Scheme parked over fears for wardens' safety

“What puzzles me is that if one of the reasons for no longer policing parking breeches is lack of police time and resources. Does this now mean they will not only have to find the time to identify these drivers but also then to prove who was responsible for the vehicle at the time, verify that the car was actually parked, not broken down or whatever other reason for being there and also prove that the photo was taken for legitimate reasons not for reasons of personal vendetta or other grievance. How long will it be before these volunteers tire of patrolling the High Street and then take it on themselves to target people who they have a personal grudge with. Maybe take it on themselves to start to look for tax dodgers, benefit claimants working illegally or whatever else suits their fancy any particular day. That would certainly be the thin edge of the wedge and would definitely lead to conflict.
Is employing one traffic warden whose salary could be covered by the fines he/she collects not a much more logical solution because I, like many, would always question any scheme started by a councillor whose own track record shows very dubious intentions in many cases judging by recent events.
The other point I would like to add is that Cllr Pasley was himself complaining on this very site about the added costs incurred by the bell in the news recently and yet already his £1000 costs for this project will be increased manyfold by the necessity to insure these people. Hypocrisy is not a great quality, detailed research and planning prior to asking for money for a plan would have shown better qualities.”

“Strange that some feel there are "too many yellow lines" when so many residents, who actually live here, campaigned to have double yellow lines placed on dangerous roads and bends where illegal parking was causing a danger to pedestrians and drivers. In fact, even in June 2012, Cllr Knight, a town and district councillor, seconded by Cllr Koops, a town councillor, had been contacted by so many residents who felt there were insufficient road restrictions on Harbour Road, a further motion was put to the council to discuss the outstanding problems. It was not be forgotten of course, that when a certain council Chairman (Cllr Terry) used his casting vote originally NOT to recommend support for double yellow lines, there was uproar by residents who said it should be reconsidered. Hence the existing lines. Looking at previous TRO schedule applications, residents even want double yellow lines on dangerous areas in their own roads as a commonsense approach to deter drivers.

Today's media report on "Park Watch", omits words included in the previous article that are pertinent to the feeling in Portishead on this scheme. Those words are:
"Town councillors would co-ordinate the scheme and a working party set up to liaise with volunteers. Earlier this month, Mr Pasley captured on camera a number of drivers leaving their vehicles on the pavement and sent the snaps to police for action".

A previous parking survey indicated the public would have confidence in a traffic warden and actually want the previous traffic warden back. They would have confidence in the police if resources were given for them to do the job although I think they better serve the public tackling crime, not parking. They may even have confidence in a local authority parking warden who was non political and say worked within the Streets & Open Spaces dept. But confidence in a town councillor organising the scheme? Therein lies the problem. Cllr Cruse is more perceptive of public opinion than the councillor who put forward the motion.”

“As someone working in Portishead and commuting from Bristol on a daily basis,I find there is ample parking without abusing the High Street restrictions but I agree there are too many yellow lines.
The real problem is lazy shoppers,determined to park as close as possible to the shop they want!”