Decision details
Objections to Proposed 7.5T Weight Restriction in Mayfield Valley
Decision Maker: Highway Cabinet Member Decision Session
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Decision:
5.1 |
The Executive Director, Place submitted a report describing the measures to restrict Heavy Goods Vehicles Traffic from travelling through the area known as Mayfield Valley and setting out officer responses to two objections. |
|
|
|
|
5.2 |
RESOLVED: That:- |
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
having considered the responses and objections to the proposed Traffic Regulations Order, the reasons set out in the report for making the Traffic Regulation Order outweigh any unresolved objections; |
|
|
|
|
(b) |
the Traffic Regulation Order described in the report be made in accordance with the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984; |
|
|
|
|
(c) |
the Traffic Regulation Order and associated sighting be introduced as and when funding from the LTP is made available; and |
|
|
|
|
(d) |
the objectors be informed of the decision. |
|
|
|
5.3 |
Reasons for Decision |
|
|
|
|
5.3.1 |
The weight restriction will reduce average numbers of heavy vehicles in a predominantly rural area. Thereby improving road safety for residents and those that pursue recreational activity in the areas. It will also improve the environment and reduce the detrimental impact on highway infrastructure. |
|
|
|
|
5.4 |
Alternatives Considered and Rejected |
|
|
|
|
5.4.1 |
In Mayfield Valley a targeted approach was initially considered to look at strategic roads that could be restricted while having an overall desired reduction of through flow in HGV’s. This was subsequently discounted as it would result in an extra restriction and warning signs that would have a substantial impact on the budgetary element of the scheme as a whole, would have a negative aesthetic impact with a significant number of additional signs being needed, this consequently would also have an impact on future maintenance costs and ongoing electricity supply costs being both budgetary and environmentally negative. |
|
|
|
|
5.5 |
Any Interest Declared or Dispensation Granted |
|
|
|
|
|
None |
|
|
|
|
5.6 |
Reason for Exemption if Public/Press Excluded During Consideration |
|
|
|
|
|
None |
|
|
|
|
5.7 |
Respective Director Responsible for Implementation |
|
|
|
|
|
Simon Green, Executive Director, Place |
|
|
|
|
5.8 |
Relevant Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee If Decision Called In |
|
|
|
|
|
Economic and Environmental Wellbeing |
Report author: David Ramsden
Publication date: 14/10/2014
Date of decision: 09/10/2014
Decided at meeting: 09/10/2014 - Highway Cabinet Member Decision Session
Effective from: 21/10/2014
Accompanying Documents: