If there were problems they waited in a lay-by
Page 26
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
could not prove that it was the company's lorries which had been over-riding the footpath.
Duckworth disputed whether the parking bays needed to be 3m wide. He also felt the plan allowed more space than was necessary for vehicles to turn. He said the company had produced different figures on the access.
Maintaining that there were no problems over parking, managing director George Truett produced an aerial photograph showing 43 vehicles parked on the site. He said that there had been no problems over artics and drawbars entering the yard.
His drivers were experienced and considerate to other road users. It would be difficult to operate the business if they could not keep drawbar trailers at 71 Brox Road. He was prepared to accept conditions and restrictions at 82 Brox Road. Each driver had a mobile telephone and if there were problems with loading they would be told to wait in a lay-by.
Julie Arnison, of 88 Brox Road said the use of 82 Brox Road would cause pollution from fumes and visual intrusion. The DLA had not experienced the dust and fumes when he visited the site as it was raining. And the site had been tidier than usual.
Arnison denied she had a grudge against the company because of covenants relating to her house, which had previously been owned by WS Hunts. She agreed there had been a dispute over a fence and the company was taking a libel action against her over another matter.