Decision Maker: Corporate Director of Business and Environmental Services
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
Having considered all representations and
objections submitted in response to the consultations and public
advertisements, taking into account other possible orders which
could be made in respect of the route and the current significant
damage to the route, the Corporate Director, Business and
Environmental Services (BES), in consultation with the BES
Executive Members considers it is expedient for the order to be
made for the reasons set out in the revised Statement of Reasons
and that its continuing use by motor vehicles is likely to cause
further damage to the road and will also have an adverse effect on
its existing character and the amenities of the area.
In recommending the implementation of the proposed TRO, it is considered that it will enable the County Council to comply with its duty under Section 122 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians) and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off the highway.
PLEASE NOTE This decision was originally
published on or near the date of the decision and so call in no
longer applies. It has been re-published as part of the change in
committee management system that we use.
As set out in the revised Statement of Reasons and to prevent unsustainable damage being caused to the U1858/9 by motorised vehicles and that its continuing use by motor vehicles is likely to cause further damage to the road and will also have an adverse effect on its existing character and the amenities of the area.
Consideration has been given to other options
by officers such as seasonal; one way; just 4x4 restriction orders,
but these still involved the route being used by motor vehicles
which is considered to be unsustainable. The Trial Riders
Federation also suggested an order to include an exemption for TRF
members events. This option was discounted as an exemption would
require specialist signage which would need approval from the DFT;
it would be difficult to enforce and enforcement would be resource
intensive. It is also considered that such an exemption would not
be easily understood by users of the route even with
Publication date: 30/04/2021
Date of decision: 20/10/2017