Skip to main content

Confusing sign

More
12 years 3 days ago #106276 by waynestr
Replied by waynestr on topic Re: Confusing sign
Are you aware that a council ranger has no authority to ask you to produce your drivers licence. I pointed this out to a local council ranger. He promptly told me I was wrong and called the police. The polite HWP officer told him in no uncertain terms that if he was to ask anyone to produce a drivers licence to prove idententity that he was liable to prosecution as only police or RTA (now RMS) in NSW have the authority to do so. I have never seen a guys jaw drop so far in all my life. Made me feel good.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
12 years 2 days ago #106277 by atkipete
Replied by atkipete on topic Re: Confusing sign
Hasnt been any hot bitchumen down this road lately Swishy, pot holes left by the last ice age are still there. Plus the council seems to spend all its budget on confusing signs rather than fixing things.
As for exceptions for fire trucks, local deliveries etc .. the sign just adds confusion. Is there a valid reason why they should not go down there ie a rotten timber bridge, steep hill or is it just because a Councillor lives down there ?

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
12 years 2 days ago #106278 by BK
Replied by BK on topic Re: Confusing sign
As a licensed weigh man, the gross weight is the vehicles tare weight plus it's load, if your vehicle tares at 4.5 ton and you put 1 ton on the tray, your gross is 5.5 ton.
A truck and dog are classed as 1 vehicle, as is a road train.

Trust me

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
12 years 2 days ago #106279 by Young Fella
Replied by Young Fella on topic Re: Confusing sign
Bulban Road in Werribee, Aktipete. Know it well. I could never work out though why there is a load limit on this road when there are a number of farms along it that require trucks to come and go. Plus all the earthmoving equipment required to access all the infrastructure development, new housing estates, buses, etc., etc. With all the trucks/buses that use the road that are exempt they might as well lift the load limit. Plus the road does not go through any housing areas, it just backs onto them. There is even a service station on Bulban Road, so how do they expect the fuel to get delivered? I know a tanker would be exempt for this purpose, but if they don't want trucks there, then don't give a truck a reason to go there! And the lack of load limit signs there often catches drivers out, they can enter Bulban Road from many places and not even pass a sign. I'm pretty sure there is only one at each end. One is east bound as shown in your photo, one west bound just past the roundabout at Ballan Road, and one in the middle somewhere. However, the road is used alot by cyclists who use Bulban Road to get to the Little River area, you know the type, shiny lycra pants, bikes that are worth more than their cars, reckon they own the road.....you know what I mean. They are probably a bit scared of a big truck going past, so the Council has put the load limit. A local cycling club often holds rides along there too. Maybe it is just that the Council have bowed to pressure from a minority group and the truck driver has been the one made to suffer because of it. That's my rant for today. Over and out. ;)

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
12 years 2 days ago #106280 by Chocs
Replied by Chocs on topic Re: Confusing sign
I have been told in the past, that the limits are placed on certain roads are to 'extend' the service life of the road, irrespective of access needs etc.
We have roads down here that could quite easily carry a b double and they do, in harvest season, but day in day out traffic would see the roads ruined in no time..
Dropping load limits on bridges will also ease the necessity to uprate the structure for todays weights and volumes of traffic.
I was also 'warned' that if you are caught on a load limit road, that was limited to protect a bridge or crossing, you will be liable for the costs associated with inspection of the structure to deem it is still safe..
You may also be liable for the repair costs if it was found to be damaged caused by your vehicle.

Your 'as of right' to service a premises is just that, to service that premises, not as a thoroughfare.
In that case you will be blanketed under the land owners access, however, if a bridge or crossing is along that access, you must obtain a permit from the local governing body, to clear your vehicle.

Its like a lot of other subjects...
Probably best to ask the appropriate shire or road authority, you will get the correct answer for that particular load limited road.

chocs 8-)

Please Log in to join the conversation.

12 years 2 days ago - 12 years 2 days ago #106281 by
Replied by on topic Re: Confusing sign
I can't get over the amount of comments a simple sign has generated!

Very simply that if your rig weighs more than 6 ton and on this road you are in trouble!

Basically for what ever reason the local council is admitting that beyond this sign the infrastructure is below standards.

Any vehicle that goes beyond this point and weighs more than 6 ton had better get a permit or permission in writing from the local council. Even if you were visiting a place on the road for the reason that Chocs mentions be best to contact local council.

If you did go past the sign without permit. And either caught or did damage. You would be charged for the repairs. And the cost of inspecting the part of the road you traveled on! Not to mention any fine!

Over 6 ton gross (total weight) you better not go down there!

Anyway Atki. I don't think your Dodge would have any troubles! Bparo your AR would be fine also empty as the actual weight empty is under the limit. But my ACCO and trailer even empty wouldn't as it weighs more than the limit empty. As long as your total weight when you travel on this road doesn't exceed the road's limit you should be fine!

By the same token if you don't have to use this road with a truck I wouldn't! As it just isn't worth the trouble! :D

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
12 years 2 days ago #106282 by Chocs
Replied by Chocs on topic Re: Confusing sign
In addition....

Some years ago there was considerable confusion generated by a comment made.

A person in a position of authority stated...
If you are caught on this road, in that vehicle, you will be fined to the extent of you vehicles legal carrying capacity. ie:15t load limit road , 42.5t gcm vehicle. Loaded or not.


chocs 8-)

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
12 years 2 days ago - 12 years 2 days ago #106283 by Chocs
Replied by Chocs on topic Re: Confusing sign

Basically for what ever reason the local council is admitting that beyond this sign the infrastructure is below standards.


Not necessarily so..
They may see fit to have a traffic flow directed via a more suitable route.

Perhaps avoiding heavy traffic passing a school or hospital.
Reducing noise and risk within a certain area is also another reason for a load limit.


chocs 8-)

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
12 years 2 days ago #106284 by BK
Replied by BK on topic Re: Confusing sign
And it's probably no where near a spot to turn around.
East of Moree some roads are road train rated, but in the middle of nowhere (probably a shire boundary) there's a sign, "no road trains past this point" and no where to turn around. >:( >:(

Trust me

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
12 years 2 days ago #106285 by atkipete
Replied by atkipete on topic Re: Confusing sign
Correct BK, no where to turn around.
It is Bulban road and a classic NIMBY situation, no actual reason for such a low weight limit and no alternative route suggested. There are plenty of trucks using it at the moment to access the regional rail project.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.463 seconds