Update from Petoskey Gravel Pit and Team Elmer’s and or Elmer’s Crane and Dozer proposed gravel pit.
The author is not an attorney, and this is not a legal opinion.
Michigan Section 257.726.
It is important when considering section 257.726 that we look at the State of Michigan Court of Appeals Oshtemo Charter Township vs Kalamazoo County Road Commission. ref: Oshtemo vs Kalamazoo.
- State of Michigan court of appeals said a township can adopt a truck route ordinance
- An adjoining township or city can object
- The County Road Commission can resolve objections
- The county road commission can’t void a “reasonable” truck route ordinance
In this case, the county road commission never made a determination that the Oshtemo truck route ordinance was unreasonable; and in the absence of that determination, the county road commission did not have the authority to void the Oshtemo truck route ordinance.
In this appeal it was determined that the county road commission did not have the authority to void the Oshtemo truck route ordinance.
Review Michigan Section 257.726:
257.726 Prohibitions, limitations, or truck route designations by local authorities and county road commissions; signs; written objection by adjoining township; violation as civil infraction.
(1) Local authorities and county road commissions with respect to highways under their jurisdiction, except state trunk line highways, by ordinance or resolution, may do any of the following:
(a) Prohibit the operation of trucks or other commercial vehicles on designated highways or streets.
(b) Impose limitations as to the weight of trucks or other commercial vehicles on designated highways or streets.
(c) Provide that only certain highways or streets may be used by trucks or other commercial vehicles.
(2) Any prohibitions, limitations, or truck route designations established under subsection (1) shall be designated by appropriate signs placed on the highways or streets. The design and placement of the signs shall be consistent with the requirements of section 608.
(3) If a township has established any prohibition or limitation under subsection (1) on any county primary road that an adjoining township determines diverts traffic onto a border highway or street shared by the township and the adjoining township, the adjoining township may submit a written objection to the county road commission having jurisdiction over the county primary road, along with a copy to the township that established the prohibition or limitation, on or before the later of March 1, 2009, or 60 days after the township approves the prohibition or limitation. The written objection shall explain how the prohibition or limitation diverts traffic onto the border highway or street shared by the township and the adjoining township. The county road commission shall then investigate the objection. The township and adjoining township shall cooperate with that investigation and negotiate in good faith to resolve the objection. If the objection is not resolved within 60 days after the township receives the copy of the written objection, the county road commission has the authority to, and shall, either approve or void the prohibition or limitation that is the subject of the objection within 60 days thereafter, which decision shall be final. For purposes of this subsection, “county primary road” means a highway or street designated as a county primary road pursuant to 1951 PA 51, MCL 247.671 to 247.675.
(4) A person who violates a prohibition, limitation, or truck route designation established pursuant to subsection (1) is responsible for a civil infraction.