Shropshire Star

Oswestry councillors criticise Shropshire's 'one size' parking policy

Oswestry Town Council has heavily criticised plans for a parking strategy for Shropshire's market towns saying the "one size fits all" scheme could not work. Oswestry Town Council has heavily criticised plans for a parking strategy for Shropshire's market towns saying the "one size fits all" scheme could not work. Shropshire Council plans to standardise charging for parking in county towns of a similar size. It has proposed introducing charges for both car parks and on-street parking in Oswestry, Bridgnorth, Market Drayton, Ludlow and Whitchurch. But town councillors say that a county-wide parking strategy will not work.

Published

Oswestry Town Council has heavily criticised plans for a parking strategy for Shropshire's market towns saying the "one size fits all" scheme could not work.

Shropshire Council plans to standardise charging for parking in county towns of a similar size.

It has proposed introducing charges for both car parks and on-street parking in Oswestry, Bridgnorth, Market Drayton, Ludlow and Whitchurch.

But town councillors say that a county-wide parking strategy will not work.

It runs several of Oswestry's main car parks including Central car park, the Horsemarket and the car park off Smithfield Street. It has also won an agreement that the Oak Street car park, formerly run by Oswestry Borough Council, will be handed over to the town council in 2013.

In a letter to the unitary authority, town clerk David Preston says that town councillors oppose the principles of the strategy.

"One size does not fit all and local needs must be respected," he said.

"We challenge the cost that will be involved to change the existing traffic orders that have been introduced after many months and in some cases many years of consultation."

The town council is also against set charges bands.

It wants a council officer to attend a meeting to speak to town councillors before it makes a detailed response to the consultation.

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.