Share This Page

Parking ban proposed in Greensburg's Saybrook Village

| Tuesday, May 6, 2014, 6:15 p.m.

Greensburg City Council is expected to vote Monday on whether to ban parking on a street in the Saybrook Village housing plan for four months.

Council briefly discussed the proposal for Cranston Drive during a meeting Tuesday. Council holds its voting regular meeting on Monday.

Under the measure, council would prohibit parking between Dec. 1 and March 31 each year.

In March, residents living along the street presented a petition to council requesting the change.

They said cars parked on the street hinder city snowplows and in some cases impeded residents from getting out of their driveways.

All the homes on the stretch have a garage or a driveway where vehicles can be parked, but some residents opt to park on Cranston, residents told council.

“People do not want to pull in their driveways for whatever reasons,” resident Judy Polidora said during the March meeting. “It's ridiculous.”

City administrator Sue Trout told council that 81 properties are along the stretch and the petition contained 41 signatures, a required majority of property owners for council to vote on the change.

A city ordinance requires a petition to be filed before council can consider parking changes.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.