MARKET traders have received assurances that plans to slap parking charges on a lorry park used for their commercial vehicles will not affect them.

Chorley Borough Council intend to impose charges on the Friday Street lorry park in the town centre which currently functions as a 24-hour site for the parking of heavy goods vehicles.

Traders feared they would be subjected to fees if plans went ahead to make the parking area short stay/long stay between the hours of 8am and 6pm, Monday to Saturday.

At present the majority of stallholders use the car park after early morning unloading.

Many market traders felt that any imposition of charges would hinder business and could drive some away from their pitches at both the covered market and the Flat Iron.

John Dickinson, who has run a clothing stall in Chorley for over 30 years, had organised a petition to object to the proposals.

He feared that stallholders, like himself, who trade four times a week, would face charges of more than £500 a year.

He said: "Opposition to any charges has been unanimous and I will be approaching those on the Flat Iron on Tuesday.

"For some I have spoken it would mean withdrawing from the market altogether.

"It would be another blow to hard working businesses who work hard for Chorley to be an attractive place to shop."

Fellow trader, Roy Woodhouse, who sells artwork and frames, said: "The facility on Friday Street also provides us with extra security as we can park in a set way to block in our vehicles.

"The parking arrangements have been fine for years with us having easy access to our vehicles."

But according to Councillor Tony Gee, chairman of the Town Centre Forum, traders will be exempt from the charges.

He told the Citizen: "I can assure stallholders that when parking charges are introduced they will be looked after, and will most likely be given a day permit.

"The plans will enable more space to use for car parking on non-market days and give us more flexibility.

"I think there may have been a communication problem as the legal notice issued didn't make clear the position with regard to market vehicles."