The news, articles, papers and videos here are selected to provide background, current ideas, opinion and inspiration on urban transport issues that are relevant for Bath. They also offer insight into how other cities are addressing the same issues that challenge Bath.
WECA Consultation about Bath City Centre
The West of England Combined Authority (WECA) is consulting about two modest proposals to improve cycle and bus circulation in Bath city centre. Details can be found at: www.haveyoursaywest.co.uk. WECA are holding two drop-in sessions at Bath Cricket Club on 29th November from 1400-1900; and at the Percy Community Centre on 6th December, also from 1400-1900. The consultation ends on 24th December.
Liveable Neighbourhoods – next phase
Cleveland Bridge Weight Limit
https://newsroom.bathnes.gov.uk/news/temporary-weight-limit-cleveland-bridge-extended
Air Quality Improvement in Bath
The Plan for Drivers
Bath Rugby Stadium Travel Plan
Bus operators call for congestion charges to be nationwide
Bath Park & Rides – Contract Renewal
On 1st Mar 22, Somerset Live published an article on Bath’s Park & Rides (P&R), the contract renewal of which is due later this year. The text is shown below. In its Manifesto, the Alliance supports P&R sites and would wish to see more of them, open for longer and flexibly adapted. We therefore broadly agree with this announcement; though consultation on details should take place.
“Bath park and rides could stay open until midnight under new plans
BY Stephen Sumner Local Democracy Reporter 1 MAR 2022
Buses could run to Bath’s park and rides until almost midnight in a major shakeup of
the service. The facilities at Lansdown, Odd Down and Newbridge that currently do
not run past 8.40pm Monday to Saturday and just after 6pm on Sundays.
The West of England Combined Authority (Weca) is asking potential contractors to
price up running services to and from the city centre until as late as 11.40pm on
weekdays and Saturdays or until after 10pm on Sundays.
There is currently an hourly service to the Royal United Hospital from Odd Down but
the new eight-year contracts could link the hospital to the Lansdown and Newbridge
park and rides.
Tender documents show that in 2020/21 during the height of the coronavirus
lockdown 319,564 passengers used the three services, bringing in £237,080 in
revenue. As of December 2021 passenger numbers had recovered and more than
doubled to 767,956, with a combined spend of £635,461, almost half of which was at
Lansdown. Figures for 2019/20 are not given.
The Weca tender suggests the price of an adult return ticket could be cut from £3.60
in the week to £2.50, while up to five could travel together on a group ticket for just
£5.40 in the first year of the new contract.
It also floats the idea of £4 a day “pay before travel car park option” for up to seven
people, payable before boarding the bus, and possible overnight parking options.
A Weca spokesperson said: “The current Bath park and ride contract comes to an
end on August 27. In order to award a new contract, the West of England Combined
Authority in partnership with Bath and North East Somerset Council need to put out a
new tender to bus operators.
“Within the tender is a request for operators to provide prices for different operating
models – for example operators have been asked to bid for passengers to pay
individually, by group ticket or to pay per car (this is a price per car for bus travel and
not car parking which will still be free for bus passengers).
“The tender also includes options for the services to run later in the evenings, which
is an aspiration of the combined authority for all services in the region. Until the
tender process is completed later in the year we are unable to comment on exactly
what the new service provision will look like.”
B&NES Council has previously revealed plans to turn the park and ride sites into
transport interchanges that would act as stepping stones between the city and the
rest of North East Somerset, with options to hire bikes or e-scooters and bespoke
buildings with lockers and showers. The tender documents say: “The park and ride
sites will be developed as transport hubs during the life of this contract. Other
scheduled services may call at the site for travel to destinations other than Bath City
Centre. It is not anticipated that this will cause significant abstraction of passengers
from the contracted services.”
Firms can express an interest in the contracts by clicking here.”
Alliance Press Statement
The Bath Alliance for Transport and Public Realm welcomes B&NES Council’s ‘Journey to Net Zero’ as an important development of the 2014 Bath Transport Strategy and last year’s Bath Transport Delivery Action Plan.
It is very good that ‘Journey to Net Zero’ now includes within its scope the need for an overall traffic plan to provide a framework for Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and the reduction of traffic through the city centre. The city is still heavily congested by traffic, with consequential poor air quality. These initiatives need to be supported by an overall fall in traffic volumes through the development and implementation of a comprehensive transport plan. This must reduce traffic intrusion throughout the city by means of constraints, further action on parking, greatly improved public transport and other measures. These cannot be left as aspirations for the longer-term. Much remains to be done to address Bath’s transport problems and to set out how changing the way we travel will contribute to the target of Net Zero.
We call on B&NES Council to establish a Stakeholder Consultative Review Board to support the Council in developing solutions which not only address the problems of transport in Bath, but which also ensure that the concerns of those who live and work in the city are understood.
___________________________________________________________________
About the Alliance:
The Bath Alliance for Transport and Public Realm (“The Alliance”) is twenty two Bath organisations joined informally to provide a unified voice for the majority of Bath stakeholders with vital shared interests in excellent transport and public realm. It has come together to support B&NES Council’s transport effort in Bath and to urge the council to develop and deliver a comprehensive, long term transport plan for the city. The Alliance does not campaign for individual transport initiatives but it does offer guidance on the framework for a plan through its Manifesto .
The Alliance believes a Transport Plan for Bath would start with a Vision of Bath as:
A beautiful city in a green setting with vibrant public spaces, a historic centre free of all but essential traffic, clean air, good mobility and excellent transport infrastructure
The Alliance members are:
Aviva Investors | Bristol and Bath Area Trams Association | Bath BID | Bath Bridge | Bath City Football Club | Bath Festivals | Bath Independent Hospitality Association | Bath Preservation Trust | Bath Spa University | Bath Rugby | British Land | Curo | First West of England | Kaleidoscope Collection | NHS B&NES, Swindon & Wilts ICB | NHS RUH | St John’s Foundation | Sustrans | SU Bath | University of Bath | Walk Ride Bath | Wessex Water
7th Feb 22
Journey to Net Zero – Alliance Comments
1. This report is focused on the transport aspects of the Journey to Net Zero. As the Alliance’s main interest is reducing traffic congestion and air pollution, and improving the degraded public realm of Bath, these aspects are of primary interest to us. However, the document does not cover a raft of other aspects of the generation of CO2 in the city, such as domestic and office heating, the design of new buildings, the problems of insulating and heating Listed Buildings, woodburning stoves, or waste disposal.
2. Hence the title of the document is a misnomer. We believe that the title might be expanded to something on the lines: “Journey to Net Zero – Part 1. Bath Transport”, with the implication that other papers on housing, heating, etc., are to follow.
3. Overall, the Alliance finds this report helpful, as it contains many measures that it has been calling for, albeit that important initiatives to reduce traffic intrusion remain as aspirations in the longer-term ‘Developing future projects’ category (page 33 onwards). It is probably inevitable that the issues must be addressed incrementally, but the next stage should be to turn the ‘future projects’ into plans.
4. Therefore, while we broadly support the ‘Journey to Net Zero’, we believe that much work remains to be done to address Bath’s transport problems. The Alliance would very much like to work with the Council on the next phase of work. We hope that the Council will give serious consideration to our proposals for a Stakeholder Board (which could include but not be limited to Alliance members).
5. Our specific comments are as follows:
p.7 We are pleased that the Vision statement retains the commitment to ‘reducing the intrusion of vehicles, especially in the historic core’. We believe that this should be elevated to become one of the ‘policy themes’ set out at p.3. It would be useful if the plan defined the ‘historic core’; which might include the area covered by the Public Realm and Movement Strategy (i.e. including the Circus area, Royal Crescent and the Pulteney Estate).
p.17 We would hope that the powers the Council is seeking over moving traffic offences will include breaches of the HGV weight limit, which are not specifically mentioned.
p.19 The Alliance has already commented on WECA’s Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP). Overall, it seems commendable, though the Government’s Enhanced Partnership scheme appears not to be quite as beneficial as some might hope. The BSIP addresses most of the essential components of an effective bus system: one that can potentially compete with car journeys and shift modal share towards public transport. Public Transport should also be affordable. However, welcome as it is, we understand that the Sustainable Transport Fund cannot be used to subsidise bus services. Without funding support to permit fares that fill buses with car drivers, the BSIP will struggle to meet its objectives. Road User Charging and increased revenue from parking might offer a way.
p.20. Reducing the intrusion of traffic will require ‘stick’ as well as the various ‘carrots’ mentioned. This should include use of parking control and traffic management to discourage driving into the centre and encourage the use of alternatives, including park and ride (P&R). The P&Rs are currently under-utilised at almost all times and are a viable and immediately available alternative to driving into the city (except from the east). Pricing should be used to encourage use of P&R.
p.27(6) We warmly welcome the M4 to Dorset Coast Connectivity Study, and hope that it will lead to proposals to enable through-HGV traffic to be removed from the city.
p.31(2) Go Ultra Low West and 41(1) Innovative Parking Provision: We understand there is likely to be a significant delay in provision of practical on-street EV charging facilities in Bath, currently blocked by lack of a plan to provide the necessary power grid by Western Power Distribution.
p.41(3) We look forward to seeing the Bath Top of Town Transport and Movement Study, which is potentially a very important document in relation to the Alliance vision for Bath. We would welcome being involved before the study is finalised.
p.42(5) We give cautious support to the concept of city centre traffic cells (in effect a city centre Liveable Neighbourhood). However, the current sketch on p.42 provides no detail and hence merely causes worry to consultees: much more detail being required, preferably in a series of stakeholder workshops. As the Alliance Vision includes ‘a city centre free of all but essential traffic’ *, we would welcome measures that ‘would remove all through traffic from the ‘Top of Town’ and the wider city centre’ However, we believe that this would require a comprehensive traffic plan to address potential traffic displacement to other residential areas.
The plan must include measures to reduce the overall volume of traffic entering and passing through Bath, so freeing up road space for some of the traffic which would no longer pass through the centre, and allow faster and more reliable bus services. It is imperative that overall and permanent reduction of traffic in the city is a linked target or the various schemes proposed, such as Liveable Neighbourhoods, will likely result in displacement of vehicles onto adjacent roads (see also p.44 below). As stated above, Road User Charging might offer an effective way.
p.44(6) The Alliance supports the concept of Liveable Neighbourhoods but has consistently argued that these need to be considered in the context of a traffic management plan. Experience with the Clean Air Zone shows how traffic measures can lead to traffic diversion and unintended congestion. Therefore we very much welcome the statement that the Council ‘will identify and assess key arterial routes to develop a circulation plan’.
p.45(8) The list of demand management measures should include parking control and traffic management (see our comment on p.20 above).
p.45(9) We are pleased that the previous flawed coach strategy has been scrapped.
p.51(3) We welcome the recognition of the need to address access from the east of Bath which offers an alternative to private car use.
Final dated 5th Feb 22
*Mirrored in the Council’s Vision statement of “reducing the intrusion of vehicles, especially in the historic core”.
Birmingham to become a super-sized Low Traffic Neighbourhood
A City Without Cars Is Already Here, and It’s Idyllic
B&NES Local Plan Partial Update Consultation – Alliance Comments
1. The Bath Alliance for Transport and Public Realm (‘The Alliance’) is an association of 22 major employers, institutions, businesses, housing providers, residents, public transport providers, universities and custodians of Bath representing a spectrum of transport interests across the city. The members share a common goal of resolving the city’s transport problems.
2. Excellent transport and public realm lie at the heart of realising Bath’s full potential as a city. Currently, Bath is falling far short of its potential. The city suffers from high levels of traffic congestion, which prevent free movement of pedestrians, deter cyclists, block buses, impose economic costs and spoil the city experience for residents, workers and visitors. High levels of air pollution, largely caused by vehicles, harm the health of residents, workers and visitors and damage the historic buildings. Vehicles in Bath cause a significant amount of the city’s carbon emissions, contributing to the climate emergency. Bath has a dysfunctional transport system, with over-reliance on private cars, inadequate public transport alternatives, and a free-for-all for commercial vehicles.
LPPU
3. Many of the changes proposed in the LPPU are designed to incorporate and reflect the climate emergency declaration, the Clean Air Plan and the liveable neighbourhoods strategy. The Alliance welcomes this as these policies all tend towards reducing private car use. The Alliance supports the Bath Transport Strategy and welcomes the development of the Bath Transport Delivery Action Plan to implement the Strategy. We fully endorse the statement at para 99, page 28 of Part 2 (Bath) of the existing Local Plan that: “The delivery of the [Bath Transport] Strategy is essential to enable the city to meet its growth objectives and to improve the quality of life within the city. Its delivery will work towards the creation of a city centre that is free of all but essential traffic, and which provides an environment that is attractive for businesses and visitors on which the city’s economy relies, as well as for those who live and work in Bath.” This closely aligns with the Alliance’s vision for Bath.
4. However, we consider the proposed LPPU to be unsound in that, while it recognises the need to reduce car dependency and achieve modal shift from private cars, it fails to set out measures to discourage private car use such as parking control to discourage private cars from coming into the city, or traffic management to reduce through traffic both in the central area and the city as a whole. Reducing traffic coming into and through the historic core is vital, but this will require a comprehensive traffic management plan to reduce overall traffic volumes in the city and avoid simply displacing traffic elsewhere.
5. Through traffic in the city as a whole is a key issue, and we are dismayed by the proposal to remove from the Plan Part 1, para 582, p212: “The Council remains concerned with the impact of through traffic, particularly HGVs, on the WHS. This is compounded by the incomplete nature of the Trunk Road Network to the east of the city. The Council will work with neighbouring authorities, including Wiltshire Council, to address the problem of through traffic in Bath, particularly traffic that currently uses the A36-A46 route through the city and continue to press Highways England and Transport Ministers to take steps for solutions to be identified and funded in the next Road Investment Strategy to be published in 2020.”
6. This is regrettable, particularly given the Council’s stated intention to reduce HGV through traffic and reintroduce an HGV weight limit on Cleveland Bridge. It is also inconsistent with the statement in the existing Local Plan, Part 2, para 98, p.28: “Working with the Highways Agency, Wiltshire and other authorities to develop proposals and strategies to remove through traffic and HGVs, in particular, from Bath.” The section is therefore unsound as there is a core need for a different north-south route running east of Bath, instead of over the Cleveland Bridge along fragile historic sites on Bathwick Street and London Road; this could be in Wiltshire, or along the A34-M4, or branching off the Batheaston Bypass, but it needs real engagement and serious work with Wiltshire. Para 582 should be retained in the LPPU and the issue treated with urgency.
7. Part 1, p.213, para 589b – climate emergency – the proposed changes include a target of a 25% reduction in car and van mileage per person by 2030. ‘Mileage per person’ is difficult to measure. Why not just aim for a 25% reduction in vehicle numbers? Also, as noted above, there are no measures directly aimed at discouraging cars and vans. Simply encouraging alternatives will not be enough to change driver behaviour, so we conclude that this section is unsound.
8. Part 1, pp 218-221, para 618 and Policy ST6– we welcome the recognition that park and ride has an important role in reducing car use by providing an alternative to driving into the city. We also welcome the idea that the park and ride (P&R) services, at existing and new facilities, could be expanded to become “Interchange Hubs”.
9. Given this recognition of the importance of park and ride in reducing traffic into the city, it is disappointing that the Council has concluded that there are no deliverable sites for a P&R east of Bath (para 619 revision). It is essential, if traffic into the centre is to be reduced, that people travelling into Bath from the east have a viable alternative to the private car. This should be treated as a matter of high importance and urgency, and hence this section is unsound.
Transport and Development SPD
10. Section 4 – parking standards – para 4.5.1, p51, sets out a ‘Bath city centre’ Parking Standards Zone which appears to be coterminous with the Bath Clean Air Zone (rather than the city centre as defined in the current Local Plan). We note that in this Zone, 0.5 spaces will be permitted for C3 dwelling houses and zero for other use classes. Given the severe space constraints within the area, this seems reasonable.
11. However, we note that the remainder of the City is proposed to be included in a ‘Zone B – Outer Bath, Keynsham and Saltford’. We believe that the constraints within the city warrant the retention of a separate Bath Outer Zone with stricter standards appropriate to the city, and on this basis the draft SPD is unsound.
Final dated 2nd Oct 21
B&NES Cabinet agrees to proceed with LTNs
At their meeting on 23 June 2021, B&NES Cabinet agreed to a first phase ‘rollout’ of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in 12 locations in Bath:
New Sydney Place (Bathwick); Great Pulteney Street/St Johns Road area (Bathwick); Circus/Lower Lansdown/Marlborough Building/Royal Victoria Park/Cork Street area (Kingsmead & Lansdown); Edgerton Road/Cotswold Road (Moorlands); Chelsea Road (Newbridge); Lyme Road/Charmouth Road (Newbridge); Oldfield Lane & First/Second/Third Avenues (Oldfield Park); Mount Road (Southdown); Church St & Prior Park Rd (Widcombe & Lyncombe); Entry Hill (Widcombe & Lyncombe); Walcot Phase 1: London Road, Snow Hill, Kensington Gardens and adjacent roads (Walcot); Southlands (Weston).
The intention is that, following consultation and equalities impact assessments, the Low Traffic Neighbourhoods will be introduced using experimental traffic orders, allowing them to be tested and giving six months for objections to be submitted.
Below is the link to a fascinating video about the recent transformation of traffic in Ghent, Belgium. Note the emphasis placed on first developing a Traffic Movement Plan (cf our Traffic Movement blog at Traffic Movement – Bath Alliance for Transport and Public Realm):
On 15th March 2021 Bath’s Clean Air Zone started and this was commemorated in film by Rob Bryher of the charity Possible. It features Cllr Sarah Warren, Cabinet Member for Climate Emergency, Cllr Dr Kumar (Bathwick), and Robin Kerr, Alliance Coordinator. See below to view it:
Somerset Live interview with Robin Kerr 1st Apr 21.
Alliance questions to Council’s webinar on Cleveland Bridge 29th Mar 21 and responses.
Alliance response to B&NES’ Bath Transport Delivery Action Plan consultation dated 27.2 21
Alliance response to B&NES’ Local Plan Update Options consultation dated 4.2. 21
Alliance comments on WECA Bus Strategy dated Feb 20
Low Traffic Neighbourhoods: Stopping Rat Runs | London Living Streets
Three Stages to Better Bus Services: using the Bus Services Act | Campaign for Better Transport
New York’s Streets? Not so mean anymore | Janette Sadik-Khan | YouTube
Zurich: Where People Are Welcome and Cars Are Not | STREETFILMS
Recent Comments