Statement on London Road and Snow Hill Area Liveable Neighbourhood
Dear residents,
The CRA’s motto is “Celebrate, Connect, Contribute and Campaign”, and over the last few years we’ve loved celebrating and connecting with residents at the street parties we have organised, the annual Halloween festivities and the Progressive Supper! And we’ve been glad to contribute – making sure pavements are cleared of snow and gritted in icy weather, promoting local businesses, welcoming new residents and collaborating with our friends at Camden Meadow and Hedgemead Park. But this letter is concerned with the campaign element of our remit …
Many of you will already be aware that a Liveable Neighbourhood scheme is currently being designed for our area (officially called the London Road and Snow Hill Area Liveable Neighbourhood).
Since 2018, the CRA has consistently campaigned for traffic calming and road safety measures to be explored by the council for the benefit of the whole of our community – and that continues to be our position.
When B&NES first announced they were going to implement trials for Liveable Neighbourhoods in 2020, the local councillors at the time, as well as the Camden Residents’ Association, campaigned for our area to be included on the list. 48 neighbourhoods applied and 15 were selected as priority areas in 2022.
We have, since then, engaged constructively with the council and residents with two aims: firstly to reduce the volume of through traffic at peak times; and, secondly, to reduce speeding. (Note* we have not worked with the council on the soon-to-be proposed design of the area’s LN. Nor have we been asked by them to provide feedback on the design as a residents’ association.)
In regards to the first of these aims, we think it is safe to assume that most people, wherever they live in Bath, would like to see less through traffic in their neighbourhoods. However, having listened to a number of residents, we also take the view that to implement measures that benefit one set of streets to the detriment of others is not something that we can stand behind. The CRA exists for the benefit of everyone in Camden and we also want to be good neighbours to the surrounding streets. Therefore, we are working hard to take an overall and holistic view on the outline currently being discussed and will judge any trials not just on their effect on Camden Road, but also on other roads in Camden and the surrounding neighbourhoods.
On the second aim, reducing speeding – it is worth noting that there have been around 30 accidents (that we know of) on Camden Road in the last three years, resulting in several injuries and serious damage to parked cars and other property. Measurements taken in 2019 found that 68% of drivers on Camden Road were speeding. We hope that the forthcoming designs from the council will seek to tackle this issue in addition to peak traffic volume.
With the Council’s designs not yet completed, it is difficult for the CRA to take a formal position at this stage. So we are currently listening, learning and talking to as many people as we can, trying to contribute positively to the discussion – and awaiting presentation of the designs.
All of the Liveable Neighborhood schemes so far in Bath have been subject to experimental traffic regulation orders (ETROs), as well as a period of pre-trial informal engagement.
ETROs are designed to last between 6 and 18 months. Assuming that the London Road and Snow Hill scheme follows the same pattern, there will be opportunities before, during and after the trials to give your honest feedback to the Council, and to insist that any ETRO is a genuine experiment where residents views and comprehensive data about traffic volumes and speeds in all affected roads determine the outcome.
We very much encourage you to engage with the process in one of the following ways.
1) Attend one of the informational meetings held by Councillors Oli Henman and John Leach. There are two left (Feb 3 and 7) at Burdall’s Yard. These meetings are for the local councillors to gather information to feed back to the council. Links to book are https://bit.ly/WalcotLN3 or https://bit.ly/WalcotLN4. If they are sold out it might be worth turning up as there have been empty seats at the previous two meetings, but do check with the councillors to confirm this.
2) Write to your local councillors. John Leach and Oli Henman are the councillors for our area, and Manda Rigby is the councillor with an overall responsibility for the Liveable Neighbourhood schemes.
- [email protected] (general email)
- [email protected] (Bath cabinet member for Highways)
- [email protected] (Walcot Councillor)
- [email protected] (Walcot Councillor)
3) When the council publish the official online feedback form for the scheme, please give this proper thought and spend some time filling it out. We assume a link will be published when the experimental scheme is put in place (whatever the final design may be). We would encourage residents to let the scheme play out a little first. As with any modal change, there will inevitably be some initial snags – especially as road users from outside the neighbourhood get used to the changes. These are likely to settle down after a few weeks/months and only then will we see exactly what the lasting impact of the changes is likely to be.
4) Please let us know what your thoughts are! Whilst the CRA is not providing any official feedback to the council, it is good for us to know how residents of Camden feel in general – the more info we have, the better we can judge the situation. Many thanks to all of you who have already reached out! For those who haven’t, our email is [email protected] and our AGM is on Monday. January 27th at 7pm at the Claremont Pub. We hope to see you there! (Note* the AGM is not a meeting about the Liveable Neighbourhood, but a formal AGM like those in previous years. We will go through our year-in-review and there will be opportunities to ask questions and also chat to committee members informally.)
Many thanks and all the best to all of you,
Johanna
(acting) Chair, CRA
Thanks Johanna. I really appreciate the thoughtful and considered approach you are taking to this process. Your statement was really clear and informative.
You seem to be wrong on your dates , it was 2021 that it was decided on by the council and also a friend was at a meeting recently where one of your committee was rather aggressive to people there.
Also someone at a recent meeting had recent traffic data for Eastbourne Avenue and it showed 80% or traffic was 20mph or below and only 2.5% above 30mph where does your 68% figure come from?
Hopefully your new commitee will be sweep out some of the problem commitee members you have.
Hi all @ Camden. I second thanks to Johanna for this very considered and well written overview. I have made many submissions online and to our individual councillors, especially Manda Rigby, who seems to be single-handedly controlling this. I am not in favour of the current proposals and second the many excellent letters written on this subject, not least by Dr Lashbrook at Fairfield Park Surgery. I agree that we need to implement traffic calming and prevent speeding, but we have done a pretty good job of that already in Camden – to further restrict access from Camden to Larkhall is wrong. The council have already stated that they propose to prevent cars from using tributary roads off of Camden when the LTN is in place, which effectively ‘strangles movement’ for those of us who live here. That has already happened in Winifred’s Lane, with dire consequences. Julian Road is now permanently ‘fugged-up’ with traffic and fumes and Morford Street is a nightmare. An LTN in Camden will effectively do the same and whilst it may be lovely to have less traffic in this part of our neighbourhood – it’s a no-brainer that someone will pay – and that will be the London Road and effectively the whole of Bath – as the clogged-up fumes rise up our 7 hills. I think we have historically done really well in managing traffic in Camden and apart from rush hour – the traffic is not that heavy. We live in a Georgian city with narrow roads and there is little we can do to re-design that, apart from a by-pass, which no-one is prepared to impose, albeit the Council are busy buying up large sections of central Bath under ‘Compulsory Purchase Orders’ to build more student flats…. If the LTN goes ahead – it will effectively divide Camden and Larkhall and do huge damage to the Larkhall shops, but principally it will make living here very difficult. There are proposal to channel traffic down Frankly Buildings and Bennets Lane, both very steep and narrow – and thus dangerous routes to drive. There is huge financial incentive for councils to implement these LTNs and they have to be in place for at least 18 months for the Council to benefit from these monies. Councillor Rigby thinks that if driving is made difficult enough, we will all get on our bikes…..(she cannot drive) – however, until I can balance my weekly shopping on my head; or become rich enough to take taxis, or I learn to fly, I shall not be cycling everywhere in this gloriously wet and hilly city. I think we all walk or take buses for the journeys we can – but our transport system needs to improve hugely before the car can be permanently ‘parked’. Okay – I’m sure that’s enough, but I think it’s important to give this feedback. Thanks again Johanna – and I will be attending the ‘consultation meeting’ next week.
We lend our wholehearted support to the principle of an LTN along Camden Road and believe that a bus gate would be a sound way to achieve this, subject to detail.
How many members of the CRA are there?
Has any consideration been given to those living in the steep side roads from Camden Road?
The CRA has included supporting comments from its own members, and any benefits for residents in Camden Road appear to be at the expense of many more residents in the actual Snow Hill area and on the London Road (who are part of the Walcot ward also).
Residents in the Lambridge ward would be isolated if the bus gate is imposed. Where does the CRA envision local traffic from the Walcot ward will go? The already busy London Road and steep Richmond Heights (often impassable with school children and narrow adjoining roads) would be the only routes to and from Fairfield Park, with all the additional pollution that will be emitted. If there has been no consideration to routes to be taken by neighbouring wards, then this application is totally selfish and should be opposed by all those who care for their environment.
Lastly, a stated aim is to change travel habits within the LTN. How many Walcot residents intend to walk or cycle rather than drive?