Issue - meetings

PETITION BY MEMBERS AND USERS OF THE GREAT MEETING UNITARIAN CHAPEL, EAST BOND STREET REQUESTING THE REMOVAL OF A THREE SPACE PAY AND DISPLAY PARKING PLACE FROM OUTSIDE THEIR PREMISES ON EAST BOND STREE

Meeting: 05/11/2001 - Cabinet - for meetings after 09/05/11, please see 'City Mayor & Cabinet' (Item 120)

120 PETITION BY MEMBERS AND USERS OF THE GREAT MEETING UNITARIAN CHAPEL, EAST BOND STREET REQUESTING THE REMOVAL OF A THREE SPACE PAY AND DISPLAY PARKING PLACE FROM OUTSIDE THEIR PREMISES pdf icon PDF 36 KB

Councillor Subedar submits a report which responds to a petition submitted to full Council on 30th November 2000 by Councillor Sood on behalf of the members and users of the Great Unitarian Church, East Bond Street. The Cabinet is recommended to have regard to the recommendation of the Highways and Transportation Scrutiny Committee but take no further action and to instruct Officers to inform the petitioners of the outcome.

Minutes:

Councillor Subedar submitted a report which responded to a petition submitted to full Council on 30 November 2000 by Councillor Sood on behalf of the members and users of the Great Meeting Unitarian Church, East Bond Street who were requesting that the three parking bays in front of the Chapel be removed.  Councillor Subedar outlined for the Cabinet the reasons, as detailed in the report, why the Director proposed to take no action in response to the petition. He particularly noted there were processes which currently operated successfully for the Methodist Church on Bishop Street, to suspend parking bays outside those premises when such events as weddings and funerals were taking place and the view of officers was that a similar arrangement could operate for the Great Meeting Unitarian Chapel.

 

It was noted that the Highways and Transportation Scrutiny Committee, at it’s meeting on 5 September, had supported the petitioners’ and requested that the parking bays be removed, double yellow lines reinstated and the parking bays moved to the other side of the road.  However, it was noted that the footway was not wide enough on the other side of the road to enable this.

 

RESOLVED:

(1)that the views of the Highways and Transportation Scrutiny Committee be noted but no further action be taken in response to the petition, and

 

(2)that the petitioners be informed of the outcome.