Sir, - I refer to recent correspondence from Mr Lappin, Mrs Swabey and Mrs Wright concerning the Great Ayton lorry survey (D&S, April 9).

Their views are shared by myself and 99pc of local residents. The remaining 1pc, including John Fletcher, who represents the local council, and random officials from County Hall, seem unable to grasp the issue in question and offer a commonsense, workable solution.

It was unnecessary to conduct a survey as the problems are obvious to anyone with commonsense. It has been an ongoing problem for the past 12 years.

Various "measures" have been taken, including a mini roundabout, which has created a new set of problems, two central bollards, adorned with coloured lights, and random coloured markings on the road surface - the rate of progress leaves me speechless.

I cannot believe that in 2004 we still allow HGVs to trundle through the village, many of which are four-ton or 60ft long, carrying all manner of cargo, which need to negotiate the narrow bridge, resulting in having to travel over the centre lines.

Let us examine the facts: they are damaging the road surface, cause danger to older residents and schoolchildren who have to cross at the most congested and dangerous point. The noise nuisance cannot be ignored. They rattle over manholes which have been repeatedly repaired. Some actually obstruct the pavement on Guisborough Road while they visit the paper shop, damage to the brickwork on the bridge and so the list grows longer.

The survey, carried out almost one year ago, is a snapshot and does not represent the actual facts.

I have frequently sampled traffic passing over the bridge. Only last Monday, between 8-10am I stood and witnessed 38 HGVs. One does not need to be a mathematician to conclude the true figure is much higher than the survey suggests.

The letter sent to Mr Hague states it was discussed with Mr Fletcher and the county officials - why was it not discussed with our local councillors? Or were they, like the residents, excluded?

I find it bizarre that Stokesley, only three miles along the road, managed to obtain a restriction of HGVs without problem, yet their problem was on a lesser scale than Great Ayton. The random placing of HGV route signs is not the answer, I know from experience, the only was forward is a lawful restriction.

Come on you councillors and officials, embrace the bigger picture, stop playing with numbers and start representing the views of your voters and the residents.

C H TANFIELD

Wainstones Close,

Great Ayton.

Traffic latest

Sir, - I refer to recent correspondence regarding the recent traffic survey undertaken by North Yorkshire county highways at the request of the Great Ayton Parish Council on behalf of some residents.

The residents, including your correspondents who live adjacent to the A173, had expressed concerns regarding the use of the A173 through Great Ayton by heavy commercial goods vehicles.

The discussion in respect to the survey included consideration of the numbers of vehicles travelling the route obviously associated with business in the locality itself, relative to the numbers travelling straight through the village from Stokesley and Guisborough.

In regard to the latter, effective enforcement of any restriction on the size of HCVs travelling the A173 is a major issue.

The county highways engineers have included in their work programme a review of the signposting for HCV vehicles at Stokesley and will enter into consultation with the adjacent local authority regarding the signposting at Guisborough.

After improved signage is in place, the engineer has agreed to undertake, as a monitoring exercise, a further survey of HCV traffic movements in the vicinity of Great Ayton.

COUN JOHN FLETCHER

Ward member for Great Ayton