Issue - meetings

The six week public consultation on the Clean Air Zone (CAZ) options was one of the most comprehensive engagement exercises undertaken by the authority with over 8,400 responses.  It has not been possible to fully analyse all of the responses within the original timeline due to the volume and the number of comprehensive responses received in the last three days of the consultation period.

To adhere to the timetable originally set presents a risk that the Council could be legally challenged on the grounds of a flawed consultation and a Business Case that has not recognised the full extent of the very detailed and technical submissions made by local residents and interested parties.

This report therefore sets out the options for a revised timeline for the delivery of the project.

Councillor Tim Ball made an ad-hoc statement by saying that the Cabinet was legally obliged to make the decision this year, and it should not wait for March or any other month next year.

Councillor Richard Samuel made an ad-hoc statement by saying that the Cabinet Member responsible for the Clean Air Zone suggested that further direction on this matter would be considered by the Cabinet in 6 to 8 weeks from now.  Councillor Samuel expressed his doubt that this Cabinet would make any decision during the purdah period, and suggested that the decision would be made after Local Elections in May 2019.  Councillor Samuel was concerned that Council would be exposed to financial risk by delaying the decision on the Clean Air Zone.  Councillor Samuel recognised that there was excellent response from the public, and that the officers would need some time to get the feedback, though this would not stop the Cabinet making the decision before purdah period.

Councillor Dine Romero commented that she would be interested in mitigation measures for those who would not be able to afford newer and compatible cars, those who were providing essential services to the community and what alternatives in transport could be provided.

Councillor Bob Goodman introduced the report.

Councillor Goodman said that residents and businesses had taken the time to engage with the Council and as such, they have deserved a proper response. This was important given the unique nature of Bath which was one of only two entire cities designated by UNESCO as World Heritage Sites (the other being Venice). The area surrounding the city was also designated. Bath was a major tourist destination whilst it was also a key transit point between the south coast and the motorway network. Therefore, the Council had to balance addressing air quality, that had the potential to be a highly complex and controversial issue, with measures that may be perceived to unfairly “penalise” residents and businesses, when the causes of the poor air quality also relate to transiting traffic, tourism and the topography of the city and surrounding area.

As a responsible public body, the Council has taken its duties and responsibilities seriously and has demonstrated best endeavours to comply with the Government Directive and legal requirements. It should also be noted that the Council was significantly further ahead in this process than a number of other local authorities provided with an air quality direction.

Whilst the volume and complexity of responses to the consultation was unprecedented, certain themes were emerging, these include:

•  Suggestions to either extend or reduce the boundary of the zone

•  Other alternative measures to address the air quality levels

•  Diversion routes to avoid ‘rat runs’

•  Identification of impacts of the proposals on specific groups of people, specific localities and businesses

•  Suggestions on mitigation measures such as; charging variations, public transport measures, access restrictions, infrastructure improvements, parking and transport management measures and development of low emission transport modes.

The Joint Air Quality Unit, commonly  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68