Issue - decisions

To agree:

When noting the information relating to the public consultation responses, key stakeholder engagement and traffic and air quality monitoring and in particular, Appendix F: New Sydney Place and Sydney Road Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO): Summary of key outcomes, that:

• The aim of the scheme, in line with the wider Liveable Neighbourhoods programme, is to encourage through traffic to remain on the main roads.

• Specifically, the aim of this trial is to prevent motorists from using New Sydney Place and Sydney Road as a shortcut to avoid the main roads, and to create a safer environment for everyone walking or cycling through the area. 

• 75% of the traffic using Sydney Road before the trial was through traffic.  The trial has reduced the number of vehicles entering New Sydney Place by 85%, and Sydney Road by 70% (while maintaining vehicle access to homes). 

• Traffic monitoring was carried out during periods when the A36 was open at Limpley Stoke, not during periods when the A36 was shut at Limpley Stoke for road works.

• Whilst the monitoring shows more vehicles using the A36 Beckford Road (a principle alternative route and part of the Primary Route Network) this has not translated into extended average queue lengths and / or journey times.  The data shows that the change in queue length and journey times for those driving along the A36 is negligible. 

• Those that used to drive through Sydney Road prior to the trial typically used to save, on average, between c.26 and c.40 seconds on their journey compared to staying on the main A36.  They now have to use the main A36 and have seen an increase in journey time, but on average that increase is only between c.23 and c.41 seconds

• In simple terms, moving the traffic from New Sydney Place / Sydney Road on to the main A36 has made no significant difference to the travel time on the A36.

• Air quality was monitored before and during the trial at 9 sites to ascertain whether the trial had a detrimental effect. There was no deterioration in air quality. 

• Those responding to the consultation from outside of the scheme area and whose main mode of travel was a private motor car, expressed the greatest level of objection, citing congestion and increased pollution as the main themes for their objection.

• Those living closest to the scheme are most supportive citing reasons of how it has improved pedestrian and cyclist safety and improved the area.

• Stakeholder engagement through work with Sustrans and delivery of pop-up events has shown that whilst criticisms exist, there has been a shift in attitude to people being positive about the benefits of the scheme and facilitating walking and cycling in the scheme area.  The Bath Walking Wheeling and Cycling Links project will further improve connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists to support the aim of the Liveable Neighbourhood programme to improve residential streets and encourage safe, active and more sustainable forms of travel.

In conclusion, whilst a majority of the respondents to the consultation oppose the trial being made permanent, the reasons cited for objection (increased congestion and pollution) are not supported by the hard data from traffic and air quality monitoring. I agree that the results of the trial demonstrate that the scheme meets our Liveable Neigbourhood policy, achieves the aim of keeping through traffic on the main road, and the benefits of this scheme outweigh any disbenefits.

Based upon consideration of the above information, to confirm support to make the scheme permanent as soon as possible.  This will be reflected within the formal statutory ETRO decision-making process, noting that the final sign-off is via a delegated decision made by the Director of Place Management within which the Cabinet Member and ward members, will have the opportunity to give formal comment.