Questions left unanswered over ‘chaos’ after Bath LTNs introduced

Bath and North East Somerset Council has broken its silence over a road scheme which led to what neighbours said was “chaos.”

The council's cabinet member for highways, Manda Rigby insisted at a council cabinet meeting on November 14 that the closure of Winifred’s Lane in Bath is not illegal and stated again that it will be monitored, after a local man raised concerns at the meeting. These were the first public comments by the council administration on the scheme since Friday November 8 when a comment was issued through the press office, despite repeated requests for top councillors to give interviews on the scheme.

After bollards were installed on what had been a one-way lane by Bath and North East Somerset Council on Wednesday November 6, at least 15 cars ended up reversing out onto a blind junction after driving up the narrow lane anyway. The council returned the next day to install “road closed” signs across the end of the lane, prompting a man who lives on it to say residents had been “completely ignored.”

READ MORE: Bath Christmas Market 2024: Opening times, stallholders and map of UK's best Market

READ MORE: Controversial Bath recycling centre plans changed after public outcry

The road closed signs have since been changed to signs reading “road closed except for access and cycles,” and moved to the edges of the road.

At the council cabinet meeting, Tim Spratt, who said he was speaking on behalf of more than 300 hundred residents living in the area, told council cabinet members: “The second Lower Lansdown ETRO [experimental traffic regulation order] is unsafe, it’s unlawful, local residents don’t want it, and it wasn’t the outcome of the co-design process. Despite what some of you have said publicly, local residents were never consulted about the Winifred's Lane ETRO.”

He said it had increased congestion and was “a danger to the very people it’s supposed to benefit.” He added that locals were “scared, frightened and deeply upset,” including people in “lower socio-economic” areas of Julian Road and Morford Street who he said may not have a voice.

Ms Rigby said: “As I am sure you are aware we are doing monitoring so saying that you think you know where all the traffic has gone, I don’t think we can say that after just a week of operation. We will of course share the monitoring information whilst we are doing the trial.

“And I do have to challenge you on saying that the ETRO that is currently laid is illegal. I do not believe that to be the case.”

Council leader Kevin Guy added: “I very rarely make a statement on these type of things but I do resent the fact that somebody would bring up the point that people from a certain social-economic background do not have a voice with councillors.

“Because they do. We listen to them and represent them and they can speak for themselves. They don’t need people in big houses telling them they don’t have a voice.”

Referring to councillor Guy’s comment towards Mr Spratt, a spokesman for the Heart of Lansdown assoication responsed by saying: “Councillor Guy is missing the point. Mr Spratt’s comments were based on fact, not opinion, and he was speaking on behalf of hundreds of residents directly affected by the council’s ETRO on Winifreds Lane. These residents include some who live on Morford Street and Julian Road. And to prove Mr Spratt’s point, hundreds of residents in those roads have not been consulted about the closure of Winifreds Lane, increasing traffic and pollution outside their front doors, and the council’s own maps showing the consultation area for this ETRO prove that."

The discussion in the council chamber followed a week in which the council did not speak on the record to the press about the scheme. The Local Democracy Reporting Service was initially told that interviews would only be given to broadcast journalists.

Ms Rigby said: “It is quite a strict rule within the council [...] for print, we insist on stuff coming in in writing and we then send it back in writing.” But, when asked for a copy of this policy, a council spokesperson said: “There is no policy on this.”

No interview was granted or response to written questions received, despite further requests to the council.

Questions posed of the council were:

• Is the council confident now that the scheme is safe?

• Does the council feel that the scheme is now working as intended?

• Regarding Wednesday/Thursday where many cars drove up the road and had to reverse onto the junction, which was described to us as "chaos" and led to the road then being closed, would the council accept the scheme went wrong?

• Warnings about this were raised beforehand by locals. How did this issue happen when it had been warned about beforehand?

• One man on the street who did not support the scheme to start with says people on the street were "ignored." Has the council ignored the people who live on the street?

The bollards are in place on a six-month trial basis as part of the council’s programme of liveable neighbourhoods (also called “low traffic neighbourhoods” or LTNs). The consultation will run until April 30 here.