Meeting documents
Cabinet
Wednesday, 4th September, 2002
|
Bath & North East Somerset Council |
|||
|
MEETING: |
Executive |
AGENDA |
|
|
MEETING DATE: |
4th September 2002 |
||
|
TITLE: |
Northgate Priority Access Point - Consideration of Experimental Traffic Regulation Orders (1) Bath and North East Somerset District Council (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Driving) Experimental Order 2001 (2) Bath and North East Somerset District Council (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Left Turn)(One Way Traffic)(Prohibition of Driving)(Prohibition and Restriction of Waiting) Experimental; Order 2001 (3) Bath and North East Somerset District Council Variation Order (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Driving)(Variation) Experimental Order 2001 |
||
|
WARD: |
Abbey - with implications City wide |
||
|
AN OPEN PUBLIC ITEM |
|||
|
List of attachments to this report: Appendix 1 Decision Making Process |
|||
1 THE ISSUE
1.1 The experimental period for the Priority Access Point Scheme installed in Northgate Street and the associated traffic management measures will end on 29th September 2002 and a decision is required in advance of that date to ensure any necessary actions are carried out.
1.2 The fourth and final quarter's monitoring report has been considered by the Monitoring Group, Appendix 3.
1.3 The scheme has achieved its objectives of reducing the volume of traffic within Bath City Centre, of providing the opportunity for improved public transport services, a reduction in noise and air pollution in the city centre and an improved pedestrian environment for city centre users.
2 RECOMMENDATION
2.1 That the Executive considers the options to make permanent or remove the experimental orders in the light of views sought from Overview & Scrutiny Panel.
2.2 That the Executive either :-
a) makes permanent the following experimental traffic regulation orders:
(1) Bath and North East Somerset District Council (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Driving) Experimental Order 2001
(2) Bath and North East Somerset District Council (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Left Turn)(One Way Traffic)(Prohibition of Driving)(Prohibition and Restriction of Waiting) Experimental; Order 2001
(3) Bath and North East Somerset District Council Variation Order (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Driving)(Variation) Experimental Order 2001
Or
b) allows the following experimental traffic regulation orders to lapse at the end of the experimental period:
(1) Bath and North East Somerset District Council (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Driving) Experimental Order 2001
(2) Bath and North East Somerset District Council (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Left Turn)(One Way Traffic)(Prohibition of Driving)(Prohibition and Restriction of Waiting) Experimental; Order 2001
(3) Bath and North East Somerset District Council Variation Order (Various Roads, Northgate Area, Bath)(CI:TE Project)(Prohibition of Driving)(Variation) Experimental Order 2001
3 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
3.1 .a) If the orders are not made permanent then costs will be incurred in removing signage, reinstating pavements and converting to the original traffic scheme, or a modification thereto. These costs are estimated to be in the range of £5,000 to £150,000 (depending on extent of changes).
b) If the orders are made permanent without modification, there are no direct financial implications however, when legislation permits, a camera enforcement system is recommended to ensure cost-effective enforcement.
4 THE POLICY FRAMEWORK
4.1 National Policy
4.2 The Road Traffic Reduction Act 1997 placed a duty on councils to prepare traffic reduction strategies for their areas. The Local Transport Plan sets out the Authority's targets for this and asserts that the major prospect for traffic reduction is in the urban areas and particularly in their centres. The Local Transport Plan set specific targets for traffic reduction in Bath's City Centre. One of the key instruments by which this can be achieved is the Northgate Street priority access point.
4.3 Local Transport Plan Policy Background
4.4 The proposal to introduce a priority access point in Northgate Street is part of a policy framework covering the whole transport network across the city of Bath. At the time of the conception of the Priority Access Scheme this policy framework was set out in the Provisional Local Transport Plan for Bath and North East Somerset, July 1999. This stated that the council's overall transport vision was to be based around a number of guiding principles which include:-
· The need to provide high levels of accessibility for all whilst promoting environmental well being
· The need to reduce reliance on private cars
· The need to widen travel choice through policies which encourage walking, cycling and public transport
4.5 The combination of measures proposed for the city centre contributes to a policy of access and internal movement across the road network that favours walking, cycling and public transport. The city centre measures are supported by planned improvements to car parks, improved highway signage, the introduction of Urban Traffic Management Control (UTMC), public transport priorities at key junctions and improvements to pedestrian and cycle movements and crossing facilities at key junctions.
4.6 In July 2000 the Council adopted its full Local Transport Plan which as well as restating the above guiding principles confirmed a hierarchy of the five main categories of highway users which places pedestrians at its top followed by cyclists, public transport, freight (including deliveries) and lastly the private car.
4.7 Local Plan Policy Background
4.8 The policies and proposals of the Local Plan for Bath have to reflect the regional role which the city enjoys. Workers come into Bath from a wide area, including Bristol, North and West Wiltshire and Northavon, with these areas supplying housing for the city workers. The shopping centre attracts visitors from an even greater area, and a catchment population of around 300,000 has been estimated. Because of this the city has a wide range of shops, some of a very specialist nature. The city also acts as a centre for financial and professional services.
4.9 Three principle issues form the basis of the Local Plan, the underlying philosophy of conservation and the protection of the quality of the environment, the growing concern for the effects of new development including traffic congestion and the limitations on space for the city to grow. The Local Plan seeks to balance the need to conserve Bath's significant environmental assets whilst promoting economic vitality and a high quality of life.
4.10 With regard to the city centre in particular, the Local Plan seeks to maintain the attractiveness of the city centre shopping area and the position of Bath in the shopping hierarchy, by supporting the diversity of existing shopping, and retaining the compact central shopping area. The Local Plan acknowledges the role of the small and specialist shops and those supplying local needs, and also seeks to support these.
4.11 With regard to tourism, the Plan acknowledges Bath's role as a visitor attraction and the effects on the economy, whilst recognising the pressures this puts on the city in terms of traffic generation and the potential effects on the character of the city centre. The Plan encourages tourist related proposals which are also consistent with the other aims of the Plan., and seeks a more balanced distribution of visitors, especially longer stay visitors, throughout the year.
4.12 The Local Plan sets out specific aims for traffic management in the city centre under Policy T6 in which it states that the Council will have as its prime aim the preservation of the historic fabric, whilst retaining a vital central area with a balanced social, cultural and economic structure and will seek to achieve the following objectives
· Further environmental improvements for the benefit of pedestrians
· Further exclusion of through traffic and other unnecessary motorised vehicles
· Improved penetration by public transport vehicles
· Maintained or enhanced standards of access for cyclists and the mobility impaired
· Servicing that adequately meets the needs of new and existing commercial, cultural, residential and recreational activities within the central area, including emergency services.
4.13 A Vision for the City
4.14 On 16th December 1997 a shared vision was adopted for the future of the City of Bath as a Sustainable, Prosperous and Accessible Heritage City where:
· People can enjoy the ambience of this famous City
· People can enjoy a dynamic street life, open spaces and peaceful areas
· People can use attractive networks for walking, cycling and convenient public transport
· People can enjoy the benefits of a successful local economy.........
.............................................
with traffic managed to avoid the intrusion of the associated noise, danger and pollution.
5 THE OBJECTIVES
5.1 In order to consider the success of the scheme it is necessary to consider whether the objectives have been met. The objectives of the project are contained within the Statement of Reasons confirmed by the PT&E committee on 21st September 2000, and are:
· to reduce the volume of traffic within Bath City Centre,
· to provide the opportunity for improved public transport services,
· a reduction in noise and air pollution in the city centre and
· an improved pedestrian environment for city centre users.
5.2 The expected outcomes, adopted as part of the 3 Year Project Strategy 1999-2002) by Transportation Sub-committee on 12th January 1999, were:
· The potential to redistribute road space also creates opportunities to improve pedestrian and cycle networks, servicing and improvements for public transport users
· Reductions in traffic volume and speed reduces pollution and improves air quality
· Reductions in traffic volume and speeds should reduce accidents
· The enhancement of the centre for pedestrians will potentially boost the economy of the city by increasing `footfall'
· Promoting sustainable forms of transport offers car users viable alternatives
· Giving advantages to public transport providers will deliver the Quality Partnership improvements to services
5.3 The results of the monitoring exercise are given in greater detail in the 4th Quarter's Monitoring Report, Appendix 3, however the chart below shows the impact on the four key objectives of the Priority Access Point.
|
Objective |
Evidence 4th Quarter Monitoring Report - |
|
to reduce the volume of traffic within Bath City Centre, |
Those roads that feed directly into Northgate Street have experienced significant drops in traffic levels, up to 70%; Milsom street has experienced a drop of 40%; Walcot Street 18%; Manvers Street 7-18%; Queen's Square Place by 6-9%. (MR 3.4) |
|
to provide the opportunity for improved public transport services, |
Public transport journey times show varied results with the Park and Ride services showing overall improvements and service buses showing a directional mixture. The Service 13 which uses the Priority Access Point shows improvements in all but the weekday morning peak time period. (MR 3.3) |
|
a reduction in noise and air pollution in the city centre and |
The roads closer to the central area have sustained greater improvements in air quality than those further away although rare months show increases. (MR 3.15) |
|
an improved pedestrian environment for city centre users. |
On Street user surveys demonstrate that fewer interviewees found the thoroughfares overcrowded; fewer felt the traffic noise and congestion bothered them and more felt safe from traffic. (MR 3.1) |
5.4. While Parsons Brinkerhoff and Dennis Wilson Partnership, authors of the Quarterly Monitoring Reports, conclude:-
· Positive feedback from attitudinal surveys
· Reduced traffic speeds
· Improved air quality
· Overall city car parking usage relatively unaffected (apart from the Podium with 4% downturn)
· Bus Routes that pass through the PAS show comparative improvement
· Pedestrian numbers have fallen in the shopping hours
· The economic detriment identified (apart from Podium Car Park) is not a direct effect of the PAS.
5.5. The Chamber of Commerce conclude:-
· The PAS have severely damaged the economic fabric of the city to the annual value of £24m and 480 jobs
· Question whether the perceived benefits are worth this price
6 THE PROCESS
6.1 The Northgate Street Priority Access Point and Associated Traffic Management Measures were introduced through an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order made under Section 9 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and came into operation on 30th March 2001.
6.2 The purpose of introducing the experimental priority access point at Northgate Street was to facilitate the passage of public transport vehicles and pedestrians throughout the city centre, to improve the amenity of the city centre and to improve the overall environmental quality within the city centre.
6.3 The project was developed over a considerable period of time dating back to the Traffic and Environmental Study for Bath City Centre by Transport Planning Associates in 1989/90. This report, adopted for consultation by Bath City Council and Avon County Council in September 1990, included the proposal that north-south traffic movements through the city should be restricted in the Guildhall area.
6.4 A lengthy period of consultation and public involvement followed culminating, in December 1997, with the adoption of a shared vision for the future of the City of Bath
6.5 Further consultation including public exhibitions and the distribution of publicity material followed and are described in more detail in the Process Report at Appendix 1.
6.6 Ultimately at a meeting of the Full Council on 20th July 2000 it was resolved in principle to the installation at Northgate Street of an experimental priority access point and the associated traffic management measures. The details of the restriction, including the categories of vehicles to be exempted and hours of the restriction were decided at the PT&E committee meeting on 21st September 2000. Further details of the options considered are included in the Process Report at Appendix 1. At this meeting the monitoring process was established, Appendix 3.
6.7 The experimental period began on 30th March 2001 to run for no more than 18 months. During this period four quarterly monitoring reports were received covering the first 12 months of the experiment. These were reported to the Monitoring Group and to PT&E committee, expect for the 4th quarter's report, which is reported on in Appendix 3.
7 CONSULTATION AND INVOLVEMENT
7.1 The city centre project parameters were established by the Bath City Centre Team, a group of officers and representatives of groups with interests in the city centre. The Bath City Centre Team became the CI:TE Working Party and was expanded to include more interests.
7.2 In November/December 1998 a public exhibition was held to present the proposals which included the priority access proposals for both Northgate Street and Manvers Street. The responses were reported to 12th January 1999 PT&E Committee at which the resolution was made to investigate the impact of the priority access points.
7.3 During 1999 repeated discussions about the priority access points took place at the CI:TE Working Party meetings, at the City Centre Manager's regular retail meetings and through information in the City Centre Manager's newsletter which was sent to all city centre retailers. There was also extensive debate about the purpose and effectiveness of priority access points in the local press.
7.4 The Impact Assessment as reported to committee on 15th June 2000 and then to Full Council on 20th July 2000 included perception studies. These were commissioned in order to build a picture of the way in which people felt they might be affected by the introduction of a priority access point. Three groups were targeted; residents; visitors (both tourists and regional shoppers and access ). In addition 16 businesses were also involved. Individual traders and other groups also made representations about the priority access points and these were also reported.
7.5 Committee was advised that there was no legal requirement to exhibit the detailed design proposals for the scheme prior to making the experimental order as the first six months of the experiment are considered to be the statutory consultation period. After six months the Committee could consider the operation of the experimental order. These six months also constitute the objection period during which members of the public can make their objections in writing.
7.6 The monitoring process, was developed in consultation with consultants Savell, Bird and Axon, who represented a traders' group in the city centre and with public transport operators.
7.7 Petitions and Multiple Returns
Prior to the start of the experimental period considerable lobbying occurred including the distribution of reply slips to the public to return stating opposition to the `busgate'. 609 were returned via three commercial premises of which 190 were from outside of Bath.
During the early months of the scheme Waitrose Supermarket made a comments book available to their customers wishing to comment on the scheme. An analysis of 486 entries gives 30% in favour, 64% against and 6% other comments.
7.8 Throughout the experiment a considerable amount of correspondence has been received regarding the Priority Access Scheme. However, perhaps surprisingly, few letters actually constitute objections to the scheme, the majority being requests for specific exemptions to the scheme, for example for `orange/blue badge holders', for local residents, for certain types of businesses operating within the City Centre, for touring coaches, for privately hired school buses and store to home delivery vehicles. A summary of the correspondence received during the experimental period is included in Appendix 2 along with the Officers' response.
7.9 Through the experimental process representations have been received from members of the public taking the opportunity to address the PT&E Committee regarding the scheme.
8 RISKS
8.1 Removal: The measures for traffic reduction as identified in the Local Transport Plan will continue to be implemented and will contribute to traffic reduction and restraint on the wider road network in Bath where traffic volumes are increasing. The planned improvements to alternatives to car use would continue. However conditions within the city centre are less likely to improve and will indeed deteriorate with fewer measures to directly restrain traffic, less opportunity for improvements to public transport and pedestrian and cycling facilities.
8.2 The expected improvements to cross city public transport links may not be forthcoming or may take longer to achieve and the Authority's commitment to the recently agreed Bus Quality Partnership would be questioned.
8.3 There would be fewer opportunities within the city centre for increasing pedestrian space and improving pedestrian flow and access to and through the centre as a result of a reduction in traffic volume.
8.4 Air quality and noise pollution within the city centre are likely to deteriorate.
8.5 The quality of Bath as a destination and the opportunities for enhancement will be more limited which could affect the role of Bath as a local and regionally important shopping centre and as a tourist destination. Bath's city centre environment will be measured against rival historic and modern centres where more has been done to improve the quality of the visitor and shopping experience for all users.
8.6 Diminished ability to attract additional funding from Government for Public Transport improvements
8.7 Continuance: Continuing negative media coverage and consequences for profile and perception of the City in Sub-Regional markets
8.8 Potential national economic slow down and inevitable local impacts being identified as the effects of the Priority Access Point.
8.9 The suggested economic consequences continue, i.e. current downward trend with causation being attributed to the Priority Access Point.
9 REPORT FROM PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, LA21 AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL ON NORTHGATE STREET PRIORITY ACCESS POINT.
9.1 The Planning, Transportation, LA21 and Economic Development Overview and Scrutiny Panel met on 29th July 2002 to consider the Priority access Point and to receive statements from invited witnesses and members of the public.
9.2 The Panel met again on 7th August 2002 to finalise their report, Appendix 4.
|
Contact person |
Barbara Selby Traffic and Transportation Manager - Access |
|
Background papers |
Reports made to: Full Council on: 20th July 2000 PT&E Committee on; 20th January 2000; 20th April 2000; 21st September 2000; 29th March 2001; 20th September 2001; 13th December 2001; 31st January 2002; 22nd April 2002 and Transportation Sub on 9th June 1998; 4th August 1998; 20th October 1998;12th January 1999; 3rd August 1999; 5th October 1999; 5th December 2000; 14th June 2001; Quarterly Monitoring Reports Local Transport Plan |