Agenda item

The Council considered a motion from the Green group.

It was moved by Councillor Joanna Wright, seconded by Councillor Saskia Heijltjes, and following a vote, it was

NOT CARRIED

Council Notes:

1.  Strategic Aims of the Liveable Neighbourhoods Programme, also referred to as Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs):

LTNs aim to improve air quality, enable more trips by active travel, and reduce congestion.  However, these objectives are at risk of being undermined by poorly designed interventions that displace traffic from one set of residential streets onto another. The recent Camden Road bus gate E3418 posed this risk, as it would divert traffic to already congested residential areas like Snow Hill, Fairfield Park, Lambridge, and London Road. These areas already suffer from high levels of traffic, poor air quality, and insufficient active travel infrastructure, making the Camden Road bus gate a threat to the very goals it is supposed to support.

2.  Traffic Displacement and Congestion:

The lack of proper traffic modelling and pre-implementation analysis has resulted in unanticipated effects. The Camden Road bus gate E3418 would have caused adverse effects and without proper traffic modelling and pre-implementation analysis, the extent of these risks is opaque and questionable. The Full Business Case (FBC) fails to include essential data such as comprehensive traffic surveys or road safety assessments for affected areas like London Road, Snow Hill, and Fairfield Park. This oversight raises concerns that the council may be rushing to implement a scheme without fully understanding the potential for congestion and displacement across Bath’s residential areas.

3.  Increased Carbon Emissions and Air Pollution:

In line with the Council’s own research, 1 in 4 to 1 in 12 new asthma cases in UK children each year are linked to NO2 pollution from vehicle emissions. Areas like London Road and Snow Hill, which already suffer from air pollution due to heavy traffic, would likely see these conditions worsen if the Camden Road bus gate was implemented without proper evaluation of the consequences on air quality. The FBC completely overlooks the air quality impact of diverted traffic, particularly around schools, health centres, and residential areas like Fairfield Park. There is no assessment of how displaced traffic will affect pollution hotspots, nor does it address how the scheme could conflict with Bath’s Clean Air Zone objectives. This lack of foresight risks undermining the environmental goals of the LTN.

4.  Lack of Clear Evidence in the FBC:

The FBC fails to meet the standard of evidence-based decision-making required for such significant interventions. There are no measurable targets, traffic reduction assessments, air quality improvement data, or road safety evaluations in the FBC. This undermines the council’s ability to make an informed decision about whether the Camden Road bus gate will truly deliver on its intended benefits. The WECA approval process, which did not require an independent scrutiny of the FBC, raises questions about the lack of accountability and governance in this decision-making process.

5.  Absence of a Fully Modeled Traffic Management Plan:

Another flaw was that the Camden Road bus gate proposal E3418 did not provide a comprehensive traffic management plan. The FBC fails to address how the bus gate would interact with the broader traffic flows across Bath, particularly in the residential areas that will bear the brunt of traffic displacement. A properly designed traffic management strategy should include city-wide modelling, taking into account all affected areas, and ensuring that interventions like the bus gate will not cause harm to already vulnerable communities.

6.  Financial Risks:

The FBC does not provide transparency around procurement processes, consultancy costs, or the overall strategy behind the funding allocation. As demonstrated in previous projects, without independent cost-benefit analysis, there is a risk of overspending and under-delivering. The scheme’s financial justification is not evident, especially considering the public funding involved and the potential for adverse effects on local communities. Public money must be spent responsibly, and the lack of clear financial accountability and evidence for the benefits of this scheme raises serious concerns.

7.  Public Consultation and Stakeholder Engagement:

The council has repeatedly failed to engage adequately with affected communities during the consultation process. In the case of Southlands and New Sydney Place Emergency Traffic Regulation Orders (ETROs), residents and businesses raised concerns that were largely ignored. Similarly, the Camden Road bus gate has not been subject to meaningful consultation, particularly with those directly impacted by the displacement of traffic. The failure to engage with residents, businesses, and other stakeholders violates Department for Transport guidelines and calls into question the legitimacy of the consultation process. A transparent, inclusive consultation process is vital to ensuring that the scheme meets the needs of all communities, not just a select few.

Council Acknowledges:

1.  The Need for Evidence-Based Decision-Making:

The need for a clear, evidence-based approach to assessing the impacts of the Liveable Neighbourhoods programme. Decisions, particularly regarding modal filters, must be supported by robust data, including comprehensive traffic modelling, air quality assessments, and road safety evaluations.

2.  The Need for a Holistic Traffic Management Plan:

The importance of a city-wide traffic management (movement strategy). Any interventions, including the bus gate, must be part of a coordinated plan that considers the broader impacts on traffic flows across Bath.

3.  The Potential for Negative Impact on Local Communities:

The potential for disruption in communities such as Fairfield Park, Lambridge, London Road and Snow Hill, where traffic displacement could create new problems. Any measures must demonstrate a clear benefit for these areas, without causing further traffic or pollution.

4.  The Importance of Public Safety and Accessibility:

The need for public safety and accessibility in all traffic management decisions. Measures must ensure that residents, businesses, and emergency services can move freely without being delayed or adversely affected by the changes.

Council Resolves:

1.  To ask Cabinet to obtain funding to undertake:

A full traffic modelling exercise to assess the potential displacement of traffic and its impact across Bath, particularly in areas such as Fairfield Park, Lambridge, and Lansdown.

·  Independent Cost-Benefit Analysis: A clear, independent analysis to assess the financial risks and overall value for money of the scheme, ensuring that the anticipated benefits justify the investment.

·  Air Quality Assessment: A detailed air quality assessment to understand how traffic displacement will affect pollution levels in areas like London Road and the historic core of Bath, and to determine if the scheme will meet its environmental objectives.

·  Community Impact Assessment: A full community impact assessment, including an equality analysis, to understand the potential social and economic effects on local businesses, vulnerable groups, and residents.

2.  To Require a Strategic, Fully Modeled Traffic Management Plan for Bath:

Subject to securing funding, the Council resolves to develop a comprehensive, city-wide traffic management strategy, incorporating detailed traffic flow modelling across Bath. This plan should address the impacts of the bus gate within the broader context of traffic flows and congestion, ensuring that the city’s environmental goals are met without disrupting residential areas or the city centre. The strategy should also consider the optimisation of public transport to support these objectives, making Bath a more sustainable and accessible city for all.

3.  To Ensure a Thorough Public Consultation Process:

The Council resolves that any future decisions on the bus gate and Liveable Neighbourhoods programme must be subject to a transparent and thorough public consultation process. This process must involve all residents impacted, particularly those in the east of Bath, businesses, and stakeholders to ensure all concerns—particularly about traffic displacement, air quality, public safety and active travel are fully addressed.

[Notes;

1.  The above motion was lost with 5 Councillors voting in favour, 33 voting against and 6 abstentions.]