Campaign group claims council transport u-turn
A campaign group has accused the council of misleading the public by pushing through controversial transport plans as one package.
The organisation VeraCityBath (VCB) has filed papers calling for a judicial review into the way Bath and North East Somerset Council handled the Bath Transportation Package (BTP).
-
Bathampton Meadows campaigners
The group has argued that B&NES is now backtracking on its original insistence that it was an all or nothing package of measures, that needed every part to work.
It says a letter from a member of the council’s legal team seems to suggest that the authority has changed its mind about whether the individual elements of the BTP can be implemented separately.
During the planning application process, officers insisted that schemes relating to park-and-rides at Bathampton, Newbridge, Odd Down and Lansdown and the bus rapid transit (BRT) route all needed to be approved - and that it could not go ahead piecemeal.
Councillors and members of the public were repeatedly told that the scheme could not be broken up and that if any single aspect of it was rejected, the whole scheme would collapse.
Officers even went as far as using the benefits of the whole transport package as “special circumstances” for building on the green belt at Bathampton.
VCB is now using a letter from solicitor Maggie Horrill, from B&NES’ legal and democratic services team, which was sent to the group’s lawyers, as a key plank in its challenge.
In it she said: “There are a number of factors which will, no doubt, have a bearing on how the applications are implemented and I understand, as with many transportation schemes of this nature, the intention would be to develop the whole scheme.
“However, the planning applications have been issued separately and as such are capable of separate implementation.”
The issue was discussed at a number of planning meetings.
Those who were in favour of some parts of the package but opposed to others asked if they could be separated.
The minutes from a meeting on July 8 last year show that officers said this was not possible.
They say: “A member queried whether the P&R (Newbridge) could be voted on separately from the BRT but officers stated that this could not be done as the proposals formed one application and were intrinsically linked.”
VCB spokesman Mark Millar said: "The council says in its legal letter that each part of the package can be developed independently - and yet the whole basis on which the council permitted the developments, despite their damaging effects, is that they were part of a bigger package.
"Now they are saying each element can be developed independently. The council must come clean and let the public know what its true intentions are."
VCB has also filed separate papers calling for a judicial review against the way Communities Secretary John Denham handled the planning applications, which had to be rubberstamped by his office.
A judge is now considering both cases and should make a decision in the next few months into whether to hold a review.
A spokesman for the council said it could not comment on the allegations because of ongoing legal proceedings.
65 Comments
View all
by Paul Wiltshire, Deputy editor
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 3:14PM
“I think we're generating more heat than light now, so I'm going to lock this thread.”
by john, batheaston
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 2:23PM
“My my Anil is upset. I was always told that you could tell when someone had lost an argument because they resort to personal abuse. Keep going Anil, your credibility has almost, if not already, gone.”
by Andy M, Bath
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 2:05PM
“Here we go again with more of Anil's prejudiced insults...
"The BRT will give you a chance to experience how things are outside your own blinkered bubble."
and...
"Open your eyes, look elsewhere, learn something from the experience..."
From an individual who has obviously not absorbed a single fact from the hundreds posted here about the unique BRT proposition being forced upon Bath.”
by anil, sq
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 1:32PM
“JC and Andy M:"....Anil - And BRT is relevant to your story because......"
"....basic transport infrastructure is non-existent(in Bath); possible improvements are always fought by the car lobby, nimbys and inherent, utter selfishness...."
The BRT will give you a chance to experience how things are outside your own blinkered bubble. For example, a dedicated busway, even partial and serving mainly those coming into the city from PRs, will be a good thing. Other bus services wont improve under First's provision in the near or intermediate future, so car usage increases daily. Also, it will give you a chance to sample off-bus ticketing, rapid on and off-boarding and a chance to read the destination signs in front of vehicles. I guess most bath's users will still stop a BRT to ask where it's going, how much it costs and when the next 337 is due....
The Surrey/Berks borders, where I expect car ownership is as high or greater than Bath, they have been steadily sorting out public transport provision. Bath seems to have its head stuck up its own heritage backside. Open your eyes, look elsewhere, learn something from the experience.... :-)”
by anil, sq
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 1:30PM
“JC and Andy M:"....Anil - And BRT is relevant to your story because......"
"....basic transport infrastructure is non-existent; possible improvements are always fought by the car lobby, nimbys and inherent, utter selfishness...."
The BRT will give you a chance to experience how things are outside your own blinkered bubble. For example, a dedicated busway, even if it serves those coming into the city from PRs, just as th”
by john, batheaston
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 12:41PM
“For those people still reading this thread, in the thread for the "issue" of the Coal Yard land BANES have added
"The Bath Chronicle web comments system has allowed the Council to give further details in response to reader observations about this issue."
So far no response to anything on this thread then BANES. Picking and choosing when only on a winner?”
by JC, Bath
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 12:24PM
“Anil - And BRT is relevant to your story because........”
by johnbatheaston, batheaston
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 9:13AM
“Whilst we are talking of rip offs, check out www.parkandride.net which gives you information on P&R throughout the country. Some like Weymouth are only running in summer but some like Swansea charge per car -and not per person like BANES - making P&R more attractive and not a rip off. The cost of Swansea's P&R £2.20 per car per day. So for four people in Swansea it costs 55p each but in BANES it will cost you £8.80. How much to park in central Bath car parks?”
by Dave, Larkhall
Monday, March 15 2010, 4:50PM
“Anil. This journey you made on the Surrey/Berks border, did it entail traversing a Georgian City with roads laid out a few hundred years ago, through a deep valley with a very large river running through its centre, and realistically only one 'A' route connecting a motorway with its immediate adjoining major routes?
The question of public transport value for money and convenience is a completely different matter. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows First Group have been ripping off Joe Public since they became sole supplier.”
by johnbatheaston, batheaston
Monday, March 15 2010, 4:06PM
“Perhaps Anil has something! "Trains were run by stagecoach and buses by abellio surrey." And we in Bath have First running both with no "driver" to beat the other in terms of price or service. No, we can't blame First for the traffic congestion. Their time tables have built in delays so they can meet the required performance criteria.”