Generic filters

Continue to implement and promote flexible use of kerbside space


  • Respondents aged 45-54, living in PO3 and those living outside of Portsmouth, and those with a disability or long-term illness are most likely to disagree with policy E (continue to implement and promote flexible use of kerbside space) (9% – 10%)
  • Residents living in PO1 show the lowest levels of disagreement at just 3%
  • 23% disagree with policy E because they feel it will move the problems elsewhere, will be difficult to implement or enforce, and not solve the issues
  • Just over a fifth (21%) find the policy to be anti-motorist and restrictive, potentially leading to increased fines for motorists
  • 17% think it will be bad for residents because of charges or fines, spaces being taken up by different types of vehicle and the associated inconvenience of not being able to park easily
  • 9% feel that the policy is not sustainable enough and lacks focus in terms of actually reducing car usage or number of vehicles

Who disagrees with policy E?

Base: (top to bottom) | Total sample: 1,324 | Age: 108, 152, 216, 286, 247, 91 | Sex: 563, 507 | Postcode: 114, 266, 131, 311, 159, 124, 58 | Disability: 230, 817

This chart shows the proportion of respondents who disagree with policy E (Continue to implement and promote flexible use of kerbside space):
6% of the total sample.
5% of those aged under 35, 7% of those aged 35-44, 9% of those aged 45-54, 7% of those aged 55-64, 5% of those aged 65-74, and 3% of those aged 75 and over.
7% of males and 4% of females.
3% of those in PO1, 6% of those in PO2, 10% of those in PO3, 7% of those in PO4, 6% of those in PO5, 7% of those in PO6, and 10% of those living externally to PO1-PO6.
9% of those with a disability and 5% of those without a disability.

Why do you disagree with policy E?

Base: Respondents who disagree with policy E (86)
wdt_ID Key themes Percentage (%)
1 Won't work / moves problems elsewhere / not implemented properly / sceptical 23
2 Anti-motorist / restrictive e.g. increased fines for motorists 21
3 Bad for residents e.g. charges, takes up spaces, inconvenient 17
4 Not sustainable / green enough e.g. not enough focus on getting cars off roads, won't improve air quality, offer incentives for residents without a car 9
5 Will make it dangerous on the pavements / roads too narrow 7
6 Fine as it is 2
7 Other e.g. workplaces to provide suitable parking for their staff, get rid of resident permits, ban goods vehicles parking in residential areas, too many HMOs 13
8 No relevant comment / no comment 21