Deadline for transport dossier
Council chiefs have been told to submit a dossier of information to the Government by March to ensure that Government funding for a controversial transport package is tied up ahead of the next general election.
A decision is expected in the next week or so from the Government Office for the South West as to whether there will be a public inquiry into the two most contentious parts of the Bath Transportation Package.
-
BRTimage
Communities Secretary John Denham's staff still say they hope to announce before the end of September whether they will call in applications for the Bus Rapid Transit scheme through Newbridge and a new park and ride site at Bathampton.
If a public inquiry is held, Bath and North East Somerset Council will have to wait until after the election - likely to be next May - to find out whether the key planks of its initiative to tackle congestion are given the go-ahead.
But if civil servants decide to let B&NES's own planning decisions stand, the council will have to get all its paperwork - including updated costings and completed compulsory purchase orders - in order by March.
That is the deadline the Department for Transport has set B&NES for its own Government civil servants to have given full approval for all the funding needed for the package, which also includes expanding three existing park and ride sites.
The council has set itself a tighter internal deadline of February in order to meet the Government target, and will also have to identify its preferred construction firm at that time.
A B&NES statement said: "The council needs to have all planning permissions in place, all land assembled and a preferred bidder with agreed costs identified by February 2010, in order to submit for full approval."
At the moment, the schemes have an initial approval for their Government funding but will need full business case approval to confirm that civil servants are still happy with every facet of the programme.
The package currently costs £57.5 million - the vast majority of which will be coming from the DfT.
The amount set aside for the BRT itself has recently risen to more than a third of this total - £20.3 million.
The council says the basic cost has not changed but that the latest figure includes a new inflation forecast and extra funds set aside for "risk" - unexpected extra costs.
It says the £20.3 million figure includes work along all the BRT route - segregated and on-street sections, the Newbridge park and ride expansion, the vehicles which will use the route and land acquisition.
But a spokesman for anti-BRT pressure group Response2route said: "There must be better ways to spend £20.3 million than on an isolated 1,500-yard bus road that starts half a mile from the Newbridge Park and Ride and ends a mile from the centre of town. The costs for this route have been less than clear throughout and now the figure is higher than ever. Once again we are calling for this flawed scheme to be called in for a full and independent inquiry."
Last month, officials from the GoSW said a public inquiry should not affect the availability of central funding for the package. But there are fears that the more time elapses, the greater the risk that the dramatic squeeze on public spending that will bite in the next two years may hit the initiative.
15 Comments
View all
by JC, Bath
Sunday, September 27 2009, 4:55PM
“I think that BRT is Flavour of the Month with the DfT, so any transport schemes have to incorporate one. This means that accross the UK, Councils are building them, just to get funding for local transport projects. Sadly, between DfT, out of touch Councillors (Haeberlings latest letter suggests she is living in a parralel Universe!), and Management Consultants, rather a lot of public money is being wasted for little benefit. Well little benefit to passengers, I'm sure that certain Companies are doing very nicely!”
by Marko, Central Bath
Thursday, September 24 2009, 9:55AM
“The BRT is just an isolated road that is clearly a waste of money. This is why the Council can't prove benefits and instead try to blur the issue by talking about the overall BTP.
However, the rest of the BTP package amounts to little more than a few car parks.
If overall £57.5 million has to be spent on transport then I suggest it is redeployed to the South East where there are genuine traffic issues that need resolving.”
by Eagle Eye, Bath
Thursday, September 24 2009, 9:39AM
“The General election will be the first Thursday in May. After that any new Government will be slashing expenditure and raising taxes on an unprecedented scale.
If the Council seriously believe that any money promised after March will be honoured after the election then I suggest that they are seriously deluded.
The economic outlook for the country is so severe that the Council's haste to grab taxpayer's money before it can be used to limit the damage of severe national issues like as risng unemployment, higher taxes and escalating national debt is beginning to look highly egocentric.
Haeberling's Council need to take a long hard look at the bigger picture here and reconsider whether their tranport plans - with only marginal local benefits based on the outdated assumption of a booming economy - represent a prudent investment of taxpayer's money.”
by Newbridge Matters!, Bath
Thursday, September 24 2009, 9:12AM
“Gary P - you make some interesting points.
With regard to material changes to the scheme; surely the great gaping space in the 'dedicated bus route' between Windsor Bridge and the City centre, due to the Western Riverside Development's non-appearance, is another?”
by Janus, Bath
Thursday, September 24 2009, 8:56AM
“I happened to read in the national press this week about the row over a proposed dedidated bus-route between Fareham and Gosport. Being funded by the Goverment....large sums of money being used that are needed eleswhere....to be built on an old railway route now a 'green' corridor....not wanted by the residents - does it sound familiar? Only difference seems to be that the 'local planners' don't want it either!”
by Gary P, Bath
Thursday, September 24 2009, 7:35AM
“The Chronicle reports: "At the moment, the schemes have an initial approval for their Government funding but will need full business case approval to confirm that civil servants are still happy with every facet of the programme."
Despite the fact there's no legal precedent for B&NES being allowed to proceed with this madness, I'll look forward to checking the revised Business Case submitted by B&NES (if things get that far) and how much that's fundamental to the scheme is deliberately overlooked and ignored, as happened with the first Case.
The B&NES Council 2004 Major Scheme Business Case for the BTP shows a summary of comments from their strategic partners and consultees. Here are some examples:
Wiltshire CPRE - ¿Support a HGV ban or road charging to reduce HGV movements through Bath.¿
They were not alone. Many contributors to the case said that HGV traffic was the top priority in problems for the BTP to solve. Since Programme Entry Status funding was assured B&NES have totally ignored this, and there are no measures in the BTP, none whatsoever, to tackle congestion and pollution caused by HGVs.
Confederation of Passenger Transport - ¿Raise legitimate doubts over the effectiveness of park and ride. It can often encourage people to use their cars more and can cause peak time overloading and off peak over capacity for bus services.¿
B&NES decided to pretend this wasn't true and have carried on regardless. This very rational conclusion, backed by reliable statistics from other schemes as well as Bath's own existing park and rides, has been dismissed without explanation and never referred to since by B&NES,
Bath Preservation Trust ¿ ¿¿does not believe that the Lambridge site is suitable for park and ride, Bathampton is worse.¿
Despite this B&NES simply went ahead with Bathampton anyway. And how this change of site doesn't constitute a material change to the scheme is another thing B&NES have steadfastly avoided explaining.
SDM3 ¿ ¿Concur with Confederation of Passenger Transport on the negative effects of park and ride. Question traffic modelling.¿
This comment is significant in its reference to traffic modelling. It appears that questioning the honesty of B&NES on BTP matters is nothing new and not only restricted to concerned citizens.
None of these comments, used to secure initial promises of government funds, were taken into account in preparation of the planning applications submitted in January 2009 and considered by the Development Control Committee meetings in May, July and August 2009.
How can any self-respecting civil servant be happy with this? With this track record, and whatever the new and revised business case says, I can't imagine it will be in the least bit trustworthy.”
by Dave, Larkhall
Thursday, September 24 2009, 6:37AM
“My apologies Stacey, it was the one after your link that was a LibDem You Tube Video.
My paranoid with all our council members and officers being trusted to spend our hard earned taxes makes me very wary.”
by Stacey, Bath
Wednesday, September 23 2009, 8:44PM
“Dave, don't get me started on the bath Spa!
The video I linked to isn't a Lib Dem video :)”
by Dave, Larkhall
Wednesday, September 23 2009, 7:58PM
“Stacey, Bath. Would you kindly point me in the direction of the other LibDem video where they wasted millions of pounds of our money on a white elephant called the Bath Spa?”
by Vanessa, Ashley Avenue
Wednesday, September 23 2009, 5:54PM
“Lower Westol Gal has a point - does anyone know if any of the officials taking the decision about whether or not to call in the plans for a public enquiry or whether to hand over the moeny have actually been to the site of the Middle Bristol Road to Nowhere to see exactly what over £20 million of our money will be spent on?
In these days of money being tight and public spending being cut, here is a dead easy way for the government to divert a lot of money to where it could REALLY do some good!”