Tags

oad sign "that cannot be repealed" plus ancient Middle Eastern bloke plus horseAfter a break for Christmas etc., a letter form Jim-in-Environment.

Briefly,

  • They have missed the point . If a group of parents wanted a crossing put up outside a school, somebody would look at the evidence, point out that there hadn’t been an accident in 150 years and turn down the request. It should be the same for any request from a member of the public.
  • The decision to put up a sign, like the laws of the Medes and the Persians, cannot be repealed.

See below for the full text of the letter (for people who are interested in that sort of thing). See next post for the next installment.

” […] I have carefully considered the points you have made and it seems that there are two key issues; firstly, why was the sign put up and secondly, what role did consultation play in deciding to have it installed?

 The sign was erected following concerns raised with Cllr [X] about the nuisance felt by some residents about parking by those unconnected with the street. Having given the matter due consideration following informal consultation and local feedback, Cllr [X] requested the installation of the sign in an attempt to mitigate the issue. As noted previously, the sign itself is advisory and has proved effective in other areas in deterring such parking. Due to its advisory nature, no formal or specific levels of consultation are required for the installation of the sign. We have spoken to Cllr [X recently and he is very clear that the sign has been erected in response to local concerns and should remain. If you wish to discuss this matter further with Cllr [X]  ….”