The issue of pavement parking has sparked a heated debate among the people of Swindon, with strong opinions on both sides regarding whether it should be banned.

While some residents believe a ban is necessary to ensure pedestrian safety and accessibility, others argue that it's impractical due to limited parking space in certain areas.

We have gathered some of the arguments and responses made by the people of Swindon to a post on the Swindon Advertiser Facebook page to reflect how the town's residents really feel about this contentious issue.

Derrick Miles agreed that there should be a ban on pavement parking, but indicated that this would cause further issues so would need to be thought about.

He said: "Yes, but you would have to have no parking in a lot of places. Where emergency vehicles would not be able to get through if they never used the verges and pavements.

Cathi Wheeler shared a similar sentiment.

She said: "Some of the streets in Swindon are very narrow so it needs to be sensible parking so that you can still get past on the pavement and also leaving enough for emergency vehicles and bin lorries to get down the road.

"Basic common sense."

Nikita provided a different opinion, stating that careless driving was too prevalent so it was safer to park cars on pavements.

She said: "If people learn how to drive and stop scratching other people's cars then yes!

"BUT this probably never going to happen so let people with big cars park their car safely on a pavements!"

Jo Brown said: "Yes, if the streets are big enough for cars to park either side and still get through. If not then they need to provide more spaces for cars to park on their streets or very close by.

"Not everyone has a driveway or garage to park their car in. And I think it's not safe enough for people to have to park their cars like two or three streets away and walk to their homes. Doesn't matter if it's daylight or night time it's not safe.

"Maybe they should start to think about making one side of the path way smaller and keeping the other side the same size then both lots of cars shouldn't need to go on pavement.

"And pavement on one side would be bigger enough for pushchairs and wheelchairs etc. The other side would be able to have people walking but maybe one at a time.

Janice Davis advocated for why pavements should be clear of obstacles like parked cars.

She said: "I’m visually impaired and know a lot of people with different disabilities plus parents with younger children need the paths as the paths are feet prams and wheelchairs."

Alan Wilson added: "Pavement parking causes numerous problems for people who need full access to it, in order to go about their daily lives in a safe manner.

"If you're disabled, visually impaired, blind, in a wheelchair, pushing a child in a pram etc, you should not have to go into the road to get by.

"Pavement parking is, without doubt, putting some people at risk of serious personal injury by potentially being involved in an accident. It's totally unacceptable that any person should be forced to go into the road.

Simon Batchelor summed up the issues with both pavement parking and parking fully in the road and said another solution was needed

"Can't get past with pushchair" - a fair moan for pavement parkers

"Can't get an ambulance/fire engine/bus down there" - a fair moan for parking fully on the road.

"What's the answer? New estates need better thought out parking solutions. E.g. Some of the roads could easily accommodate parking on the super wide verge/pavements.

Others were concerned about who would enforce a ban if it was put in place.

Gavin Vanstien said: "Who's enforcing it? Traffic wardens don't do anything about people that park on double yellows obstructing access... can't see this."

Steve Kingston added: "Yes. But only if you employ wardens to monitor and, where necessary, ticket offenders.

"Now, if the police would enforce traffic laws and deal with offenders parking on/opposite road junctions, we’d really start to sort out Swindon streets."

The council was considering imposing a ban, but this motion was recently defeated at a council meeting where it was referred to a future committee.