T HE NEW environmental legislation which operators face is still '
Page 40
Page 42
Page 43
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
"not entirely right," Permanent Under Secretary of State at the Department of Transport Sir Peter Lazarus, told delegates when opening CM's Fleet Managentent Conference.
But lu., said that in reality operators will never get exactly what they want.
I lundreds of bodies are consulted for transport legislation. "With transport, because it is so important and so largo:, intcrests arc always bound to be in conflict", he said.
While being aware that the new environmental rules had come in for a lot of
Criticism in the Lap's present review of it, he said that the worst fears had not been realised.
Many operators find the new controls frustrating, but if there is no material change required on an operator's licence then the Licensing Authority cannot refuse it, he said. A haulier can also comment on restrictions being placed on it.
"But we were aware from the outset that there would be confusion over the responsibilities and the planning authorities at public, inquiries," he admitted.
The DTp's job in reviewing the new regulations is to continue to strike the precarious balancebetween operators and local residents, he said.
Sir Peter also mentioned the recent side-guard regulations and said that as a result of consultation he hoped that the present regulations are -nearer right". But adjustment will go on, he assured delegates.
The EEC adds another dimension and problem to drawing up legislation — and the hauliers' operation, too, he said, '1 he I) Up wants more flexibility for the vexed question of the drivers' hours, and more consultation with iiidustry. "This is inevitably long and drawn out and difficult. We hope at last that we are getting somewhere and that the new drivers' hours regulations will bring considerable improvement to operators," Sir Peter concluded. DELEGATES sat spellbound for over an hour as the conventional format of the conference was cast aside and they were conveyed into an imaginary traffic court hearing.
The pretext was to illustrate just what the year-old environmental rules for operator licensing mean in reality and there is little doubt that most delegates came away informed and entertained by the exercise.
Former CM man and one time traffic court clerk Norman Tilsley set the scene before returning to the role of his youth.
The applicant. Herbert Taylor of ABC Transport, was a retired East of England haulier who, for the purpose of the mock court room exercise was an operator of nine vehicles and nine trailers painted in a conspicuous purple and pink livery and operated from a one
time military airfield at the village of Gardensville.
That was in country half way between North Town and South Town and close to the twisting B1066 rural road.
He had set up in business in 1946 with an ex-War Department lorry and now wanted to renew his operator's licence and add three tractors and trailers to it so that he could take on a recently won contract.
Against him, one resident's representative, Miss Bird (played by
retired solicitor's clerk Edith Lucas) was trying to stop his plans as she complained that ABC lorries spoiled her enjoyment of the cottage she had bought with a view to retirement and long country walks.
Each side had its solicitor, Michael Gotelee for Mr Taylor and John Backhouse for Miss Bird. To adjudicate Eastern Deputy Licensing Authority Charles Arnold-Baker weighed up the two cases and set them into the framework of the 1982 Transport Act.
Gotelee set out the moves taken before the hearing and pointed out that Taylor's original newspaper advertisement for his 0-licence application had been wrong. Instead of stating — as published in the Department of Transport's now superseded guide to the regulation — that representations "should" be sent to the applicant he ought to have said they "must" be sent.
'Hie District Council had objected on environmental and traffic grounds, but they backed down. Taylor had established use rights for his depot and he had also commissioned a traffic survey which proved that his lorties made an insignificant impact on the general level of traffic on the roads around his depot.
-Hie LA had already ruled out of order an objection from the parish council as the Act does not permit it to be classified as an objector. He also refused to accept a petition from a Counsellor Mrs Stirrit of the Gardensville Residents Association. A Mr and Mrs
Mottlington, who lived at The Street, Gardensville, had made representation but did not appear at the earlier enquiry.
Gotelee added that Taylor's workshops and warehouse on the site both generated additional traffic.
Taylor said he needed the extra lorries for a contract to deliver newsprint to Fleet Street. He would operate from 5arn to 7pm on weekdays, from 7am to Ipin on Saturdays and from 5pm to 7pm on Sundays. Maintenance would he conducted from 8am to noon on Saturdays and Sundays and on week days from 8am to 8pm as necessary.
His first slip in the proceedings was not to make a separate application for two vehicles which were parked outside drivers' homes at North Town on up to four nights a week. Gotelce argued unsuccessfully that the Act specified that he should seek a separate licence only for places where the vehicle is normally kept and that in this case the airfield was that place. The LA went so far as to suggest that the drivers might need to make their own 0-licence applications.
Taylor referred to noise nuisance created by an aero club which used part of the airfield. It used "everything that makes a noise" on Sundays and had constant aircraft movement when it ran parachute exercises. On other days, unsilenced cars were used for drag racing and late night jollifications at the club house created further noise. "They are naturally a sporty type of people," said Taylor as he explained why their vehicles ;ind life style were noisy.
Taylor was unwilling to use an unsecured lorry park in South Town as an alternative to his depot and said his insurers would not accept it either. Diverting lorries away from The Street would add between £2,000 and 0,000 to his annual costs and he would only do that if the LA insisted.
Miss Bird complained of the noise of' lorries changing gear; of the smell of diesel fumes "especially in summer" making her need to close her bedroom windows; of vibration from lorries and of "very big" lorries. Extra vehicles were "bound to make a great difference" to the enjoyment of her home.
She accepted that the industrial estate had expanded but its lorries ran at more regular hours than Mr Taylor's. And that noisy aero club? "but I can't do anything about it,'' she pleaded.
Backhouse set out Miss Bird's shopping list. There should be no movement in or out of the depot or any maintenance on Sundays, no maintenance between 7pm and Sam on week days and afternoon on Saturdays; any maintenance or load trans-shipment at night should take place behind closed doors; The Street not to be used for access to the B1066; no vehicles to be left unattended in Gardensville for more than 15 minutes; operator to give notice in writing within seven days of any breach of these conditions; the size and number of vehicles to be limited; and the duration of the 0-licence to be cut front five to two years.
Gotelee said that Taylor was prepared — with reluctance — to stop using The Street and would abide by the 15 minute parking restriction, but considered that the other proposals were too harsh.
The LA said he was persuaded that Taylor's business did cause Miss Bird nuisance and gave notice of the conditions he had in mind. He would give his reasons in writing later.
There would be no movement of vehicles permitted on Sundays, but it would be unreasonable to ban Sunday maintenance. He did seek an undertaking from Taylor that he would conduct Sunday maintenance behind closed doors, that his vehicles would be diverted from The Street and that he agreed to the 15 minute parking restriction.
'Me law did not allow for him to lay down any condition demanding written notice of any breech of conditions. He refused to limit the size and number of vehicles on the licence hut in view of the "rather new type situation" of the environmental rules, he felt it wise to limit its duration to two years.
He was prepared to grant the additional vehicles on an interim licence as Taylor said he would appeal to the Transport Tribunal against the conditions. That left scope for a further
hearing later. cohrimied SI page 44