Enforceable signage?

System

TBH that looks like the 18m from the junction but extended around the corner on safety grounds. I think it would be a bit of a sticky wicket to park on those.

Hadeon

derrick wrote: »

the LA tell me the road is unadopted and privately maintained.

esmerobbo wrote: »

There seems to be some history here!

Strawberry Fields is a public highway, adopted by Chorley council, and not subject to any parking restrictions.

I note the residents have (quite illegally) attached their own sign to the council-supplied item saying 'Private – residents only'.

History as well as confusion then esmerobbo.

derrick

esmerobbo wrote: »

There seems to be some history here!

"Earlier this week I was called urgently to Chorley Hospital as an elderly relative was, unfortunately, dying.

As the hospital car park was full, and traffic through the roadworks terrible, I parked my car on Strawberry Fields for around 45 minutes.

When I returned, my windscreen was covered in Post It notes telling me that this was a private road with resident-only parking.

Can I please point out to the person who did this, that Strawberry Fields is a public highway, adopted by Chorley council, and not subject to any parking restrictions.

I note the residents have (quite illegally) attached their own sign to the council-supplied item saying 'Private – residents only'.

Strawberry Fields is a lovely location, but I'm afraid the residents can't separate themselves from the rest of the borough, we all pay council tax, we are entitled to park there.

I really think these people should either get lives or move to gated communities".

From here! http://www.chorley-guardian.co.uk/news/opinions_february_8_2006_1_2014350

Also if you look at the street view the DYL's are not broken as in the OP's picture.

http://g.co/maps/n3fem

I spoke on the phone to Lancashire County Council Highways, and they informed me that Strawberry Fields is not adopted by them and is privately maintained, your link to Chorley Guardian does not support your view as it is only a letter on there that you have quoted with no references.

The picture in the OP is taken as a screen grab from Google maps and, if using your link, you move the map around you will clearly see the lines are as in my OP.

withabix

derrick wrote: »

Do the words on this sign,(strictly residents parking only), carry any weight? There is no other signage, and the LA tell me the road is unadopted and privately maintained. The DY lines that change shade and alignment are probably done by the residents/landlord.
The post code for anyone wanting to use Google maps is:- PR7 1PQ



.

Would you park on someone's driveway?

Parking on a private road is NO different.

derrick

!!!!!! wrote: »

TBH that looks like the 18m from the junction but extended around the corner on safety grounds. I think it would be a bit of a sticky wicket to park on those.

I would not dream of parking on the DL's.

To clarify my point re the parking, I am having to travel to Chorley hospital twice a week at around midday and will park in the lay by about half a mile away from the hospital, however on Thursday the lay by was full and I parked round the corner in Badgers Way, that seems similar to Strawberry Fields but without the residents parking signage, it was only on walking back down from the hospital that I noticed Strawberry Fields and the signage, hence the query here,(after I spoke to LCC Highways), I am driving a medium sized mini bus and as the parking is at a premium in the hospital plus the size of the vehicle,(and yes the parking charges), I will find elsewhere to park. Strawberry Fields will be a last resort and the vehicle will only be there for around 30 minutes.


.

esmerobbo

derrick wrote: »

, you move the map around you will clearly see the lines are as in my OP.

That's because its taken with a 360 degree camera which rotates when joined together you often get alignment out!

Are you saying the view I gave has but the lines back together? If you are I would suggest they sack whoever laid the kerbstones as they are well out as well :cool:

If you are confident the lines don't mean nothing why don't you test em?

derrick

esmerobbo wrote: »

That's because its taken with a 360 degree camera which rotates when joined together you often get alignment out!

Are you saying the view I gave has but the lines back together? If you are I would suggest they sack whoever laid the kerbstones as they are well out as well :cool:

If you are confident the lines don't mean nothing why don't you test em?

It's not a case of testing them, the lines from the main road, Euxton Lane, appear to have been done by the council, as they start to straighten they are out of alignment and 2 different shades, however I am there again on Tuesday and will have a proper visual look and maybe take a picture.

Spin the map round and zoom in, you will get the same image as I have posted.

.

System

If they were unofficially extended then there should be evidence of the end bar being removed at the original end point.

Can't you see that the right hand bit of your picture is out of focus so has not rendered correctly?

You WANT to be correct and are ignoring any evidence that contradicts your hypothesis.

System

Here's another view showing the same thing. It is caused by the tiling of the photos! Either that or the residents have been out and repainted the lines

derrick

!!!!!! wrote: »

If they were unofficially extended then there should be evidence of the end bar being removed at the original end point.

Can't you see that the right hand bit of your picture is out of focus so has not rendered correctly?

You WANT to be correct and are ignoring any evidence that contradicts your hypothesis.

Even officially lines sometimes do not include the end bar.


I put the picture up re the signage not the lines, this has become an extension of the OP and not one I am really interested in as if I do park up there I will go past the DY's., however as I have said, look at Google street view and play with the camera and zoom, you will see what I have posted is correct.

.