The Goodwood South Ward briefing occurred last night. After some robust discussion it was agreed that staff would work to find 2 options that would allow safe passage for cyclists and 2 way traffic. These options are likely to see no parking at least up to Fairmont Ave and probably Byron Rd. However, we will look to see if additional parking can be provided in Parker Tce. The Ash trees, with consent, of the residents, will be removed in the near future (they are all but dead). It may be possible to extend the new shared path to East Ave, but there will need to be discussions with DPTI about who should pay for this. If there is a shared path and 2 way traffic it is possible to provide a narrow landscaping strip between the two. When these are finalised they will come back to Don and I, then to a small group of residents (probably a similar group to those who met regarding the LATM) and then to all who made comments (18% residents). This may take some time. I will get back to you again when I have any further information. Please comment if you wish to add any further thoughts you may have,
"It may be possible to extend the new shared path to East Ave, but there will need to be discussions with DPTI about who should pay for this. If there is a shared path and 2 way traffic it is possible to provide a narrow landscaping strip between the two"ReplyDelete
... Yes at the expense of replacing the trees on Canterbury I suspect, poor form and very poor planning but I will wait and see. It took me nearly 3 visits to Council meetings with our Fairmont neighbour to have a dangerous gum tree removed from our back yard on the proviso that native tree(s) where put in it's place. I hope this is the case for Council also re the 20 odd trees to be reomved on Canterbury alone nevermind Parker, not to mention the awfull sight of industrial powerlines and gantries that will be laid bare for all to see without a tree to cover. A tree lined street no more and watch property values fall.
4 Canterbury Tce
The trees will be replaced in Parker Tce in every scenario. Most of the issues have been caused by the DPTI railworks over which Council has little , if any, control. The trees are dead or almost dead and needed to be replaced, Council consultation results were that 82% of residents wanted them removed and replaced. Overall 49 trees will be removed beginning next week. Hopefully, if the separate cycle path is chosen the strip of landscaping will be wide enough to support the growth of trees (probably a tall then species).ReplyDelete
Thanks for the response Jennie,ReplyDelete
"Hopefully, if the separate cycle path is chosen the strip of landscaping will be wide enough to support the growth of trees..."
Yes the word is "Hopefully".
The latest that's been "muted" or "pushed " to gain two way, parking and a bicycle path on Canterbury is to fore go the trees altogether.
We are part of the 82% who begrudgingly agreed on removal of the trees but fully expected them to be replaced on Canterbury not potentially sacrificed for the sake of a bike lane and car parks and we're full time cyclists ourselves !
I understand the concerns of Fairmont and Coulter residences re: rat runs and increased parking but losing the trees altogether is not the answer.
As we recommended to council, put a bike sharrow down Canterbury, make it a 25 speed limit with bikes having right of way, keep it two way for cars and parking and replace the trees.
"Hopefully" there's a way to work through this with some foresight and common sense.
4 Canterbury Terrace
The sharrows are an option on the table to go back to consultation. It is important that everyone that this concerns has their legitimate say when consultation occurs.ReplyDelete
It is also true that Council was not responsible for the death of the trees nor any of the infrastructure that DPTI have imposed. It is responsible for the safety of residents and must ensure that what DPTI have left us with will be as safe as possible for all users.ReplyDelete