Bid to review rapid bus scheme thrown out
Politicians last night voted to plough on with a controversial £60 million drive to tackle congestion in Bath.
Opposition Liberal Democrats had attempted to put the brakes on the Bath Transport Package, which includes the £16 million Bus Rapid Transit project.
At a stormy meeting, they accused the council's ruling Tory cabinet of turning a deaf ear to concerns over the scheme, which would create a new segregated bus route in Newbridge.
Residents opposed to the BRT, which they say will be an environmentally-damaging waste of money, protested before a meeting of Bath and North East Somerset Council last night.
But Conservatives, Labour and independent councillors teamed up to vote down a move by the Liberal Democrats to get an independent review of the plans.
Instead, the council voted simply to "engage with residents" and crack on with the package, which also includes contentious plans for a new park and ride site at Bathampton.
The Response2Route pressure group, buoyed by a poll on the Chronicle's website www.thisisbath.co.uk showing 80 per cent opposition to the BRT, also handed over a 2,000-signature petition to B&NES last night.
During the council meeting, an overspill room had to be opened to accommodate the protesters.
The growing divide between the biggest parties at the Guildhall over the BRT intensified last night amid claim and counter-claim about exactly how the route had been first approved.
Tories accuse the opposition of going back on initial support for the principle of the BRT, which appeared as a line on a map in a planning blueprint to which all parties signed up two years ago.
The Liberal Democrats say the plan has changed since then, and that walkers and cyclists would be marginalised by the latest scheme.
The cabinet has warned that any changes to the package would risk the city losing around £50 million of Government funding to sort out Bath's traffic nightmares.
Deputy council leader Cllr Malcolm Hanney said that if Bath's transport issues were not addressed, the city's economic growth could be stifled.
Tories say plans for the BRT route have already been reviewed by independent experts who concluded that creating a segregated section on a former railway line which is now a popular recreation area would be more cost-effective than using existing roads.
Conservative politician Cllr Richard Maybury (Lambridge) said: "After years of increasing congestion, these plans are a big step forward in keeping Bath moving. The new and expanded park and rides will take thousands of extra cars off Bath's roads and the improved bus routes will benefit thousands of transport users across the region. It's just a shame that cross-party support for this scheme has broken down."
Party colleague Cllr Colin Barrett (Con, Weston) added: "Attempts by Liberal Democrats to put the brakes on these improvements would be a one-way route to gridlock. The plans for the rapid transit route have been detailed since before I was a councillor, yet the Liberal Democrats now want to backtrack on their previous support at massive cost to taxpayers."
The BRT would run from an expanded Newbridge Park and Ride site through the Western Riverside and the city centre to the new facility at Bathampton.
The package also includes expanding sites at Odd Down and Lansdown and improving existing bus services.
Opposition councillor Andrew Furse (Lib Dem, Kingsmead), who led the move to get the BRT route reviewed, accused Tories of "quibbling".
"We are still not convinced that all the alternatives have been properly looked at and that there has been real and meaningful consultation. Once again the Conservatives have shut their ears to the protests which have been raised by the very people who will be worst affected by the scheme.
"The Conservatives seem only to be concerned with quibbling about who voted for what and when in the past. But residents care more about what is on the table right now. It is clear that the other parties do not care about residents' concerns."
Cllr Caroline Roberts (Lib Dem, Newbridge), who represents people most affected by the route, said the BRT and the expansion of Newbridge Park and Ride would affect up to 1,000 people's homes in one way or another.
"It has been said by some people that there is a lot of fuss over the loss of just a half a dozen gardens. In fact we have counted the numbers and there are up to 1,000 residents who will be affected by the new road outside their houses, or the new extension to the Newbridge Park and Ride.
"The present situation is different in many ways to that agreed in the local transport plan, so the Tories should listen to the electorate and agree to an independent review to show the people that they are listening."
Protesters fighting the scheme say it will become a magnet for anti-social behaviour.
At the protest outside the Guildhall, campaigner Jo McCarron said: "We are here to protest againt the BRT because we feel that we haven't been given any facts that the BRT will do what they say it will.
"We have not seen any evidence of cost benefits or a feasibility study.
"This scheme threatens Newbridge and Lower Weston as a residential area,and it will also deliver very limited benefits at a huge cost.
"There are major feasibility issues and financial risk which have not been properly assessed.
"The council have decided in favour of the scheme before even completing an impact assessment.
"At night the roadway will become a magnet for mopeds, joyriders and anti-social behaviour which the council will not be able to control.
"We just wanted to be out here to show the amount of people who are upset about this.
"The council need to listen to us and they are not."
Sue Greco, 62, of Newbridge Road, said: "My garden is right at the bottom of where they propose to put the bus lane.
"I don't want the noise or the pollution that will come with this.
"I think this route will be open to vandalism – it will become dangerous.
"I am definitely against this – we have used the lane to walk the dogs and take our grandchildren out. I have lived here for 35 years.
"My house will be de-valued because of this and they do not care.
"The council need to listen to us about this but they don't and won't."
Pippa Page, 49, from Newbridge, who was at the demonstration with her husband Robert, said: "It is a green belt area and is special because of its outstanding beauty.
"A normal person living in Newbridge wouldn't be able to put up a loft extension because the council would have a problem with it but yet they seem to be able to do as they please."
34 Comments
View all
by Steve, PSJ
Monday, November 24 2008, 12:30PM
“Swap traffic light controlled junctions for large roundabouts.
Make all bus lanes available to cars with 2+ people.
Scrap the Bus Gate, it is causing congestion elsewhere by forcing traffic to take longer journeys, still within the city.
Start planning for a viable Ring Road to enable existing through traffic to completely bypass the City.
Change the Park & Ride payment, from Per bus passenger, to per car parked. Presently there is no economical incentive for cars with 3-4 pasengers to use park & ride. Also if you are doing serious shopping, you would need to go back & ffrth several times to drop thing at your car. Alternatively, if you needed to buy a single item from visiting 1 shop, then again it is not economical to use P&R.
Task all Bath Employers to provide Annual Park & Ride Passes for their employees. If you used the money being spent on BRT to subsidise this, it would be more viable & effective.
Lastly, to nothing is not an option, but to spend millions doing the wrong thing, which will make vitually no difference IS WORSE than doing nothing!”
by HS, Bath
Saturday, November 22 2008, 4:46PM
“Vernon - well said! I've also suggested something along the lines of subsidised/free public transport and school buses. Council reaction - zippo!
By the way does anyone know how much the new bus fare will be?”
by Vernon Herridge, Baytree Road
Saturday, November 22 2008, 12:26PM
“No doubt some study has been conducted into the numbers of people working in Bath who live on current bus routes, yet choose to drive. If the millions promised by the Government were used to subsidise fares ( say 50 pence per journey as a standard fare) and to provide reliable bus services using existing routes, how long would that money last? People could catch a bus near their home and not need to drive to the Park and Ride. And the environment would be saved to see another day. Encouraging people to use pushbikes would be useful and healthy too, though it is never safe to leave a bike in town without fear of it being stolen or vandalised.”
by al, bath
Saturday, November 22 2008, 10:19AM
“heres a plan, dont vote for them at next opportunity. Im sure this will be long before anything is actually done. Mind you i dont fancy your chances of who you are voting for doing anything different.
Ease cobgestion caused by school run?? Solution... dont make school start 10 minutes before most people have to be at work making a car the only option for us normal people to get to work in time.
Mind you at least when this BRT is built it will take a couple of cars off the road meaning i will be one or two car lengths closer to getting to work on time.”
by Julia, Bath
Saturday, November 22 2008, 6:42AM
“I heard a while ago that First was considering a flat £1 per journey fare anywhere in Bath for a three month trial period to make fares cheap and simple like in some European cities. I guess they hoped to make up revenue with greater utilisation. I think it sounded a great idea. I would certainly use the bus under those terms. Of course it never happened.”
by Jozef, Colo Heights NSW Australia
Saturday, November 22 2008, 5:48AM
“A bus lane is something all average motorists hate.
Why?
Because as they sit in traffic they see an empty lane with not a bus in sight.
But it gets better.
They watch as two three or more, nose to tail, go past a bus stop without stopping for waiting passengers. The bus timetable is up the creek and the buses can't make up time as they can't pass each other.
As for the poor passenger in that situation how long did you have to wait for the next one?
How often have you seen a row of buses that can only travel at the speed of the guy in front?
But of course the best joke of all is the bus that fly¿s past with not a single passenger inside.
And to top it all of if you drive in it by mistake you get busted!
If the road infrastructure cannot achieve free and uninterrupted vehicle flows no technology will help!
Whether you¿re in a bus, car, truck or van the journey time can be significantly reduced by a road system that allows all commuters to reach their destination without stopping.
Notice I said ALL commuters.
When you have a crucial bridge or bottleneck to negotiate this becomes even more important.
Furthermore in the event of a blockage on any road, and this goes against all current politically correct thinking, if the blockage is screened off correctly the vehicles passing that blockage should go past it faster not slower!
If you have two lanes reduced to one then the traffic has to travel past the restriction at twice the speed to maintain vehicle flow rates.
Traffic lights just stop traffic, roundabouts are for light traffic and freeway intersections are fundamentally flawed. They fail under heavy traffic as they also only work with light traffic. Why do you ask? Because you enter and exit all traffic from one lane.
The major problem is the roads infrastructure is designed to slow you down. This is called world's best practice and it has been wrong for just on 140 years.
Liquid Flow Traffic intersections are designed to keep you driving safely without stopping.
The solution to traffic jams is not the size of the road but the ability of an intersection to work correctly.
At www.ubtsc.com.au we have models of intersections that work at 100 percent efficiency.
They allow ALL vehicles entering an intersection to exit that intersection left, right or ahead without stopping all day every day without fail. Yes even during the worst peak traffic you can imagine.
It¿s called Liquid Flow and its only limitation is the maximum speed a road can be traversed safely.
Although it is not shown on our website, pedestrian and bicycle crossings are built into the Turnabouts to separate the Pedestrian and the cyclist from the road traffic.
None of this is worth anything if government at all levels dismisses it as too expensive! It isn't.
Think outside the square for solutions and look for the positives of what this means.
Imagine being able to cross town in peak hour traffic without stopping at a single intersection.
I'm 'Jozef Goj' the inventor and designer of 'Liquid Flow Traffic' intersections. Search me and make up your own mind”
by Evan, Lower Weston
Friday, November 21 2008, 9:09PM
“Mr. Council spokesman, are you afraid to put your name to your statements?
1. All of Bath is open to vandalism, and making a purpose built drag-strip for the joyriders and mopeds is really going to help control things. Like not! Its also a great getaway lane for the burglars of Bath. And you¿re going to make it real pretty with tarmac, concrete and yellow flood lights. As for your dedicated cycle and foot path, who in their right mind would want to walk or cycle along a bus road, literally putting ones life in danger by being in close proximity to speeding bendy buses with appalling safety records . There is already a parallel cycle and foot path along the Avon river taking you right into city centre, without getting killed by a bus or inhaling diesel fumes.
2.How about coming up with the feasibility studies for the alternative routes you say you have undertaken? You claim it will cost millions more than the proposed destruction, but have never produced any kind of verification on that. I¿m afraid we can¿t just take your word for it.
3. Well, it looks like your planning to spend a lot of tax payers money on lowering the sewers, wether it be in the plans or not. No wonder Colin Skellet is in favour of this blight, as his Wessex Water stands to profit from the re-engineering of the sewers.
4. If your figures and projections are correct, then your are in fact saying that the proposed park and ride ¿improvements¿ will be too inefficient to cope anyway. Haeberling has already said that in addition to destroying the Bathampton Meadows, Charmy Down will make an excellent 2nd P&R site in years to come. So which part of Newbridge do you want to ruin in order to put a 2nd P&R there, in years to come? It will be too little too late, even before you are able to implement the scheme. An analogue solution in a digital age. You need to go back to the drawing board and come up with something that will actually work.
5. May I bring your attention to the reply Don Foster received from Rosemary Winterton. It clearly states that there is no problem with moving the BRT from one road to another. No need to resubmit the business case at all. All you are going to loose is 2 MINUTES! Bath residents will loose a great deal more if your dismal plans goes ahead. So please stop your scare mongering tactics, Bath will not loose the funding when the route is changed.
6. The Councils plan will not help tackle congestion with any significance. The greater public will continue using their cars, because its cheaper and more convenient than public transport. The few cars taken out by P&R will easily be replaced with suppressed demand and therefore make no difference to the levels of congestion or pollution. All you are doing is adding more buses, which will be running empty most of the day anyway. Do something sensible about the school runs and through traffic instead, and we will soon have clearer roads.”
by Dave, Weston
Friday, November 21 2008, 9:01PM
“The improvement to 10 major bus routes as described by the council spokesman amounts to nothing more than cosmetic improvements at bus stops with displays to show how late the buses are running. What is interesting is that in Bath we can only have these improvements if we have the whole package including the BRT scheme - Trowbridge and Bradford on Avon bus routes have had these improvements for years but funnily enough the more competent councils over there didn't put themselves in hock with a BRT scheme. So which is it - is it the BRT that brings these improvements or a competent council?”
by Joy, Bath
Friday, November 21 2008, 8:17PM
“No. Just that they are not interested in what electors think. But I do not understand why First Group have no competition in BANES.
Where my son lives there are 3 companies running services. They are not allowed to undercut each other and on most routes there are two operators. Not following exact routes but going to the same places. Fares are almost half what they are here.”
by Howard Cain, Somerset
Friday, November 21 2008, 7:42PM
“Joy Stockley wrote:
"So all politcal parties have the same disregard for the electorate.
There are other similarities as well - Government money with strings attached and First Groups' wishes."
Sounds like you're suggesting that our elected leaders are involving themselves in some dirty backroom dealing?
Certainly smells that way, doesn't it.”