A number of letters to the editor have been submitted regarding the one way street decision.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Tina Clifton, of O’Brien Road, writes:
Like most residents north of Cohen’s Bridge, I am infuriated with the recent announcement to turn Chandos Street one way outside the new VIC.
I have read with interest the letters to the editor in Tuesday paper and while I totally disagree with Matt Davis’ opinion, I do wholly agree that no councillor should feel threatened, especially if they have done the right thing.
However, it is for this reason that I am particularly offended by the mayor’s comment in Tuesday’s paper, “that residents north of Cohen’s bridge should not be disadvantaged as cars have steering wheels and can easily turn”. This comment is rude and unnecessary and not relevant to the issue. Don’t treat us like idiots.
Secondly, I have to admit that while I think the move of the VIC was unnecessary, it was as Matt mentioned an issue that I felt was not as important as many other issues that are not being mentioned.
It is exactly for this reason that I did not read the 150-page document and why I never got to page 63 where it was mentioned that Chandos Street will become one way.
What I do not understand is why the whole thing is necessary anyway.
Is there any reason why Chandos Street can’t stay exactly as it is? If the western side of Chandos Street becomes parallel caravan parking as suggested in the current plans, there will be enough room to leave the rest of the road alone, according to my calculations.
By changing to parallel parking, we are in effect making the road three metres wider, as vehicles that were taking up six metres of road by being reversed parked are now only taking up three metres.
So, if the road is now three metres wider, why do we need to close a lane? As the council was unable to answer this question at [yesterday] morning’s meeting we can only assume that either this option was not considered or there is another agenda?
This option would save considerable cost, only require a change of some signage and sadly the loss of a few trees. This would not inconvenience the residents, accommodate the tourists and, even better, give local residents that want to do business with a trailer a place to park also!
In a rural community like ours, it is not uncommon to see residents with horse floats, box trailers and even small trucks looking for a place to park near the CBD.
Imagine if we could provide an added benefit for these people, or will they be discriminated against as it is not a caravan?
Is another agenda as many people are suspicious of and which was mentioned at this morning’s meeting, namely the Open Living Plan of 2010?
All we are asking for is honest and open communication. Where the facts are discussed and presented to the people who will be affected, namely the local residents and ratepayers, who have accepted a rate rise but would like some respect and courtesy in return.
It would be even better if these discussions could be held before construction is started so all options are considered. Is that too much to ask of the people that were elected by us, to represent us?
Rory Heath, of Gunnedah, writes:
I’d like to congratulate Matt Davis for his great letter in Tuesday’s NVI which clearly laid out the facts and brought a voice of reason to a debate which has, particularly by some people on social media, got a bit out of hand.
Any sensible person, after reading the Jenny Rand report which was very well summarised by Matt, would have to come to the conclusion that moving the VIC was the right decision.
As part of this decision, some changes in Chandos Street were obviously going to have to be made.
Knowing it was potentially an emotional issue and that most people are naturally resistant to change, it would have been very easy for council to sit on their hands, do nothing, and let the third report recommending the moving of the VIC slide on by.
I believe it took true leadership from councillors to stand up and vote for what they believe to be in the best interests of the entire Gunnedah community, even when they knew they would cop some flak in the process.
I guess we can be thankful that if a 50 metre section of one-way road really is the biggest issue we have to debate, then Gunnedah is actually doing pretty well.
There are thousands of places in the world that would love to have our problems. Time to keep a sense of perspective everyone.
Jeremy Penfold writes:
As I can't make the friendly protest that has been organised for Wednesday [yesterday] I feel the need to show my support to our community.
In the short time that you and a few other members of the council have been in your elected positions, you seem to have upset half of Gunnedah, your lack of respect for the thoughts and opinions of the town's people just amazes me.
The fact that people are finding things out via social media is poor form on your behalf as you are not being transparent and forthcoming with the information when asked questions.
If the other people of the town feel as I do, I am pretty sure you'll be looking for a new job come election time.
I have lived near the area of the Visitor Information Centre on Memorial Avenue and I know how many caravans/campervans pull up there.
I've watched families pull up for a rest and wander around looking up in the trees for koalas, enjoying a cuppa and biccy and just taking a moment to take in our town or pull up across the road alongside the hospital and let the kids have a play while they stopped, revived and survived in safety.
What is going to happen when we have the monthly markets?
What about the people from the properties and surrounding towns like Kelvin? (This is a main route for them).
What about when it floods? How will visitors access the new centre or where will they park especially if it's a good one?
If we get a half decent flood the water will rise and cut off this access to it (Bloomfield Street goes under in the smallest flood let alone a decent one).
All this as well as redirecting your traffic and making Bloomfield Street even busier than what it already is.
There are so many more arguments against your decisions and I could go on about this, but I'm sure there'll be plenty more people writing the same.
Joanne Ford, of Gunnedah, writes:
I realise we’ve been over and over the same old thing, and some councillors may say “get over it”.
But... just wondering... Did council ever consider having a questionnaire at the Gunnedah CaravanPark, the council “low fee” camping area and the VIC on what visitors look for in regards to an information centre’s location?
They are the ones travelling through town. Surely this would have made sense for six to 12 months.
After all, Cr [Mayor Owen] Hasler is asking Gunnedah residents to give the changes 12 months before making up their minds. But then, what does make sense?