Delays 'to double' at busy city junction

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Delays at a busy city centre junction are likely to more than double in the next 10 years, council chiefs warned today.

Bath and North East Somerset Council has revealed computer model projections for five congestion blackspots in the city as it attempts to boost public support for its own £58 million package of transport plans.

It says that if nothing is done to tackle congestion in the city, morning rush hour waiting times at the junction of George Street, Broad Street, The Paragon and Lansdown Road will increase by 118 per cent over the next decade.

Its other projections are:

* Pulteney Road/Bathwick Hill – 43 per cent increase in average delay

* London Road/Cleveland Bridge – 39 per cent increase in average delay

* North Parade/Pulteney Road – 19 per cent increase in average delay

* Newbridge Hill/Combe Park – 19 per cent increase in average delay.

The council is facing opposition at either end of Bath to two key elements of its £58 million Bath Transportation Package, and has upped the ante with new web pages warning of the consequences if its schemes are defeated.

Pressure groups have been set up to fight both its Bus Rapid Transit scheme through Newbridge and its latest chosen location for an east-of-Bath park and ride site, at Bathampton.

But council cabinet member for transport Cllr Charles Gerrish said: "In ten years' time, Bath is likely to be gridlocked with vehicles waiting at junctions unless Bath and North East Somerset Council delivers on the vision priority of improving transport and the public realm.

"If current trends continue, it is likely that delays at these junctions will delay motorists and public transport by anything from a fifth to double the time they are waiting on average now. This would be harmful to the local economy and erode residents' quality of life."

The figures were revealed on the website – www.bathnes.gov.uk/stopgridlock.

Cllr Gerrish added: "If the council does nothing about improving public transport, then residents and workers could face additional delays of up to four minutes at a junction. This is simply unacceptable and reinforces the need for measures to improve bus routes, expand park and ride capacity, enhance cycling and pedestrian access, and reduce the number of HGVs in our area."

The council says 27,000 people already travel in and out of Bath by car to get to work every day, contributing to congestion which costs £50 million a year.

The number of cars travelling through the centre of Bath is expected to increase by 14 per cent in the next ten years, it says.

Officials say a fifth of travelling time is currently spent at a standstill in the former Avon.

The figures come from the Bath Transportation Package business case, and the Model Forecasting Report submitted to the Department for Transport as part of the Joint Local Transport Plan.

Comments (21)

 

And I presume that B&NES will reject any plans for a Tescos on the Bath Press site, as that will significantly increase traffic around Bath. Or will it be the usual B&NES left hand/ right hand lack of co-ordination scenario?

JC, Bath, commented on 23-Oct-2008 17:59

 

Dubious stats to support a dubious scheme. Before wasting so much of our money, it might have been an idea to actually do a proper traffic survey, so that the right issues can be addressed. Petit Breton - Nice sentiments, but if we did all move to Public Transport, Worst Group would increase the fares to lower demand, as that is more profitable than increasing capacity. Until Public transport is seen as an asset, rather than a drain on resources, or a cash-cow if you are a Private Contractor, nothing will improve, and Councils will continue pursuing ineffective and wasteful plans.

JC, Bath, commented on 23-Oct-2008 17:54

 

The council forgot to mention how the BRT will actually ADD to congestion on the Windsor Bridge Road, London Road and in the outskirts of Bath. There is no point in a so called transport "solution", if all it does is move traffic from one place to another. Bath needs a long term intergrated transport solution not short sighted fashion statement.

Jo, Bath, commented on 23-Oct-2008 16:49

 

I said that nobody's kidding themselves that it's one particular problem. I agree completeley that people will have to make personal changes, but BANES' responsibility is to come up with 21st century solutions to a multitude of diverse problems based on properly sourced statistics, to identify where those changes can be made. A one size fits all plan isn't going to work.

Tony, Bath, commented on 23-Oct-2008 14:17

 

But yes people are kidding themselves - people think its others: the councils, others, and haulage that is causing the problems - heavens forbid that they're actually contributing to the problem and that they could do something about it themselves. I quite agree that many of the council's plans are ill thought out and that they need to go back to the drawing board, but to paraphrase Kennedy's inaugural address:

"Ask not what your council is going to do to limit congestion and pollution, ask what you are going to do to limit congestion and pollution!"

Petit Breton, Winsley, commented on 23-Oct-2008 13:43

 

Nobody's kidding themselves that A4-A36 traffic is the big problem. There are loads of big problems. Unfortunately , BANES' lack of proper consultation and properly assembled traffic flow figures, seem to suggest that they haven't got a clue, and are just panicking.

Tony, Bath, commented on 23-Oct-2008 11:30

 

The park & ride is currently too expensive for most people and teh council should consider this if they want to reduce traffic. At the moment park & ride buses charge per passenger so you are effectively are being punished for car sharing! It would cost approximatley the same to park in town as it would for a full car of peopel to pay for the bus, The bus fare cahrge on park & ride buses ashould therefore be charged per car rather than per person. I promise you that would have an immediate impact on some of the traffic issues in Bath...

paul, Bath, commented on 22-Oct-2008 20:53

 

Bath v Traffic.

This has been a talking point for the last 2000 + years!

Ol' Noman the Roman had the same problems so he had the Fosseway built, but sadly that got so jammed up with locals going in and out of the city he packed up and went back home to Rome. Since then the city has had sadan chairs, horse and carts and now todays cars, trucks buses etc. AND still the same ol' jams!

Answer :- Close Bath City to ALL but buses, trains, delivery trucks, taxis and local servises ie wast collection, police, fire, ambulance and bicycles!

Maybe that will sort out the problem?

Or NOT!

McFrank, Planet Blog, commented on 22-Oct-2008 20:23

 

I cycle and occasionally drive round most of Bath and the A36 most days and to be honest most of the commenters here are kidding themselves. The majority of the traffic causing congestion are single occupant cars not HGVs and most of the traffic is going too and from Bath to local towns and Bristol. An A46/36 link isn't going to sort out the congestion problems - getting people out of their cars will.

Petit Breton, Winsley, commented on 22-Oct-2008 20:00

 

Shame on you Dan! Parking at Sainsbury's to go to the bank? I thought that car park was for their customers and although it is free at the moment, enough people doing what you do will inititate charges. Why not do away with the trip altogether and bank online? Pay all the bills from the comfort of your own computer and leave the parking spaces for genuine shoppers. Dave.... really like the idea of a duel role for the Park and Ride buses but it will never be adopted as it is far too sensible!!

Janet McPherson, Upper Wellsway, commented on 22-Oct-2008 19:06

 

Isn't Bath already gridlocked? Forget about in 10 years time!

I thought that the BRT was designed for people who come into Bath to work or to go shopping (ie. a replacement for the P&R). It won't stop people who want to pass through Bath, therefore, congestion will still be as it is now.

Unless, they make everyone who wants to pass through Bath park at Newbridge P&R, get on the BRT, travel across town to the new Batheaston P&rR where they will collect their cars that have been teleported from Newbridge, and then they can carry on their journeys!

Sireal, UK, commented on 22-Oct-2008 18:27

 

If the only traffic using the High Street is 'local' it's because the bus gate prevents through traffic. Those who think the bus gate doesn't reduce the amount of traffic in the centre clearly don't remember how much worse it used to be. As for an A4-A36 link: a) it's not going to happen; b) the money could be better used elsewhere and c) it would attract more traffic to Bath.

Roger, Bath, commented on 22-Oct-2008 16:45

 

How about a simple plan which would probably cost a lot less than new park and rides and rapid transport routes:

1. Link Batheaston Bypass to the A36 (the bypass is already south of the river so it seems silly that a bridge couldnt be built across the canal and railway lines and link the two main roads together, cutting out over half the traffic from London Road/Cleveland Bridge

2. Remove the bus gate and pinch points on high street - the only traffic using this route is "local" traffic anyway so it wont have a serious impact on pedestrian safety.

3. Reprogramme the traffic lights so that they work together (e.g. the lights near sainsburys petrol station are not co-ordinated with the lights at brougham hayes, or the lights at the other end of the sainsburys giratory

4. Enforce double yellow lines

5. Subsidise bus fares / encourage a new bus operator such as Arriva or Stagecoach into the city to get some competition going and drive down first's overpriced monopoly. For example, if i want to pop into the bank in town it is cheaper to drive into town and park at sainsburys for half an hour than to catch the bus.

6. Improve signage - lost tourists driving round in circles dont do anything for the traffic situation

7. If a park and ride really is needed, then build it near Cadburys in Keynsham, and use trains between Bath and Keynsham to transport people!

8. Close broad street at its junction with George Street, with through traffic being diverted along walcot street via the pig and fiddle junction, and up to the mini-roundabout.

Dan, Combe Down

commented on 22-Oct-2008 16:10

 Agree with most of what Janet has said. Somewhere along the line, Bath became car-dependent. When I first travelled to Bath over 25 years ago, the buses were rubbish, but rarely bothered by traffic. Now, the bus service is still rubbish, possibly the most expensive in the UK, but a lot of the fleet is less than 5 years old; so, there's been some progress. But cars always get in the way. My children grew up walking or using buses to go to school from an early age. They are not second-class citizens as a result - rather, they are environmentally-aware, much to their credit.

The new transport bill, in its final stages now is supposed to give local authorities more say on public transport. Big transport groups are already looking at how they can exploit loopholes. If that happens, Bath will slide back, rather than improve.

Bath needs a transport for London type authority responsible for all transport, taxis and roads. A congestion charge will pay for infrastructure. Yes, it will probably cost just under 1 billion gbp, but while bailing out greed-driven bankers, paying for unwinnable wars and the like, we also need to invest in Bath's future.

anil, south glos, commented on 22-Oct-2008 11:06

 

Maybe introducing penalties for tailgating, becuase this can greatly add to delays when tailgaters get stranded across a junction as the lights change. A regular problem at Cleveland Bridge.

Helen, Bath, commented on 22-Oct-2008 10:49

 

How much traffic could be removed if the empty returning Odd Down park and ride buses were used to take kids up to Hayesfield, Beechen Cliff and St Gregory's schools in the mornings (when everyone using P&R is going into town) and then taking them back into town in the afternoon.

(Incidentally I did suggest this via the gridlock site and got nothing more than an automated response which tends to suggest (on Dave Dodgy stats evidence) that because this idea doesn't fit with the masterplan its going to be ignored!)

Dave, Weston, commented on 22-Oct-2008 10:34

 

Well, public officials using statistics to sway public opinion in these cynical times is a non-starter.

You can issue all the dire warnings you want, but if you don't support the figures with hard information on the statistical procedures that were followed, the software systems used, the observational data sampled in the statistical model, the source of the projected figures applied to the model, the provision made for any random variables, and the manipulation of any parameters that may have effected the results, then you're just whistling in the wind.

Even my seven year old daughter knows that, and she's right 62.85% of the time.

David, Bath, commented on 22-Oct-2008 10:23

 

The only reason there are high figures for traffic going through Bath is that the Ring Road goes through Bath. HGVs are only stuck around our roads because there is no other way from the A46 to the A36. Cleveland Place is only a mess because the redesign was done by a load of planners, not the Police and regular road users. The High Street is more congested than ever since the Bus Gate was introduced as nothing can even move through the pinch point outside the Guildhall to turn right. Traffic unwittingly caught in the City Centre is going round and round trying to get out because there is no route across the river via Pulteney Bridge. It makes perfect sense that closing one bridge would make the others much busier as can now be seen on North Parade Bridge. We left Orange Grove at 4.50pm last Thursday and arrived home at 5.40pm. Fifty minutes to travel 3 miles! The problem at the end of North Parade is that traffic already on the A36 blocks off the junction so there is no room to turn right into the "flow". Most of the blockage problems are caused by selfish drivers unwilling to give up their place in a queue to allow traffic to filter in. By remaining bumper to bumper they really do not help. From the ease of travel into the City during school holidays, surely it must be evident to someone that a decent, mandatory school bus system would relieve a large part of the congestion. How many of these mums really need to take their little darlings to school in the car, and could some of them not car share, just as commuters are encouraged to do? The reason children don't learn road safety is that they never walk anywhere, so this would have a dual effect. Traffic flow in Manvers Street is severely impeded by the ridiculous bus stops outside Bayntuns. They narrow the road to one lane where there is now a two-way flow, and nothing can move, including other buses, so what price public transport? When you travel abroad with a car to busy cities like Amsterdam and our twin Alkmaar, you see much better traffic management with sets of lights that work together, not against each other, and the emphasis is on getting the traffic into the city at the beginning of the day and out at the end by reprogramming traffic lights accordingly and good use of filter lanes for turning. Even with the huge number of bikes over there they manage the traffic rather than try to get rid of it. Maybe Bath could take this leaf out of a foreign book instead of pigs and Christmas Markets!

Janet McPherson, Upper Wellsway, commented on 22-Oct-2008 10:04

 

The A46 and A36 were supposed to be linked when the bypass was built, and would have given Bath a significant reduction in HGV's etc entering Bath on the London Road. However, I believe one of the main protesters for the link connecting the two roads changed their mind and protested against it when they realised it would come up to the A36 alongside the bottom of their garden, hence. As for computer based predictions - you can come up with statistics to prove anything, 8 out of 10 people know that.

Derek Hole, BA1, commented on 22-Oct-2008 09:48

I find it somewhat ironic to see these statistics of cataclismic traffic growth appear on the same day Nissan announced they are ceasing production of their Micra model (a small car often bought as a second car) for two weeks and then resuming on a 3 day week basis.

As Shaun says - remove the unnecessary through traffic by linking the A46 and A36, and then see what more we need to do. Unfortunately this scheme is now someone's means of making their mark on the city and even though its looking like being a scar rather than a monument, like it or not its going to be pushed through even if it means using dodgy stats to make the case!

Dave, Weston but not affected by BRT, commented on 22-Oct-2008 09:20

 

If traffic is going gridlock in Bath possibly the council should look at ways to divert the heavy vehicles travelling through the city onto alternative routes. This would free up the East side of the City. And then strictly enforce the double yellow lines through the centre of the city which slows traffic crossing East/West. This would actually allow traffic to flow unlike the addition of big bendy busses to the already full roads going between places already served by smaller buses which are currently 90% empty.

Shaun, Bath but not any bit served by the BRT, commented on 22-Oct-2008 08:15

Read this article on the Bath Chronicle website.