Active Travel and Accessibility Forum Follow Up

While it is all fresh in my head I will quickly write-up as much as possible.

LCWIP

The Bath and North East Somerset Local Cycling Walking Infrastructure Plan is being developed as a whole across BaNES, North Somerset, Bristol, and South Gloucester. It was good to note that Cllr Mark Shelford want a commitment from the people that are developing the LCWIP that the priority would be Safe routes to school then commuter routes to centres of employment, then centre of commerce.

Cllr Shelford also noted that walking was analysed at 2km and not the 3 miles that is currently used for school travel support.  (5km for cycling).

There was an admission that no money is available to implement this and we will be needing to look to the DfT and WECA however WECA are going through the process of developing a Joint Spatial Plan, a Joint Local Travel Plan, and there is also something called the Local Plan.

All in all good. What was not so good is there was no connection to what Wiltshire are doing or any detail about the connections between Urban areas. Also Secondary schools were ignored in the node to node analysis in Bath. However expect further work on this.

Oxfordshire Walking and Cycling Standards

I’ve spoken about these before and there is progress on these with the council now looking to develop or adopt these. They are absolutely vital and can transform what developers can do with their roads space. This is a big big change and will make a huge difference.

Somerdale Bridge

Apparently £1M is not enough to build a bridge. I understand the one at Batheaston cost £900k with material costs of around £500k. Cllr Shelford made it clear he could not understand why a bridge could not be built here for that money. Expect this one to explode.

Seven Projects for Bath City Forum

The ATAF will be developing a set of 7 costed projects to submit for CIL funding via the Bath City Forum. Projects can be as simple as installing a dropped kerb to finally getting a good ramp from the Two Tunnels into Lyncombe Vale rather than that root infested dirt path.

Given that other community forums have similar CIL pots, there is no reason not to develop this out to other areas.

Share with Care

As cycling has become more popular, so has poor interaction between people walking and cycling. Council is going to reach out to Sustrans and their One Path initiative on the B2B and see if something similar could be done on some of our shared routes. The reality is though, we simply must start designing for cycle traffic and recognise a cycle is a vehicle capable of speed. Grade separated segregated space is realistically the only way to achieve this to remove much of the cycle traffic from leisure routes.

A.O.B.

Keynsham High Street design process is about to kick off.

Western Riverside was discussed and how the whole development should be considered a Low Traffic Neighbourhood and that Destructor Bridge should be restricted to buses only. Further work needed.

Weston to City Centre cycle scheme was discussed as to whether the advisory cycle lane actually did anything. A few people noted that if the parking along here was removed then this would no longer be a problem as segregated cycling infra using orcas (see London Road) could be implemented.

Cllr Shelford should be congratulated for defending the London Road Orcas. Apparently he got a lot of flack for them. They are an example of how to achieve light protected cycle infrastructure.

 

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Active Travel and Accessibility Forum Follow Up”

  1. Its become apparent that Bath residents views regarding anything in Bath, about Bath, and network we use, are being pushed aside, because we are merely just the residents that live here,
    We do have a right to put our views & opinions forward, there are other ways

    1. I’m unsure what you expect from a publicised council organised forum that is tackling car dependency and enabling walking, cycling, and accessibility. There is nothing else quite like it run by the council.

      1. It just seems that the city is being blocked altogether, we need to keep at least one main route through the city, why cant london road to lower bristol road be more freeflowing& charge free&shut the inner A4 route off.surely that would help a great deal, certainly for safety of everyone,fair enough its nice & great idea to clear the traffic to clear the air in the city, i love the idea, but buses for a family to go & see family on other side of Bath is expensive, & hospital apps, it will just force the traffic into smaller residential streets,we rent parking in the city from our housing association, but to get to it we will be charged ontop of that, we actually work our backsides off, and have a good 2002 petrol car, could go on for years, but now have to buy a new one, we dont have free cash to just buy one, itseems the council doesnt think much about what we (residents) think, our city is just for students, but then again its easy to not listen to people and blank and block,

      2. I’ll address 3 issues here.
        1) The council are offering a consultation at the moment on the CAZ. Please talk to them however there is a legal requirement placed upon them by the high court to reduce Air Pollution to safe levels within the city. By 2022 you will need to have bought a 2006 CAT 4 petrol car. Given that now over 60 cities are being required to implement CAZs, the longer you hold off replacing your ‘illegal’ car, the less money you will get for it as the market tanks for older cars. Note I own a 2006 diesel so will be investigating replacing in a few years but only use it at weekends and usually in the countryside. Please go book an appointment with the council.
        2) That free route that you are proposing, the A36, runs past a school that already has illegal levels of pollution. We are poisoning children. The government/council just chose to ignore it. Nottingham does not need a CAZ. It has a workplace parking levy, invested in trams and cycling.
        3) I suspect the “blank and block” comment is aimed at me blocking you on twitter. I found interactions with you negative and not very useful. It felt like there was simply a lot of sniping without any useful discourse. Never keep negativity in your life if you can help.

      3. Sorry, 😃, but please one thing, the lower bit of the A4 link has a lovely strip of land down each side, is there any chance we would be as part of cycling infrastructure upgrades, be getting a cycle route along it, this is much needed,as you know cycle infrastructure in batheaston is useless, i even liked your idea for the p&r down there, alongside the link,not in the field,shame it cannot go up on charmy, nicely out of the way, sorry again lw

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s