AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Neighbour fails to prevent increases

3rd June 1993, Page 14
3rd June 1993
Page 14
Page 14, 3rd June 1993 — Neighbour fails to prevent increases
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• Environmental representations from a neighbour failed to prevent Penrith, Cumbriabased Graham Lund increasing the authorisation on his licence from one vehicle to three vehicles and two trailers.

North Western Traffic Commissioner Martin Albu heard that Lund operated a drain and pipe contracting business. The additional vehicles were needed to make the business more successful.

Sonic of the plant needed to be transported from one site to another by a vehicle and lowloader trailer.

Graham Bow(.1 said that he lived in the a c': ,,.ciit property. Over the past three years Lund had gradually built up his business. The site had degenerated from a farm into an eyesore.

Lund said that only minor maintenance was carried out on site, as the vehicles were maintained by a commercial garage.

In granting the application, Albu said that if it had not been an existing operating centre he might well have taken the view that it was unsuitable. There was no doubt that the activities at the site caused noise and disturbance.

However, that arose from the keeping and maintaining plant at the premises and not from the keeping and maintaining of vehicles, On balance, he considered that the additional problems caused by increasing the authorisation would not make a significant difference to the situation.