On 10 Sep 2014 at 10:42am South Streeter wrote:
I'm wondering if anyone else is finding the amount of parking suspensions on South Street excessive?
About two days a week on average, 10 parking bays are suspended from 8am-5pm so the huge construction vehicles can get to the Timberyard Lane development.
I know it's a tight squeeze (and have watched with my toddler in rapture at the huge beasts trying to get down there several times), but I'm starting to get miffed at not being able to park in South Street. Do they really need to take up two whole days for a couple of trucks? Not sure how to contact at the development company to ask.
On 10 Sep 2014 at 11:00am Round In Circles wrote:
You can check with LDC what the conditions of the planning permission are to start with. There will be plan outlining things like a route through the town for the construction traffic, and site working hours. You can also ask ESCC how the bay suspensions were approved, if they are part of approved conditions, and what alternatives they are providing for people affected. Whilst we are not entitled to parking spaces , we are entitled to reasonable provision, not simply being chucked on the garbage heap every time a Council sees the potential to make some money. After all, we have already paid for permits. Both ESCC and LDC have a habit of giving endless permission to people to park (for cash) with no knowledge or consideration of how many people are already relying on not many spaces and the effect suspensions and extra permits will have.
An embarrassing article in the paper might help. No one expects perfection, but one has to park somewhere, we have no choice, so the Councils between them need to consider this.
On 10 Sep 2014 at 12:00pm South Streeter wrote:
Thanks, Round In Circles, that's really helpful.
I called ESCC, who told me to call the Parking Shop. I did: they said they were told by the developers there would be deliveries all day today. There is no activity at all. So I've just walked down to the site and found Dave, the site manager. Nice chap. He explained that the shipyard where the large piles (fnar) are awaiting has been closed today, so there'll be no more deliveries today. I've asked him to call the Parking Shop to try and have the bay suspension signs removed. But there's no incentive for the Parking Shop to do it, so I suspect it will remain in place.
FYI, back when the planning application was being mooted they identified Timberyard Lane or Morris Road as access roads. TL was chosen. A rock and a hard place, really.
On 10 Sep 2014 at 12:03pm South Streeter wrote:
BTW, the lady in the parking shop suggested I email ESCC parking admin support. I'm doing so, to ask for extra parking provision.
On 10 Sep 2014 at 1:04pm Merlin Milner wrote:
Pop over and see me at No8 South street and have a chat and see if I can help.
On 10 Sep 2014 at 1:26pm South Streeter wrote:
On 10 Sep 2014 at 1:27pm TDA wrote:
Wonder why they didn't float all the material on barges down the river? No bridges in the way and it's coming from a shipyard anyway, to a riverside project.
On 10 Sep 2014 at 2:37pm Round In Circles wrote:
Glad to see you have made some progress. ESCC may like to try and dump responsibility on the Parking Shop, but it is not the Parking Shop who are responsible for ensuring that the impact on local residents by any planning application, is kept to reasonable levels. ESCC sub contracts the running of the Parking scheme, and if bays are not being used for whatever reason ESCC needs to ensure that it is not creating problems for residents. The use of bays has already been paid for by Permit Holders, so the parking Shop and ESCC cannot simply hold bays suspended when there is no reason to. Problems do occur when buildings are constructed, but expecting residents to sit around looking at unused bays, day in and day out, on the off chance that a builder's schedule may be followed is unreasonable. Hopefully Cllr Milner can help encourage ESCC to take some responsibility for how their own scheme is run. The Parking shop only do what ESCC tell them.
On 10 Sep 2014 at 3:31pm Jude wrote:
At one of the consultations held at the Linklater the developers said that they considered using barges as a green alternative but the tidal nature of the river made only two deliveries a day possible and not at convenient times. It would have been too costly, they said. Maybe you could try and get some compensation direct from the developers. I'm sure if they delivered a bottle of wine or a few Harveys to each household for each week of inconvenience they would help mollify the residents.
On 11 Sep 2014 at 8:40am the obscure wrote:
With extra harveys to any student households - eh Labour Voice
On 11 Sep 2014 at 5:52pm Merlin Milner wrote:
I offer to help and I get 2 thumbs down. Why?
On 11 Sep 2014 at 8:40pm Tipex wrote:
Ignore it merlin. Some visitors here tick thumbs down regardless of what's been posted. That or your generous offer to personally assist makes some feel guilty about how little THEY actually do for this town.
On 14 Sep 2014 at 2:41pm Jude wrote:
@'the obscure' - are you implying I am associated with the Labour party or a student ? Just FYI, I am neither!