Epping Forest red route

Discussion about street lighting, road signs, traffic signals - and all other street furniture - goes here.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
forestgump
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri May 22, 2020 09:48

Epping Forest red route

Post by forestgump »

It looks very much like the Epping Forest temporary red route will not be made permanent, the temporary order expires on Monday and there has been so much negative feedback that it seems the permanent TRO will be dropped at the last minuit. If that turns out to be the case does the local authority HAVE to remove the red lines, or can they just leave them to decay over the next few years?
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: Epping Forest red route

Post by jervi »

forestgump wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 18:06 It looks very much like the Epping Forest temporary red route will not be made permanent, the temporary order expires on Monday and there has been so much negative feedback that it seems the permanent TRO will be dropped at the last minuit. If that turns out to be the case does the local authority HAVE to remove the red lines, or can they just leave them to decay over the next few years?
I presume the red route was introduced via an ETRO. After 18 months, if it has not been made permanent or prematurely removed, then the ETRO will lapse.
When a ETRO has lapsed then the road reverts to the previous TROs in force (or if there was no TRO, then no TRO), road markings & signage will have to conform to the reverted TRO. So the Red Lines should be masked up/burnt off and replaced with yellow lines where they existed before.
forestgump
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri May 22, 2020 09:48

Re: Epping Forest red route

Post by forestgump »

The red route was introduced under covid emergency powers at pace and without minuted meetings as a temporary TRO, the 18 month period expires on November22 2021, A permanent red route has been advertised and consulted upon but as far as I know will not now be finalised due to massive public backlash against it, the consultation ended two weeks ago.
For the most part there were no parking restrictions or yellow lines as this is within an ancient forest.

So from what I understand they will have to remove / burn off the red lines, is there a timescale for them to do this?

if the lines remain it will be very confusing for forest visitors, And very easy/cheap for them to attempt to re-visit installing the red route in say six-twelve months time!

verge parking was specifically allowed under byelaw 11 of Epping Forest
forestgump
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri May 22, 2020 09:48

Re: Epping Forest red route

Post by forestgump »

There is another scheme they introduced in Epping Forest under the cover of covid, an ETRO to close a length of public highway to reduce flytipping, poaching of rabbits, sex litter and anti social gatherings. That road, Fairmead road was a dead end going to a forest car park.

I objected on several grounds such as. The signed order was undated as the month was omitted, 20th day of 2020! they corrected this after six months, the reasons were not valid reasons to close a road, the carpark was much used and valued by disabled visitors, and as an experiment for the most part it was not possible for it to fail. That order was introduced on 29May 2020 and so the 18 months period expires at the end of November.
My objections still stand and I have not yet been notified of any decision.

Does the 18 month period mean that if I hear nothing from them in the next month the ETRO lapses? or can they consider the objections for an indefinite period leaving the closure in place?
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1594
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: Epping Forest red route

Post by jervi »

forestgump wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 10:54 Does the 18 month period mean that if I hear nothing from them in the next month the ETRO lapses? or can they consider the objections for an indefinite period leaving the closure in place?
You personally are unlikely to hear anything from them, although some councils may send out an email about the TRO if you commented on it. However information should be on their website if a TRO is sealed (approved)
Restrictions under an ETRO can not be extended beyond the 18 month mark, and comments regarding the ERRO should only be applicable to that specific ETRO in question.

As far as I am aware they have two mainstream options:
1. Make the ETRO into a TRO & keep the restrictions and markings in place.
2. If the ETRO cannot be made into a TRO, then the ETRO is removed (or lapsed at 18 months) and markings/signage must be removed (within a reasonable period of time)

Alternatively the ETRO & markings/signage could be removed, but then advertise it as a TRO. And then if that TRO can be approved, markings/signage could be re-instated. In this situation comments from the ETRO are unlikely able to be used, since it would be a different order with the same contents.

Another option could be to create an identical ETRO with effect from the day after the current one expires, however I'm not sure how legal that would be or if it would be any more likely to be approved. B&H CC nearly opted for this a few days ago about the temp cycle lanes along the seafront, but instead they voted 4-2 to make that ETRO permanent (into a TRO).
User avatar
Big Nick
Member
Posts: 4348
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 08:27
Location: Epping, Essex

Re: Epping Forest red route

Post by Big Nick »

If they don't replace the yellow lines then it becomes a free-for-all parking wise. The original ETRO was brought in because the roads were being blocked by visitors escaping the London lockdown in 2020 and the car parks being full.
That may have eased now but the next step by City of London is to bring in charges for using many of the Forest car parks, which I expect to have the same effect as the lockdown traffic. That will provide ammo for the permanent introduction of red lines throughout the Forest.

I've read the byelaws. I don't know where you could get a vehicle 45m off the highway :lol: But one way of reading it is this: The verge is part of the Forest, and if you damage it while parking on it then you could be in breach of the byelaws. :-?
https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/things- ... st-byelaws

Fairmead Road has been an issue for a long time. I walked down it in 2015 and there were countless piles of nitrous oxide canisters and other litter down there. The track to the car park is rough as anything and as many have noted, it's a much used dogging site. If you count that as a pleasure purpose then it's allowed under the byelaws :wink:
https://www.eppingforestguardian.co.uk/ ... rest-shut/
forestgump
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri May 22, 2020 09:48

Re: Epping Forest red route

Post by forestgump »

Hi Big Nick,
The red route was brought in by way of a Temporary TRO and for the most part there were no yellow lines prior to the reds, a Temporary TRO cannot be made permanent, Car park charges were brought in soon after the temporary order was made, As for Fairmead, yes the road is in poor condition and yes there was a lot of anti social anf flytipping, the gates could be a solution if they were opened in the morning and closed at night as they now do on almost all their car parks,

Bylaw 11 refers to parking for leisure during daylight hours provided no harm is caused etc. most people only want to get three feet off the road to allow free passage for other road users.
User avatar
Big Nick
Member
Posts: 4348
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 08:27
Location: Epping, Essex

Re: Epping Forest red route

Post by Big Nick »

forestgump wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 15:41 Hi Big Nick,
The red route was brought in by way of a Temporary TRO and for the most part there were no yellow lines prior to the reds, a Temporary TRO cannot be made permanent, Car park charges were brought in soon after the temporary order was made, As for Fairmead, yes the road is in poor condition and yes there was a lot of anti social anf flytipping, the gates could be a solution if they were opened in the morning and closed at night as they now do on almost all their car parks,

Bylaw 11 refers to parking for leisure during daylight hours provided no harm is caused etc. most people only want to get three feet off the road to allow free passage for other road users.
I am aware of all that. Look at where I live. It should be visible under my name and photo.

What I am saying is that now the Temporary TRO has expired, the City will gather evidence of people parking on the roads (to avoid the car park fees) and then apply for a Permanent TRO. Back to square one.

I supported the campaign to Save the Tea Hut at the top of Fairmead Road back in 2013/14.
In 2016 I had a very interesting chat with a chap (who I met in London by sheer chance via a mutual friend) who worked for the City of London about the absolute fiasco they made of reducing deer numbers - he admitted they hadn't really considered what the locals would think of them selling slots for deer shooting to a club for rich game hunters https://www.capreolusclub.co.uk/
Huge public backlash. It happened again early this year.
The City have done exactly the same here with regards to parking fees and ignored or overridden the opinions of the Forest Verderers who sit on the panel to represent the likes of you and me. It's all about the money.

But when you next go to the forest look at these spaces along the side of Fairmead Road https://goo.gl/maps/qBxkBbGgwq19rete9 and consider this: That was a narrow country lane just about wide enough for cars to squeeze past each other.
All those parking spaces started out by people just wanting to go a foot or two to one side to create space. Now you can park a 7.5ton lorry with ease there.
At what point should the line be drawn?
Is it wise to allow more verge parking in other parts of the forest?
Post Reply