Transport
9.01 Bath is a complex City. The various parts of its
transportation system such as the public transport services and
parking facilities are not only interdependent, but are all
affected by decisions made on other matters such as new development
or meeting conservation objectives in a street or neighbourhood.
Bath is, however, a relatively small City with well defined
shopping centres and employment areas. The size and nature of Bath
should assist the City and County Councils in evolving a "balanced
transportation strategy" in which all the decisions on various
transportation issues can be carefully co-ordinated. The aim is to
reverse undesirable trends in, for example, commuting patterns, and
achieve desirable environmental objectives such as removing heavy
traffic from a particular area.
9.02 In devising and encouraging the implementation of such a
strategy, the City Council seeks to work in close consultation with
the County Council which, as Highway Authority, has ultimate
responsibility for traffic and transport matters. In recent years
the County Council has attached increasing emphasis on the need to
improve the environment and promote the use of public transport.
This changing attitude is illustrated by a number of the policies
in the Third Alteration to the Structure Plan, particularly
Policies TR1-6 and Appendix A. The County Council has prepared a
Transport Plan for the County following the completion of a
comprehensive traffic and environmental study of the Bristol area,
called the Bristol Integrated Transport and Environmental Study
(B.R.I.T.E.S.); and a study of ways in which rail services could be
expanded and improved: Strategic Avon Rail Study (S.T.A.R.S.). It
is intended the Transport Plan should form part of a Replacement
Structure Plan.
9.03 It was decided in the 1970s that because of the special
environmental, topographical and architectural characteristics of
the City, its traffic problems could not generally be solved by
building new roads within its boundary. Since then the emphasis has
been on traffic management, although it is hoped that a combination
of improvements within the City and the ultimate construction of
new roads to the east will maintain the A36, a primary trunk road,
as an efficient through route. The importance of traffic management
explains why the City Council has long sought Agency powers in this
field, a move which the County Council has always resisted.
9.04 POLICY T1 - WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A STRATEGY TO REDUCE THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF TRAVEL, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SEEK TO
PROMOTE THE USE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT, WALKING AND CYCLING AND TO
REDUCE DEPENDENCE ON THE PRIVATE CAR FOR JOURNEYS WITHIN THE CITY,
ESPECIALLY BY VISITORS AND THOSE TRAVELLING TO WORK.
9.05 In order to achieve and maintain a balanced system for the
City, the traffic flows must be monitored. This has been done
regularly by the County Council since 1979. New development will
have effects on the traffic system, particularly in areas where no
new roads are contemplated. To complement the County Council's
traffic monitoring, the implications of major development in more
sensitive parts of the highway network must be carefully
assessed.
9.06 POLICY T2 - THE CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTS THE COUNTY COUNCIL IN
CLOSELY MONITORING THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT SYSTEM IN BATH AND
WILL ASSIST, WHEREVER POSSIBLE, IN ASSESSING THE POTENTIAL
IMPLICATIONS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OR OTHER CHANGES.
9.07 Most of the traffic in Bath has an origin or destination in
the City. However, the main objective behind existing policies has
been to discourage through traffic from, and limit congestion in,
the Central Area. Whilst this area has benefited, traffic has been
diverted to the A36 and A4 resulting in severe environmental
damage.
9.08 For many years, the City Council's hopes of a more
effective diversion of through traffic centred on the Batheaston
and Swainswick Bypass which is now under construction. This was
because the Department of Transport's proposals included elements
which would have provided a new connection between the A36 and A46
primary routes, so relieving London Road and Cleveland Bridge of a
substantial amount of heavy goods traffic. However, as first the
"Beckford Spur" and later the "A36 Link" were deleted from the
proposals, the new road will not now provide relief for Bath. The
Department has also announced that studies have concluded that the
construction of a new road to the south and west of Bath would not
be a viable proposition. This leaves only the controversial
extension of the Batheaston Bypass southwards from Bathford, the
"East of Bath to Beckington" scheme, as the only part of the
Government's road programme which offers the prospect of diverting
through traffic away from the City, and this road is unlikely to be
constructed during the period of this plan.
9.09 This situation underlines the need for other policies and
proposals to control traffic, but the City Council remains mindful
of the problem of through traffic. Although only a little over 20%
of all vehicles that enter the City can be so described, as much as
67% of the heavy goods vehicles have no business in the City. The
City Council will therefore continue to investigate ways in which
the impact of through traffic can be alleviated.
9.10 POLICY T3 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SUPPORT MEASURES TO
REDUCE THE VOLUME AND ALLEVIATE THE IMPACT OF THROUGH TRAFFIC IN
THE CITY INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW ROADS WITHIN OR IN THE
IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF THE CITY IF THIS CAN BE DONE WITHOUT UNDUE
ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE.
9.11 The proposed improvements to the primary road network will
hopefully reduce through traffic. However in order to maximise
these benefits, it may be necessary to introduce further control
over the movement of heavy vehicles. Similarly, on a smaller scale
there are areas within the City that would benefit from measures
that would reduce through traffic. In order to help identify these,
the City Council has commissioned the 'Bath Environment and
Transport Study' (B.E.A.T.S.). This aims to develop a methodology
for determining the "environmental capacity" of parts of the City
and individual roads within them. To date, only pilot studies have
been carried out, but it is hoped that the Study can be extended
City-wide in the future.
9.12 In earlier plans, three areas of the City were the subject
of specific traffic management proposals, the introduction of which
was agreed by the City Council but which have not yet been
implemented. These are Widcombe and East Twerton where it is
proposed to divert a large proportion of the traffic from the A36
onto alternative stretches of existing or new roads in order to
improve the environment in these local shopping centres. The City
Council has agreed in principle to help fund the first of these
schemes, which involves the introduction of two-way traffic along
Rossiter Road.
9.13 POLICY T4 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SEEK APPROPRIATE TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT MEASURES TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF MOTORISED TRAFFIC IN
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS.
9.14 Over the years a number of road proposals have been
prepared, and land has been safeguarded either under powers set out
in the Highways Act 1959, or by resolution by the County Council.
These proposals have now been reviewed and some of these highway
schemes have been retained. For planning reasons and in order that
the remaining and necessary highway improvements can be declared on
Local Land Charges, they will be safeguarded from new
development.
Proposals Map 9.15 POLICY T5 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SAFEGUARD
THE LAND REQUIRED FOR THE FOLLOWING HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT SCHEMES AS
SHOWN ON THE PROPOSALS MAP:
i) LOWER BRISTOL ROAD (A36) STAGE 1:
A4 TO WINDSOR BRIDGE ROAD;
ii) LOWER BRISTOL ROAD (A36) STAGE 2:
WINDSOR BRIDGE ROAD TO PINES WAY;
iii) LOWER BRISTOL ROAD (A36) STAGE 3:
MIDLAND BRIDGE ROAD TO CHURCHILL BRIDGE;
iv) ROSSITER ROAD (A36);
v) ENTRY HILL;
vi) A4/A46 JUNCTION, LAMBRIDGE;
vii) THE AMBURY; AND
viii) LANSDOWN ROAD
9.16 Policy T5 does not include a number of schemes which were
safeguarded in the Bath City Plan (June 1990). These are listed in
Appendix D together with the reasons for their deletion.
9.17 Since the 1970's, when the decision was made to rely on
traffic management rather than road building to reduce congestion
in the central area and improve the environment of pedestrians,
various steps have been taken to reduce the amount of traffic which
crosses the main shopping "spine" from Milsom Street down to
Southgate. The latest measures, which have included severing the
links between Queen Square and Wood Street, and between Lower
Borough Walls and New Orchard Street as well as the closure of
Pulteney Bridge to most types of traffic, have followed the
recommendations of the 1990 Traffic and Environment Study. This
recommended a series of phased proposals some of which have been
adopted by the City and County Councils. Servicing problems mean
that there is little scope for additional complete
pedestrianisation, but consideration will be given in the future to
the closure of some shopping streets between 10.00 am and 4.00 pm.
Any such further measures will have the aim of balancing the needs
of pedestrians with those of traders and other property owners and
residents, whilst still permitting a degree of car penetration in
the evening to support cultural and entertainment facilities.
9.18 POLICY T6 - IN BRINGING FORWARD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
PROPOSALS FOR THE CENTRAL AREA, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE, AS ITS
PRIME AIM, THE PRESERVATION OF THE HISTORIC FABRIC WHILST RETAINING
A VITAL CENTRAL AREA WITH A BALANCED SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC
STRUCTURE AND WILL SEEK TO ACHIEVE THE FOLLOWING OBJECTIVES:
i) FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE BENEFIT OF
PEDESTRIANS;
ii) FURTHER EXCLUSION OF THROUGH TRAFFIC AND OTHER UNNECESSARY
MOTORISED VEHICLES;
iii) IMPROVED PENETRATION BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT VEHICLES;
iv) MAINTAINED OR ENHANCED STANDARDS OF ACCESS FOR CYCLISTS AND
THE MOBILITY IMPAIRED; AND
v) SERVICING THAT ADEQUATELY MEETS THE NEEDS OF NEW AND EXISTING
COMMERCIAL, CULTURAL, RESIDENTIAL AND RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES
WITHIN THE CENTRAL AREA, INCLUDING EMERGENCY SERVICES.
9.19 The Car Parking Strategy adopted by the City Council in
1988 emphasised the important role that Park and Ride would have to
play in meeting the increased demand for parking, but also proposed
additional provision in the City Centre. The Traffic and
Environmental Study (1990) stressed the need for stricter control
of both on and off-street parking to support its proposals for
reduced vehicular access. Policy TR13 of the Third Alteration to
the Avon County Structure Plan adopted in 1994 calls for a
reduction in the amount of commuter parking in the centre of Bath.
The Council will therefore reduce the number of long-stay parking
spaces, whilst providing a limited increase in the availability of
short-term parking for shoppers through its control of charges.
9.20 POLICY T7 - THE CITY COUNCIL'S CAR PARKING STRATEGY IS TO
EXPAND THE PROVISION OF PARK AND RIDE AT ENTRY POINTS TO THE CITY,
AND TO RESTRICT PARKING PROVISION WITHIN THE CENTRAL AREA, OTHER
THAN TO MEET THE NEEDS OF SERVICING, THE MOBILITY IMPAIRED AND
RESIDENTS. ANY INCREASE IN SHORT TERM PARKING WITHIN THE CENTRAL
AREA SHOULD BE AT THE EXPENSE OF LONG-STAY PARKING SPACES.
9.21 The improved regulation of on-street parking which has
followed the introduction of the card parking scheme has increased
the availability of this type of parking despite the gradual
reduction in the number of spaces brought about by traffic
management measures. The Council accepts that this improvement has
been achieved at the expense of conditions for residents living
near the City Centre. A recent substantial reduction in cost has
increased the demand for residents' on-street parking permits even
though these do not guarantee a space. Up to now, it has not been
thought practical to designate any 'resident only' on-street
parking areas, but this matter will be kept under review. The
Council hopes that by improving security and lighting in its
off-street car parks, residents will be encouraged to make greater
use of these at night.
9.22 POLICY T8 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL MAINTAIN AND EXTEND
ON-STREET PARKING CONTROL WITHIN AND CLOSE TO THE CENTRAL AREA, IN
ORDER:
i) TO DISCOURAGE TRAVEL BY PRIVATE CAR TO THE CENTRAL AREA,
PARTICULARLY FOR JOURNEYS TO WORK;
ii) TO PROTECT THE APPEARANCE OF THE HISTORIC CITY; AND
iii) TO ENSURE THAT PARKING REQUIREMENTS OF RESIDENTS CAN BE MET
CLOSE TO THEIR HOME.
9.23 In order to maintain Bath's attraction as a tourist,
retailing and business centre, priority will be given to developing
Park and Ride sites on all the major approaches to the City, as
well as taking the necessary steps to improve access for public
transport between the car parks and the City Centre.
9.24 Following the establishment of three successful schemes at
the University, Newbridge and Lansdown (the latter is located
within the former Wansdyke District area), the City Council has
re-affirmed its commitment to Park and Ride and its determination
to establish an additional site at Lambridge, as shown on the
Proposals Map, as well as a site at Odd Down which falls outside
the City boundary. The City Council also intends to provide a
further extension to the car park at Newbridge. The land allocated
for a Park and Ride facility at Lambridge on the Proposals Map is
owned and used by Bath Football Club (RFU). To implement the Park
and Ride facility, the City Council will need to acquire the
site.
9.25 The City Council's commitment to Park and Ride includes
recognition of the need to:-
i) provide any necessary subsidy for the bus services;
ii) provide the highest possible standard of landscaping bearing
in mind that the car parks are likely to be located within or
adjoining the Green Belt; and
iii) negotiate with the Highway Authority for the introduction
of traffic management measures which will assist the services.
9.26 The existing and proposed Park and Ride services would be
considerably enhanced if a route segregated from other traffic
could be provided for the public transport link with the City
Centre. Possible routes for light railway or bus-way links will be
investigated.
9.27 The provision of Park and Ride facilities at locations
where traffic entering the City can be intercepted is a key element
of the City Council's strategy for reducing demand for car parking
within the central area and the use of private vehicles within the
City. The aim is to provide such facilities on all the major roads
entering the City. The City Council will look to developers to
enter into planning obligations to assist in the provision and
improvement of Park and Ride sites.
9.28 The County Council is committed to the promotion of Park
and Ride throughout the County (Policy TR5 of the Third Alteration
to the Structure Plan), and fully supports the endeavours of the
City Council to extend the provision and use of Park and Ride.
Proposals Map 9.29 POLICY T9 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SAFEGUARD
THE SITES SHOWN ON THE PROPOSALS MAP FOR PARK AND RIDE CAR
PARKS.
9.30 POLICY T10 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SEEK PROVISION OF PARK
AND RIDE FACILITIES ON ALL THE MAJOR APPROACHES TO THE CITY.
9.31 POLICY T11 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL PROMOTE PARK AND RIDE
SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY. PRIORITY WILL BE ACCORDED TO TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT MEASURES AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS THAT ASSIST THE
MOVEMENT OF BUSES ON ROUTES THAT LINK PARK AND RIDE SITES TO THE
CITY CENTRE.
9.32 Even with improved public transport, pedestrian and cycle
accessibility and increased restrictions on the movement of private
cars, there will continue to be substantial demand for the use of
the latter as car ownership rates are likely to continue to rise.
This in turn will generate demands for car parking in any
development proposal. The City Council accepts that there is a need
for a variety of maximum and minimum standards which take account
of differing circumstances and locations. Until a thorough review
of the parking standards has been carried out, and new standards
adopted as an alteration to the Local Plan, the City Council will
negotiate with developers to determine an appropriate level of
on-site provision for servicing and car parking.
T13 9.33 POLICY T12 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL REQUIRE THE
PROVISION FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS OF ON-SITE SERVICING AND CAR PARKING
FACILITIES TO AN EXTENT TO BE DETERMINED WITH RELATION TO:
i) THE PROPOSED USE, ANY NEED FOR ON-SITE PROVISION TO ENSURE
ITS EFFICIENT OPERATION, AND THE LIKELY EXTENT OF MOVEMENT TO AND
FROM THE SITE;
ii) THE ENVIRONMENTAL CAPACITY OF BOTH THE SITE AND ITS
SURROUNDINGS TO ACCEPT PARKING;
iii) THE CAPACITY OF THE LOCAL HIGHWAY NETWORK AND THE NEED TO
CONTROL ANY INCREASE IN TRAFFIC LEVELS;
iv) THE NEED TO ENSURE HIGHWAY SAFETY;
v) THE ACCESSIBILITY OF THE SITE BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT, INCLUDING
PARK AND RIDE;
vi) THE EASE OF ACCESS BY CYCLE OR ON FOOT;
vii) THE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC CAR PARKING IN THE VICINITY OF
THE SITE; AND
viii) THE PROVISIONS OF POLICY T13.
9.34 The Council recognises that it will not be successful in
its aim of reducing future demand for car use by developing Park
and Ride, and by the way it manages the public car parks, unless
strict control is exercised over the provision of private parking
spaces. In the past, the Council has relied on the shortage of open
land and the listed building and conservation area controls to
limit the amount of off-street parking. It is often not physically
possible for developers to provide any parking spaces. The Council
now considers that stricter controls are called for in the Central
Area where the impact of both moving and parked cars on the
environment is greatest. Within the designated Central Parking
Area, no additional off-street parking provision will be allowed
apart from a limited amount for servicing premises and for the
mobility impaired. In exceptions, parking may be allowed in the
case of new residential developments in accordance with Policy
T12.
Proposals Map 9.35 POLICY T13 - WITHIN THE CENTRAL PARKING AREA
AS DEFINED ON THE PROPOSALS MAP, DEVELOPERS PROPOSING TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL NON-RESIDENTIAL FLOORSPACE BY MEANS OF NEW CONSTRUCTION
OR CHANGE OF USE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PARKING
PLACES ON SITE, EXCEPT TO CATER FOR ESSENTIAL SERVICING AND THE
MOBILITY IMPAIRED.
9.36 Many older terraces in Bath do not have adequate off-street
parking nearby and so the streets are often congested with parked
cars. Many of the streets have narrow paths and alleyways which,
with the co-operation of all or the majority of residents, can be
improved to form a rear access road. The County of Avon Act 1982
empowers the City Council to assist in this.
9.37 POLICY T14 - WHERE POSSIBLE, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL
ENCOURAGE AND ASSIST IN THE PROVISION OF APPROPRIATE REAR ACCESS
ROADS TO ENABLE CARS TO BE PARKED WITHIN THE INDIVIDUAL
CURTILAGES.
9.38 Although steps will be taken to discourage or prevent heavy
goods vehicles from entering residential areas, the City Council is
mindful of the fact that parking associated with essential
movements detracts from residential amenities in some areas. The
Council will seek to ensure that adequate off-street servicing and
parking facilities are provided whenever possible, and overnight
parking will continue to be provided in the Avon Street Coach
Park.
Proposals Map 9.39 POLICY T15 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL PROVIDE
FACILITIES FOR OVERNIGHT PARKING OF LORRIES AT THE LOCATION SHOWN
ON THE PROPOSALS MAP.
9.40 The importance of public transport is increasingly being
acknowledged, and the need to encourage its use as an alternative
to the private car is stressed in Planning Policy Guidance (PPG13
"Transport" : March 1994), Policy TR4 of the Avon Structure Plan
(Third Alteration), the Avon Transport Plan and Policy T1 of this
Local Plan. Although the railways and taxis have an important role,
and some forms of light rapid transit may be introduced in the
future, buses will continue to provide the majority of urban and
rural services. Avon County Council has done much to secure the
retention of the bus route network and frequent services throughout
the day. The City Council will seek to maintain this and promote
measures which will increase the quality and attraction of bus
services. These include the introduction of bus lanes and other
traffic management measures, improving access for the disabled, the
provision of fare subsidies, enhancing the ease of interchange
between bus services and other forms of transport, and
experimentation with types of fuel and forms of traction.
9.41 POLICY T16 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SUPPORT HIGHWAY AND
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS THAT IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY AND
RELIABILITY OF BUS AND COACH OPERATIONS PROVIDED THE PROPOSALS ARE
CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE
ENVIRONMENT.
9.42 Inter City Regional Railways and express coach services
provide important public transport links to and from Bath. Not only
are these services for Bath residents, but are important in
sustaining Bath's prosperity in bringing commuters, visitors and
shoppers to Bath.
9.43 For many visitors the railway and bus stations provide
their first impression of Bath. The suggested re-development of the
Southgate area should provide opportunities to improve facilities
for both bus and rail passengers.
R3 9.44 POLICY T17 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SECURE AN EFFICIENT
PUBLIC TRANSPORT INTERCHANGE AND AN IMPROVED ENVIRONMENT FOR USERS
OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES IN ANY REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SOUTHGATE
AREA.
9.45 The railway in Bath has only one siding at Westmoreland
Yard which provides space for loading or unloading freight. Whilst
not all of this site may be required as a 'railhead', it is
considered prudent to retain this facility in the City.
9.46 POLICY T18 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SEEK TO SECURE THE
RETENTION OF THE 'RAILHEAD' FACILITY AT WESTMORELAND STATION ROAD
WHERE FREIGHT OR CONTAINERS CAN BE TRANSFERRED TO OR FROM
TRAINS.
9.47 There have previously been proposals to link Bath and the
rapid transit network that is being proposed for Bristol, but the
recent Strategic Rail Study for the County (STARS), concluded that
this would not be appropriate because advances in signalling
technology mean that the existing railway could provide an enhanced
rail link between the two cities. The same study did, however,
recommend that the possibility of linking the existing Park and
Ride site at Newbridge with the proposed site at Lambridge via the
City Centre be investigated. Consultants were therefore
commissioned by the County and City Councils to carry out the
"Rapid Transit in Bath Pre-Feasibility Study". This has concluded
that such a link could be financially viable, should be seriously
considered and investigated further in view of the likelihood that
increased traffic congestion will seriously affect the quality of
the Park and Ride bus services, and that a corridor within which a
rapid transit system could be provided should be safeguarded in the
future. Rapid transit could detract from as well as enhance the
environment, and this and any future studies will be the subject of
full public consultation before any decisions are taken to actually
promote the provision of such a facility.
T9 9.48 POLICY T19 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL ENCOURAGE FURTHER
INVESTIGATION OF THE POSSIBILITY OF ENHANCING THE PARK AND RIDE
SERVICE BY THE PROVISION OF A RAPID TRANSIT LINK BETWEEN THE
NEWBRIDGE AND THE PROPOSED LAMBRIDGE PARK AND RIDE SITES, AND THE
CITY CENTRE, AND WILL IF CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE, SAFEGUARD THE
POSSIBLE ROUTE OF SUCH A LINK FROM DEVELOPMENT.
V5 9.49 Many visitors to the City arrive in private coaches.
Facilities for these have recently been improved with the opening
of the Riverside Coach Park, but many coaches continue to set down
and pick up passengers in Kingsmead Square. Those coaches which are
providing short tours of the centre of Bath have put unacceptable
pressure on this part of the City. A policy regarding their
management is included within Chapter 8 on Visitors: Policy V5.
9.50 The ease of movement of pedestrians throughout the City is
considered to be of increasing importance. In the City Centre, some
of the streets were pedestrianised nearly twenty years ago. Recent
studies have indicated that there is a greater need for pedestrian
management schemes, such as improved signing of information etc,
and areas given over to pedestrian priority.
9.51 Shoppers need convenient routes from car and coach parks
and public transport stops to the commercial area. Tourists who
want to visit the Central Shopping Area are also likely to require
signposted routes between other attractions. The aim of the City
Council will be to give priority to pedestrians through the use of
traffic management schemes, by restricting vehicle traffic and
introducing pedestrian schemes that improve the environmental
quality of public areas, while respecting the architectural
character of the City Centre and its function as a retail
centre.
9.52 People who are mobility impaired are not always given due
consideration when designing streets for wheelchairs or pushchair
use. Dropped-kerbs, appropriately located ramps, and access to
public buildings are basic requirements. The City Council is not
able to impose a duty on owners of existing buildings, but can help
by encouraging and by ensuring that ramps and drop-kerbs are
installed where street works offer the opportunity.
9.53 POLICY T20 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SEEK SAFE, CONVENIENT
AND PLEASANT CONDITIONS FOR PEDESTRIANS AND THE MOBILITY IMPAIRED
IN ASSESSING ALL DEVELOPMENT AND HIGHWAY PROPOSALS WITH REGARD
TO:
i) INTRODUCING FURTHER RESTRICTIONS IN STREETS WHICH GIVE
PRIORITY AND SAFETY TO PEDESTRIANS;
ii) PROVIDING EFFECTIVE AND APPROPRIATE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
FACILITIES;
iii) INTRODUCING MEASURES TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES IN
SOME STREETS; AND
iv) SECURING MINOR IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS SIGNING RAMPS AND
DROPPED KERBS AT JUNCTIONS AND PRINCIPAL POINTS OF PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS.
9.54 In the remainder of the City, the footpath network provides
convenient routes between different residential areas to schools,
shopping centres, playgrounds and to areas of countryside.
9.55 Under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act
1949, all public Rights of Way must be shown on Definitive Maps
prepared by the County Council. No Definitive Map exists for the
Bath district area. The provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside
Act 1981 require that a Definitive Map and statement recording
public Rights of Way on footpaths and Bridleways be prepared and
then kept under continuous review. The County Council is the
surveying authority for this exercise, and to assist in preparation
of the Definitive Map, the City Council will safeguard the existing
Rights of Way as an interim measure, as shown on Map 1. Footpaths
and Rights of Way can be of considerable nature conservation,
landscape and historical value.
Map 1 9.56 POLICY T21 - IN THE ABSENCE OF A DEFINITIVE FOOTPATHS
MAP FOR BATH, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SAFEGUARD THE FOOTPATHS SHOWN
ON MAP 1 AND OTHER ESTABLISHED RIGHTS OF WAY FROM DEVELOPMENT.
WHERE NEW DEVELOPMENT OR RE-DEVELOPMENT WOULD AFFECT THESE, THE
COUNCIL WILL REQUIRE THE PROVISION OF SAFE AND CONVENIENT ROUTES
FOR PEDESTRIANS.
9.57 The City Council would wish to encourage the protection of
existing routes where they coincide with new development. Footpaths
or Rights of Way threatened by new development should be replaced
and re-routed if necessary. The Council also wishes to promote the
creation of new access opportunities.
9.58 There is further scope for the extension of the footpath
network, in particular along the riverbank north of Pulteney
Bridge.
9.59 POLICY T22 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL SEEK TO EXTEND THE
NETWORK OF FOOTPATHS WHERE THIS WOULD PRODUCE SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS,
THROUGH THE CREATION OF NEW LINKS WHICH PROMOTE WALKING AS A MEANS
OF TRAVEL, OR PROVIDE A PUBLIC AMENITY.
9.60 The County Council has enhanced the priority given to
cycling and to improving safety and the environment throughout the
County. Consistent with this, the County Council proposes to
implement a continuing programme of cycle routes and provision of
other facilities for cyclists. This provision will consider the
needs of pedestrians who use these routes. The Avon County Council
Pedestrian Officer will be consulted on developments relating to
Cycle paths. Presently, there are few dedicated cycle routes within
Bath. The Bristol-Bath Cycle Track extends from Bristol City Centre
to Bath and terminates at present at Brassmill Lane. A "leisure
route" utilising part of the River Avon towpath between Brassmill
Lane and Green Park, near the City Centre, has also been
constructed.
9.61 Consultants commissioned by local campaign group Cycle Bath
with the support of the County Council, produced a feasibility
study (The Bath Greenway Route, June 1991), considering a cyclist
route across the entire City, east to west. The aim of the
"Greenway" route would be to operate as an uninterrupted
thoroughfare segregated from any kind of motorised traffic, for use
by pedestrians, wheelchair users, cyclists and people with prams.
Further investigations in May 1992 considered the implementation of
the "Greenway" primary route, a City Centre through routes study,
and a study of City Centre By-pass routes. Consideration has been
given to identifying a preferred City Centre through route and
northern by-pass route for implementation. It is anticipated that
these routes will largely follow the line of adopted highway and
will link to the Riverside "leisure route".
9.62 The growth in cycling as a form of transport and leisure
activity increases the need for safe and pleasant routes.
Opportunities to create safe routes to primary destinations such as
schools, shopping centres and within parks will therefore be
sought.
9.63 POLICY T23 - THE CITY COUNCIL WILL, WHERE OPPORTUNITIES
EXIST, SUPPORT THE IDENTIFICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF AN
APPROPRIATE NETWORK OF CYCLE ROUTES AND SECURE CYCLE PARKING
FACILITIES, OF ADEQUATE SAFETY, CONVENIENCE AND ATTRACTIVENESS,
INCLUDING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS, SHOPPING CENTRES, EMPLOYMENT
SITES AND WITHIN PARKS; AND ALSO TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE NEEDS AND
SAFETY OF CYCLISTS IN THE DESIGN OF NEW HIGHWAY AND TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT SCHEMES.
9.64 The lack of specific cycle facilities such as racks, in
itself acts as a deterrent to cycle use. The Council considers that
parking facilities for cycles should be provided in association
with developments, and at particular locations such as the railway
and bus station, major employment sites; and in close proximity to
shopping areas, in order to encourage cycling as well as protect
pedestrian footways, improve safety and reduce obstruction.
9.65 The County Council in 1989 produced cycle parking standards
to form the basis of conditions on new developments. In February
1991, the County agreed to continue to operate the cycle parking
standards, but to review these in the light of ongoing
investigations into modal share targets for cycling. Until this
investigation is completed, District Councils have been invited to
adopt the cycle parking standard as guidance.
Appendix E 9.66 POLICY T24 - THE CITY COUNCIL IN CONSIDERING ALL
APPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT WILL, WHERE APPROPRIATE, REQUIRE THE
CYCLE PARKING STANDARDS TO BE APPLIED AS OUTLINED IN APPENDIX E.
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CYCLE PARKING WILL ALSO BE CONSIDERED IN THE
LIGHT OF THE COUNCIL'S CONSERVATION POLICIES FOR THE CITY, THE AIM
TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE THE CITY'S NATURAL AND BUILT ENVIRONMENTS
AND THE CONSTRAINTS IMPOSED BY LAND AVAILABILITY, PARTICULARLY
WITHIN THE CITY CENTRE. IN CONSIDERING THE NUMBER, SITING AND
DESIGN OF SUCH FACILITIES, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE PARTICULAR
REGARD TO THEIR IMPACT UPON THE VISUAL AND OTHER AMENITIES OF AN
AREA.
9.67 The City Council will normally require new development
proposals to meet certain standards and criteria in relation to
highways. It will aim to ensure that developments satisfactorily
mitigate any highway and transport problems that they might
otherwise cause. All proposals will therefore be assessed in
relation to their impact, both in individual and cumulative terms.
Proposals should achieve a high standard of road safety. The
recommended standard for the layout and design of new roads should
be based upon the principles of Design Bulletin 32 (April 1992) and
local supplementary guidance (Avon County Council's "Residential
Roads in Avon : 2nd Edition 1994") and any subsequent
amendments.
9.68 Where appropriate, developers should also take into account
the need to safeguard strategic and local highway proposals and
make provision for the early introduction of public transport
services. They will also be required to provide or fund any highway
improvements which are made necessary as a direct result of
development.
9.69 POLICY T25 - PROPOSALS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS WILL BE
REQUIRED TO MEET WHICHEVER OF THE FOLLOWING HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT
CONTROL CRITERIA WOULD BE APPROPRIATE:
i) THE ACHIEVEMENT OF A HIGH STANDARD OF ROAD SAFETY;
ii) THE SAFEGUARDING OF THE STRATEGIC AND LOCAL HIGHWAY
PROPOSALS AS SHOWN ON THE PROPOSALS MAP;
iii) THE PROVISION OF FACILITIES FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT INCLUDING
MOVES WHICH WOULD FACILITATE THE EARLY INTRODUCTION OF BUS AND/OR
RAPID TRANSIT SERVICES;
iv) THE PROVISION OF SAFE AND ADEQUATE ACCESS ONTO THE EXISTING
HIGHWAY NETWORK HAVING REGARD TO THE LIKELY IMPACT OF THE EXPECTED
ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ON THE CHARACTER AND AMENITIES OF THE
SURROUNDING AREA;
v) THE PROVISION OF OFF-STREET PARKING AND SERVICING FACILITIES
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICIES ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL;
vi) THE PROVISION OF FACILITIES FOR CYCLISTS, PEDESTRIANS AND
THE MOBILITY IMPAIRED;
vii) THE PROVISION OF TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES; AND
viii) THE PROVISION OR THE FUNDING OF ANY NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS
TO THE TRANSPORT SYSTEM ARISING AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE
DEVELOPMENT.
