them just because they don’t have enough space on their drive for more than one car. The clue is in the name - they are for visitors, I take this to mean guests, tradesmen, district nurses etc etc.
When we bought our house we were young and didn’t give thought to anything like this. Our eyes have been well opened since. People are very territorial about the space in front of their house and just wait until a neighbour moves in with a van or a works vehicle in addition to a family car. They will be parked up in a way that causes the least inconvenience to them and no thought to the impact their parking might have on others.
From what I’ve read I’m 99.9% sure the boyfriend is fine parking in a visitor space although if it were me I’d be encouraging him to find somewhere else if only to prevent bad feeling

Convent: where nuns live
Covenant: often put in place on new build estates with rules about what you can and can't do

Yes, probably, You can have a legal right and it still negatively impact people. How often is that car sat unused taking up public space? In isolation you might think its fine but in aggregate I think we tolerate too many cars.

People think lots of other things that are perfectly legal are also socially/ societally unacceptable.

Based on your map and what he’s said I would think he’s allowed to park there. I get why the house owners don’t like it but that’s just the way it is

Yes a covenant is an agreement

Tbf hes not got one yet but it'll be sat unused for however long hes not using it. People have every right to own a car, its not ideal if space is at a premium but it is what it is.

Hopefully him having his own transport soon will help him get a job as it means he can look further afield and be more reliable getting there (missed out on another job this week because they didnt feel hed be able to get there at short notice). Alternative is he sponges off the tax payer. But at least he wont be legally parked on the road which should make him feel warm and fuzzy inside.

Surely if it is a V space anyone can use it.

If it were for "visitors to the particular house" then it would be reserved for that house and marked with that house number.

The parking there seems like it going to end up as a clusterfuck, especially if the spacers aren't painted. How the planners were ever allowed to come up with a scheme like that is mystifying for me. But then I don't know their mind or the planning rules.

I suspect the reason they put in "V" spaces is because they count towards the ratio of "free" land and allocated land.

Edit : Maybe after a second look its not going to be that bad. But I reckon there will be lots of parking along the side of houses etc.

From the plans it appears, based on looking at houses with two spaces, that they are general visitor spots as the double spaces are allocated with the house number.

Three times a week is essentially more than a visitor as he’s coming back every 48 hours which is at the limit of the stipulation so yes, you need to vary where he parks.

Don’t get into a row with the new people as it’s not worth it over this as you know you’re heading in to a grey area and disputes with neighbours are rarely worth it.

So it'll be sat taking up about 10 square metres of public space for probably 160 hours a week. Yeah I think that's a waste, and he should probably do without it.

The alternative being him supposedly mooching off public finances is a total red herring, as whether he is earning or not the car will be sat there taking up the space. I don't care what your son does or doesn't do.

If we had fewer cars children would be able to safely play on the road, people would be able to use pavements conveniently and it would also be safer to drive as vision would be less impaired.

It's fine that you don't value public space as much as I do, I'm sure there are other things we disagree on.

I imagine he'll be out in it for more than an hour a day tbh. And probably more like 7 square metres of space. So already its not as 'bad' 😊

If he has a car hes more likely to be able to get a job which means he wont be on benefits and the car wont be there, so the exact opposite of a red herring. I can imagine a lot of young adults are in this position. I know of at least 3 others.

Anyway, yes agree to disagree on this one. I'm really looking forward to helping him get mobile and increase his chances of getting a job 😃🤞 (and having another car in the household just in case will be a plus!)

Edited to add - kids shouldn't be playing on any road either 😱 cars should be driving on pavements and people who cant see properly because there are cars....on a road....shouldn't be driving anyway, or they should get glasses.

That looks as though the three terraced houses each have one exclusive designated space and the other two spaces are shared between the three houses. I assume it was arranged that way because there isn't enough space for all three houses to have two designated spaces.

The concept of a red herring seems to have escaped you.

He isn't driving it around while he is at work, is he? So it's just sat in some other public space.

He’s not a visitor though. He’s a regular guest residing in your property

You’ll probably have a relationship with the neighbours for longer than she will with the BF. I’d know who I’d rather keep happy, tell him to park in different spots and walk.

I would also think they are visitor spaces available to anyone. It is a terrible design but that is not on you (or your daughter’s boyfriend). It’s on the developer who was all about gouging as much profit as possible out of the development rather than building a pleasant place for everyone to live. It will be interesting to see what the estate manager comes back with.

It is unreasonable in my opinion, but someone does similar on our estate (adult grandson living with his grandparents) and if you don't do it someone else probably would.

That seems really odd, that you can share a visor shot or of sight of your own house and right in front, not even a pavement between the car and the house, of someone else's windows. What do your deeds say?

Sorry I thought you knew what red herring meant with you using the phrase yourself. Your beef was extra cars parked on public roads (legally). My point was young people having a job means they likely wont be parked on a public road for 23 hours a day.

But given you also believe children should be able to play on roads, you seem to believe pavements cant be used, and cars parked legally means peoples sight is affected then as I say im definitely cool with agreeing to disagree!