Cheadle and Gatley Lib Dems are moving
Your Lib Dem team for Cheadle West & Gatley Learn more
by Lib Dem team on 18 August, 2010
At yesterday’s Cheadle Area Committee councillors approved the proposals for new parking restrictions on Coniston Road, Gatley, which aim to keep the junction safe and prevent parking down the road from causing problems for passing traffic, especially larger vehicles, such as fire engines.
The proposals must now be advertised, allowing anyone the opportunity to object. They’ll come back to Cheadle Area Committee (probably in October) when those objections (if any) will be considered.
If councillors then decide to approve the plans, the lines can be painted and the new restrictions imposed.
8 Comments
These are sensible proposals, Iain. Ones which will address the real road safety issues.
Pleased to hear that the idea for residents parking permits has been rejected. It was “overkill” for a problem that one can easily see barely exists. I’ve lived on that part of the estate for nearly 30 years and have only once been even slightly inconvenienced by non-resident parking (and even then, it was an issue resolved within a couple of minutes).
Thanks for this update Iain. Interesting to see that some residents on South Park Road not directly affected can have such liberal views. As long as it not in their back yard maybe! Each to their own though! Appreciate the work done by Gaham Price and his team. Well done to them.
Is there any part of Gatley that the Liberals are not going to yellow line?? It seems to be the only area they are concentrating on. Perhaps Iain wants to consider the effects it will have if these were put outside his own home. As long as the yellows are not put outside my home and therefore gridlocking my property then put them anywhere that anyone sees fit. BUT NOT OUTSIDE MY HOME THANK YOU. For anyone interested the whole process for restrictions on Coniston has been flawed from the start. Lack of communication, illegal street signs prematurely erected challenged and taken down, the list goes on. For decades not a single problem has arisen from the 999 services being unable to gain access – what has changed? Perhaps Councillor Roberts won’t mind me parking my car outside his house as he is restricting me from parking outside mine.
Surely John is only speaking facts from his own long experience?
My parents have lived on the estate since 1959 and they concur with John.
Chris – at your request, as part of the consultation process, this plan actually removes parking restrictions on the section of Coniston Road near your house, making it easier for you to park there (i.e. you’ll be able to park there 7 days a week, not 6.5 as at present).
Perhaps you could let me know what further changes you’re asking for.
Iain, Thank you for posting and your reply. In the absence of adequate and timely communication on the outcomes of the consultation process I can hardly be blamed for “jumping the gun”. I am still none the wiser as to what version of the plans have been approved nor the comment on “7 days parking not 6.5” ??? To answer your question, I do not want or ask for further changes – only to retain the status quo – it has served the community well for decades. The motto being “live and let live”.
Chris
Chris – My surprise was only because we’d had a couple of lengthly conversations in which I’d assured you that your views would be taken into account, which they were.
We’ve tried to balance the views of significant numbers of people who most certainly do want change to the lines with others, and in particular with your reasonable request to be able to park on-road near to your house.
You can see the full details of what’s proposed on the latest Cheadle Area Committee agenda. Go to http://bit.ly/9MA5Fa (pdf, may take a while to load).
The details for Coniston start on page 95, and most useful is the map on the page marked as 102 (actually p101 of the pdf document) which shows what’s proposed.
If David Williams’ response was directed towards me, then he should re-read my post – particularly the bit where I said that, for nearly 30 years, I had lived on part of the estate affected by the suggested “residents only” scheme. I declined to sign the petition first time and, perhaps unsurprisingly, wasn’t invited to do the secodn time around.