Report to Transport and Highways Portfolio

6th March 2012 Agenda Item:3.5

REPORT OF SERVICE DIRECTOR FOR HIGHWAYS, ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES

RABBITHILL LANE / SPALFORD LANE, SPALFORD – PROPOSED 7.5 tonne ENVIRONMENTAL WEIGHT LIMIT

Purpose of the Report

1. To consider objections received in respect of the proposed Environmental Weight Limit scheme (TRO 3170) at Rabbithill Lane/Spalford Lane, Spalford.

Delegated Authority

2. Scheme of Delegation TH.2. All powers relating to the planning, management and maintenance of highways and rights of way, and the development of integrated transport and road safety, which are not delegated to the Planning and Licensing Committee including:- (in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Personnel and Performance) the disposal of land acquired for (but no longer needed for) highway purposes.

Information and Advice

3. Rabbithill Lane/Spalford Lane is a narrow country road, single track in parts that leads from the village of Spalford to the village of North Scarle in Lincolnshire. The road is the main access route to Spalford Warren Nature Reserve and as such is used by vulnerable road users including dog walkers and horse riders.

4. The road is also used by HGVs belonging to local farmers and haulage companies as a short cut to and from the A1133 which leads to the A57, A1 and beyond. The road is not suited to use by vehicles of this size and there is conflict between them and the vulnerable users.

5. A 7.5t Environmental Weight Limit is proposed to protect the amenities of the area and to encourage the HGVs to use a more appropriate route. The alternative route, Wigsley Road and Eagle Road which run parallel to the roads to be limited are more suited to carrying heavy traffic and the extra distance involved is 650m. The Spalford Lane part of the route continues across the County boundary into Lincolnshire. Lincolnshire County Council were contacted with the offer that Nottinghamshire County Council would process a weight restriction Order covering their part of Spalford Lane and meet all associated costs including the provision of necessary traffic signs. The proposed changes can be seen on the attached drawing no. NET/NJG/JH20360/Rabbit.

1

6. A statutory consultation and public advertisement of the proposals has been carried out and five objections have been received.

7. Lincolnshire County Council declined the offer of this Authority making an Order on their part of the route and providing the necessary traffic signs as the route does not meet their criteria for the provision of an Environmental Weight Limit. The Lincolnshire County Council web site says that Environmental Weight Limits can be introduced to prevent damage to the highway network or danger to the public or environmental damage. Its objection is on the grounds that the resulting Order will end at the County Boundary and HGVs may find themselves in difficulty travelling along a road which becomes limited at its’ mid-way point. The simple solution to this problem would be to allow this Authority to fund the provision of a sign indicating a weight limit ahead to be placed at the end of the road in Lincolnshire.

8. A representative from a local business, North Scarle, Lincolnshire objected, by telephone, on the grounds that the alternative route is longer. The business is located inside Lincolnshire. If the weight restriction had extended for the full length of Spalford Lane as originally intended, movements to/from the business would have been exempt and there would have been no effect on the business. With the restriction starting at the County Boundary the result is that any movements by HGVs between the business and the principal road network will result in following the alternative route, an extra distance of 700 metres. This is not considered to be excessive.

9. A representative from a local business, North Scarle, Lincolnshire objected on the grounds of extra costs incurred by businesses and the effect on residents living on the alternative route. The extra distance involved in using the alternative route rather than the route to be restricted is 650m. The alternative route is more suited to carrying HGVs as it is wider. The representative is of the opinion that Rabbithill Lane/Spalford Lane is a well established route for HGVs and has been used for many years by both his own company and other local agricultural businesses and haulage contractors with his own company vehicles making up to 50 trips per day along the route. He states that ‘any restriction on this route would disadvantage our operations and add unnecessary cost’ and that it would result in an ‘increased flow past North Scarle Primary School’. As previously stated the alternative route is just 650 metres extra and does not pass North Scarle Primary School.

10. A representative from a local business, Spalford objects on the grounds that the restriction will place a burden on business as the route is there for the ‘convenience of local businesses’. He is of the opinion that the extra mileage covered by HGVs using the alternative route will place an unnecessary financial burden on local businesses. As stated previously the extra distance is just 650 metres.

11. North Scarle Parish Council object on the grounds that ‘not enough lorries use it’ but it will ‘divert traffic to other roads in our parish’. This sounds a little contradictory as the roads onto which the HGVs will be diverted are better suited to carrying them than Rabbithill Lane and Spalford Lane.

12. One further response to the consultation was received. Newark and Sherwood District Councillor M. Shaw responded positively to the introduction of a Weight Restriction.

2 13. The scheme is funded from the Local Transport Plan budget for 2011/12. The cost of implementing the scheme will be in the region of £5000. Should the implementation of the project be carried out during 2012/13, a new allocation from the Local Transport Plan budget will be made.

Other Options Considered 14. Other options have been considered but do not address the issue of HGV manoeuvres.

Reason/s for Recommendation/s

15. The recommendation is made as it is considered that the benefits of the scheme address concerns which have been expressed locally regarding the safety of vulnerable road users and protection of the amenities of the area through which the route runs.

Statutory and Policy Implications

16. This report has been compiled after consideration of implications in respect of finance, equal opportunities, human resources, crime and disorder, human rights, the safeguarding of children, sustainability and the environment and those using the service and where such implications are material they are described below. Appropriate consultation has been undertaken and advice sought on these issues as required.

Human Right Act Implications

17. The following convention rights of the Human Rights Act, 1998 need to be considered when taking the decision:

Article 1 of the First Protocol Convention provides that every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.

Article 2 of the Human Rights Convention is an unqualified right to life and to positive protection of that right by public authorities.

Article 8 of the Convention provides that "everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life and his home". The implementation of an experimental Traffic Regulation Order could interfere with Articles 1 and 8 rights for nearby residents, but the Council may interfere with such rights in accordance with the law as contained in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and, where it is necessary in a democratic society, in the interest of, amongst other things, public safety and/or the general interest. The decision-maker may consider and conclude that implementation of this Order is necessary in a democratic society to protect the environment and improve public safety.

RECOMMENDATION/S

a. The objections be over-ruled

3 b. The Nottinghamshire County Council (Rabbithill Lane and Spalford Lane, Spalford)(Weight Restriction) Traffic Regulation Order 2012 (3170) be introduced as advertised c. The objectors be informed accordingly.

Name of Report Author: Andrew Warrington

Title of Report Author: Service Director (Highways)

For any enquiries about this report please contact:

Neil Hodgson, Team Manager, Major Projects and Improvements

Constitutional Comments (SHB 29/2/12)

Cabinet Member has power to approve the Recommendation.

Financial Comments (IC 29/02/12)

The financial implications are as contained in paragraph 13 of this report.

Background Papers

All relevant documents for the proposed Environmental Weight Limit are contained within the scheme file which can be found in the Major Projects and Improvements section at Trent Bridge House. The file includes;

Letter from Lincolnshire County Council dated 19 October 2011. E-mail from Lincolnshire County Council dated 3 January 2012. Letter from North Scarle Parish Council dated 19 February 2012.

Except for previously published documents, which will be available elsewhere, the documents listed here will be available for inspection in accordance with Section 100D of the Local Government Act 1972.

Electoral Division(s) and Member(s) Affected Collingham, Cllr. V.Dobson

4