lazyjack
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@johnhoppy 17930 wrote:
Everyone needs to step back a bit and think about what they are suggesting here. Just because it is a little inconvenient at times to negotiate parked cars does not mean that draconian measures need to be taken to prevent parking on this road, or any change to the traffic flow. It is not a major road, it is reasonably wide, and with a little patience it is easily negotiated. There are far more important problems for the council to spend money on and for us to get worked up over.
I agree, whenever I’ve used the road I’ve had no issues whatsoever. Out of interest, do you think a one-way system would work ? I just think it’s a complete waste of time and money as I can’t see any way it would become permanent.
@PhilWynn 17928 wrote:
The only problem is the side streets in the day are already clogged with vehicles belonging to town-centre workers, shoppers , Gerard Bakery staff and the situation will only get worse for those living in these streets if we were to do as you suggest.
As one of the local members I am being asked to carry out a balancing act, whereby we are trying to keep everyone happy. Only the trial will prove if a one-way system will improve traffic flows in the area. If it does not, having given it a reasonable time, then I shall ask for the trial to be ended without delay.
Cllr Phil Wynn
If residents can’t park in their own street because of Gerrard’s staff and town centre workers and shoppers then some streets may need some sort of permit system applied. I have occasionally used Ruthin Road to park for an hour or two but I wouldn’t have the cheek to park in any of the residential side streets (Peel St, Gibson St etc) while I went to work all day.
@PhilWynn 17926 wrote:
Jack – it is my understanding that Poyser St will also be made one-way to prevent the street becoming a rat-run as you have rightly pointed out.
As I have already stated it is for a trial period so we will need to monitor the change in driving patterns to see if matters are improved or not as the case may be.
Cllr Phil Wynn
A simpler solution might be a single yellow line all the way down the Bellevue side with 8/9am – 5/6pm restrictions. Residents could then still park overnight when there is less traffic around but it would improve things during the day when it seems to be causing most problems.
I’m pretty sure Poyser Street will still become a rat run as I would assume it will be one way in the opposite direction to Ruthin Road. Please don’t tell me it will be in the same direction……….
@lazyjack 17908 wrote:
* Other surrounding streets, such as Bradley Road and Ruabon Road/Pen-y-Bryn, which are already extremely busy will just become busier
Actually meant Victoria Road, not Bradley Road.
I also think that a one-way system on this road is a stupid idea. Anyone remember the one-way trial under Stansty bridge ? Total disaster and the only people who couldn’t see it coming were the council.
There are several issues which seem quite obvious to me:
* Cars are more likely to speed down the road if it’s one-way, as there’s no oncoming traffic to worry about
* Some cars which can no longer go in one direction may use Poyser Street instead, which just happens to have SCHOOL ENTRANCES on, along with a lot of houses
* Other surrounding streets, such as Bradley Road and Ruabon Road/Pen-y-Bryn, which are already extremely busy will just become busierIt’s things like this that do make you feel that perhaps it is time for change with WCBC. I’m not totally sure how successful a merger with Flintshire would be but when you look at the current situation, how can you have any confidence that things will improve with the current setup ?
@Metalhead 17344 wrote:
Chris, if anyone wanted to do that it would actually be pretty difficult to detect. Using a proxy and 2 different browsers would appear as though it was 2 different forum users. Look, I’ve just nipped across the Atlantic Ocean to post this!
Your IP Address Is:
67.223.***.***Your IP Details:
ISP: HostVentures.com
Services: Suspected Network Sharing Device
City: Nottingham
Region: Maryland
Country: United StatesI would be surprised if anyone would go to those lengths to manipulate a discussion on a small local web forum like this TBH, it would be a bit sad to say the least.
Personally, I don’t think it’s the case but there does seem to be some effort in trying to drag the thread down so it gets locked. Only my opinion of course….
I appreciate we don’t all agree on many things but there’s no need for personal insults.
@Sheefag 17336 wrote:
Ah, I see, but it’s ok to lie about and insult the developer though….
I don’t believe anyone (against the development) has posted deliberate lies, there’s really no need to. Also, please point us to the posts which insult the developers (post numbers).
As you probably know, I am against the development. However, I don’t know the farmer (or family) and have absolutely nothing against them. I see no need to make up any BS about the family.
That said, certain things, especially the timing of the planning application have been quite well planned so perhaps they do have a total disregard for the surrounding neighbours.
@Sheefag 17321 wrote:
600+ homes earmarked for Gwersyllt, I don’t see too many on here getting bent out shape about it.
Not in your backyard perchance?I guess that’s up to the people of Gwersyllt to object.
EDIT: Actually, the article is a load of rubbish. 500+ of the houses would be in Rhosrobin, not Gwersyllt.
@Sheefag 17311 wrote:
Constructive comments Jacque? done all that much further back up the thread.
I’m enjoying responding to Captain Imbecile’s nasty, unfounded accusations against the applicant and the scurrilous rumours that he tries to spread.Thread locked or thread open matters nought, the planning application will be decided by due process and not by the bitter outpourings of some rabid pensioner on this forum.
Just can’t help yourself can you ?
You are actually only discrediting yourself with your on going rants and nasty comments. Cheer up for Xmas.
