Parking, Resident Parking | A thousand vacant places in the village streets, none for the block residents:

– I agree that it may sound strange, says the leader of the city committee.

Watch video: Considering moving after parking refusal:

In May 2020, Erik Stene and Henriette Berg moved into a block of flats at the top of Økernveien, at the northern end of the Bjerke district. A little over a year later, the couple is seriously considering moving – due to the district’s parking policy.

In September, resident parking was introduced in selected zones in the district. Roughly speaking, that means that while the residential streets on Risløkka are offered resident parking, a large “block island” in the middle of the district must do without.

Until September, when resident parking was introduced, it was easy to find parking in the side streets in the area. In these streets, with detached houses and villas, the residents have been offered resident parking.

A thousand vacancies – everyone gets rejected

Only a third of those who have received the offer of resident parking in the Bjerke district have taken advantage of the offer. Two thirds of the residents who have been offered such parking have thus rejected the offer.

This means that over a thousand resident parking spaces are unused, but not accessible to anyone other than those in the parking zone, even if they live 50 meters away.

Also read: New sensational MDG proposal: Will open up a ban on free parking

Erik Stene asked the district if it was possible to pay for a resident parking space so that he and his wife could have the opportunity to park in the side streets, as before the scheme was introduced. The answer was negative.

– We who live in Økernveien have now been deprived of the opportunity to park in the immediate area. The district committee has decided that only the homeowners on Risløkka will be allowed to park there, and not us who live in a block here in Økernveien. We think this is ruthless, says Erik Stene.

– The only reason we have received is that the district must decide on parking in the district, says Henriette Berg.

In the district’s response to Erik Stene, the case officer states that there have been many inquiries from the residents in the area, but that everyone receives a negative answer:

The answer to everyone is the same: “The district committee has deliberately not wanted to include new regulated residential areas in the residents’ areas because access to parking there must follow the number that was decided in the zoning plan and building case.”

– Gets only arrogant answers

– We are for resident parking and have wanted it. I thought it was possible to address this, but only get arrogant answers back from the district, says Erik Stene.

Bjerke district is one of the smallest in Oslo, with 33,000 inhabitants, but also one of the fastest growing, with an estimated population of 41,000 inhabitants in ten years.

Much of the population growth takes place through relocation to these block areas. Many of the large block Sami have been built over the last 15-20 years.

Also read: Demanded ten kroner for the parking and 59 kroner in fee: – People are furious

In the parking norm that the district refers to in its refusals to residents who want to pay for resident parking, there is a lower number of parking spaces belonging to the condominiums than there are apartments – typically parking for two out of three apartments is included.

Street parking outside the zones is now also more limited than before, partly because Økern square road, which cuts through much of the block of flats, has been given bicycle lanes on both sides where it was previously possible to park the car.

– Yes, it’s a matter of principle

In October, district committee leader Lars Erik Fuglesang (Labor Party) encouraged block residents to take action on demands:

– They can come to the city administration with their wishes, then we will see, he told Nettavisen on 15 October 2020.

Now he answers the question as to why those who ask can not use some of the more than 1,000 unused resident parking spaces:

– This is because the number of parking spaces in the condominium is regulated according to the parking norm.

– But the parking norm in a block says nothing about street parking?

– No one can demand to be allowed to park in the street.

– Why is it reasonable to exclude everyone who lives in these blocks from resident parking, while around 1,000 of the 1,500 spaces offered to residents in the adjacent residential streets have not been used?

– We have introduced resident parking in the areas this has been desired by the residents to remove foreign parking.

– But the case processing shows that afterwards there have been many inquiries from people who want to be included in the resident parking?

– Most of the housing associations we have approached have said no. Sletteløkka and Veitvedt, for example, have said no, and the argument is that it is too expensive. We want to help the residents, but we can not treat one person over another, even though I understand the frustration.

– Why is it a problem to offer resident parking even if there are only a few who want it? There are a thousand unused spaces in the side streets right by this block?

– We do not have a good answer to this. It has been desired that this be introduced, but the city council has said no. It will be an overall assessment.

– Is not this pure equestrianism?

– That’s probably it. And I agree that it may sound strange. But we must follow the regulations and rules that are used as a basis.

– Was not the purpose of resident parking to make it easier for residents to park?

– People say no where you offer to expand. Had the price not been so high, it might have looked different, says Fuglesang.

Also read: Residents are raging against parking chaos: – This is not Manhattan

Considering moving

– It is interesting that the Labor Party reserves parking for the homeowners, while the block residents do not get, says Erik Stene.

The couple emphasizes that they are for resident parking, but thinks it is strange that one does not look holistically at an area that belongs naturally together. Stene and Berg state that they are completely dependent on two cars, due to work and family relationships.

One car they have to reach far to park – it can be impractical in the long run:

– This means that we must consider whether we can continue to live here or have to move somewhere else.

–