Annie Bynnol   613 #25 Posted November 4, 2012 The ones on Eyre St / Arundel Gate aren't full, what makes you think more are needed? The OP is talking about the reduction in parking spaces on Arundel Street. The OP may not want to walk all the way to Arundel Gate or to the other thousand+ empty car parking spaces nearby. The Council could then show that they are not "...car haters..." by being fair and providing a multistory carpark for those who want to park on Arundel Street. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
the_rudeboy   12 #26 Posted November 4, 2012 The OP is talking about the reduction in parking spaces on Arundel Street. The OP may not want to walk all the way to Arundel Gate or to the other thousand+ empty car parking spaces nearby. The Council could then show that they are not "...car haters..." by being fair and providing a multistory carpark for those who want to park on Arundel Street. It's outrageous to expect motorists to walk any distance to their final destination, all motorists should be provided with parking directly by their destination. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Planner1   438 #27 Posted November 4, 2012 IN RETROSPECT, perhaps a better solution might to have not had two competing multi-storeys next door to each other and the existing small NCP, and instead pushed for them to be in different locations, but I'm not sure how much say the council have with regards private development on private land  They aren't next to each other.  The KIT Kat is there to serve the new Markets area. Qparks is there to serve the heart of the city area. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Squiggs   11 #28 Posted November 4, 2012 They aren't next to each other. The KIT Kat is there to serve the new Markets area. Qparks is there to serve the heart of the city area.  Well, using that logic, rather than saying "they aren't full, why have another?" you might then ask why not have a multi storey on Arundel Street as it would be there to serve a different area to the Markets and Heart of the City... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
MrMoran   10 #29 Posted November 4, 2012 Do you visit other towns and cites much? If you did, you'd see exactly the same measures being used.  The suggestion that someone is getting back handers to do this is frankly ludicrous.  :hihi: No it isnt. It happens a lot more than people think. Or in your case care to admit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
gnvqsos   10 #30 Posted November 4, 2012 :hihi: No it isnt. It happens a lot more than people think. Or in your case care to admit.  If this is so you are witholding information apertaining to a criminal offence making you similarly culpable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Planner1 Â Â 438 #31 Posted November 4, 2012 Well, using that logic, rather than saying "they aren't full, why have another?" you might then ask why not have a multi storey on Arundel Street as it would be there to serve a different area to the Markets and Heart of the City... I really can't see any need for an additional large car park in that area. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Planner1 Â Â 438 #32 Posted November 4, 2012 :hihi: No it isnt. It happens a lot more than people think. Or in your case care to admit. I think it is rarer than you make out. Â There are a lot of people and many steps in the approval routes for any traffic management scheme or planning consent. Huge numbers of people would need to be "on the take" and I do not believe this to be the case. I have never come across anything of the sort and I find it ridiculous that any one thinks that someone (who?) would pay huge numbers of people to ruin a city's road network. Â The road network isn't ruined anyway so it's clearly not the case. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Squiggs   11 #33 Posted November 4, 2012 I really can't see any need for an additional large car park in that area.  Nor I  My suggestion was that perhaps they could have been spaced further apart rather than having a concentration along one short distance Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Planner1   438 #34 Posted November 4, 2012 Nor I My suggestion was that perhaps they could have been spaced further apart rather than having a concentration along one short distance  They're placed along one of the main access routes for the city centre, there are others placed more widely.  These things are planned not just for today, but with future development in mind (Sevenstone). There are many factors which have to be considered. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
MrMoran   10 #35 Posted November 4, 2012 If this is so you are witholding information apertaining to a criminal offence making you similarly culpable.  I can live with it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
MrMoran   10 #36 Posted November 4, 2012 So you have gone from..............................  The suggestion that someone is getting back handers to do this is frankly ludicrous.  To......................   I think it is rarer than you make out.   :hihi: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...