The most interesting item at last night’s meeting of Rawreth Parish Council was about Beeches Road. There’s a 3 MT weight limit along there. It’s for good reasons – both the nature of the road itself and also the weak bridges.
Overweight vehicles are still using it however the Parish Council is working with Essex Police and Essex Trading Standards to improve the situation. Yesterday morning drivers were given spot fines for being over the limit, and it’s fair to say that the Parish Council are impressed by the help they are being given by Essex on this. This is an ongoing process, with more checks in the future.
One thing that was mentioned last night was the number of drivers who were breaking the weight limit because they had no idea of the weight of their vehicle (even the unladen weight).
Why not put in a 6’6 width limit? Or is that just too obvious!?
It’s a good question, but I think some vehicles could fit the width limit and still be over the weight limit for the bridge.
The minutes of Wednesday’s meeting are now published, which explains things a bit more clearly than our post:
“289. BEECHES ROAD WEIGHT RESTRICTION – The Clerk advised Members that on the morning of the Meeting both herself and Cllr Hopkins had been invited to observe ECC Trading Standards and Essex Police carrying out enforcement procedures in Beeches Road. The Clerk advised that with the police present on the spot fines could be issued and that in a space of two hours 27 vehicle had breached the restriction. The Clerk advised that enforcement action is taking place every month, not always with the police but even without their presence ECCTS still record vehicle details and write to the drivers, if the driver is already the subject of an enforcement breach anywhere in the County the second offence will lead to prosecution. TS advised they have already been successful in prosecuting drivers caught in this location. The Clerk advised there are no plans to stop the enforcement checks as the road is still classed as one of the worst in the County for breaches. The Clerk did remind those present that the 3 tonne limit is not on the road but in fact the weak bridge and therefore vehicles must be observed crossing the bridge before action can be taken. The Clerk advised that in the event that the weak bridge is strengthened there are two more weak bridges in the same road, therefore the weight restriction will be moved to the next bridge ensuring that vehicles of a gross unloaded weight of 3 tonnes cannot use the road as a cut through. The Clerk advised that the morning had been very informative and that thanks had been conveyed to ECCTS and the Police for allowing them to observe the operation and for the continued work that both parties are doing.”
I have suggested a width restriction which would stop some, not all, of the overweight vehicles. The main problem is the lack of space to turn around if vehicles have gone down there in error. Land would have to be bought to make a turning area which makes the whole project to expensive apparently. I have spoken with a camera expert and they say a number recognition system would be relatively simple and inexpensive to fit at each end of the road and this may be an option. The issue of the weak bridge means that deliveries to the Mousery have to go via Watery Lane which are not at all suitable for that road, putting a width restriction in would not solve that problem.