Issue details

HSSF-16-24 Intention: PROPOSED TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDER AMENDMENTS IN THE VICINITY OF ALDERBURY AND WEST GRIMSTEAD PRIMARY SCHOOL

 

 

To:

 

(i)            Consider the comments received following the formal advertisement of Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs hereafter) proposing the introduction of waiting restrictions and a 20mph zone in the vicinity of Alderbury and West Grimstead Primary School.

 

(ii)          Recommend proceeding with the introduction of the Council’s proposals as advertised.

Decision type: Non-key

Decision status: For Determination

Notice of proposed decision first published: 24/07/2024

Decision due: Not before 1 Aug 2024 by Cabinet Member for Highways, Street Scene, and Flooding

Lead member: Cllr Nick Holder, Cabinet Member for Highways, Street Scene, and Flooding Nick.Holder@wiltshire.gov.uk

Department: Highways & Transport

Contact: Paul Shaddock / 01722 434671 / Email: paul.shaddock@wiltshire.gov.uk.

Consultation process

Consultation has been undertaken with:

 

  • The elected Wiltshire Council Member representing the Alderbury and Whiteparish Ward in developing its proposals and through the statutory TRO consultation process.
  • Alderbury Parish Council in developing its proposals and through the statutory TRO consultation process.
  • Alderbury and West Grimstead Primary School in developing its proposals and through the statutory TRO consultation process.
  • Emergency services through the statutory consultation process
  • Members of the public, including parents of pupils attending the schools, through the statutory consultation process.

 

TROs proposing the introduction of additional waiting restrictions in the vicinity of the school and a 20mph zone were formally advertised for comment on 8 February 2024. The Council's closing date for the receipt of objections or other representations to the advertised TROs, together with the grounds on which they were made, was 4 March 2024.

 

During the consultation period a total of three items of correspondence were received in response to the Council’s proposals. Of those three items one expressed support for the Council’s proposals. The remaining two items of correspondence objected to the Council’s proposals, or elements of them.

Decisions