1. SUMMARY

1.1. The Council’s Consultants, BEELAB, presented their findings of a study of the River Avon between Pultney Weir and Bathampton Weir to an informal meeting of this Committee in March of this year. This report formally presents these findings to Committee and seeks endorsement of the main consultant’s recommendation to introduce a speed limit on this stretch of the river. It recommends that Committee make a formal request to the Environment Agency to achieve this and authorizes officers to work with the Agency to progress the matter.

2. RECOMMENDATION

2.1. That Committee accepts BEELAB’s reports of findings amended by Professor Sellin’s letter dated 7th May 1999.

2.2. That a formal request is made by this Committee to the Environment Agency’s Bristol Avon Local Flood Defence Committee to favourably consider the introduction and enforcement of a speed limit on the River Avon between Pultney Weir, Bath and Bathampton Weir in line with BEELAB’s recommendations, to include periods of review.

2.3. That this Council, as a riparian owner, works in collaboration with other riparian owners, and in particular with Riparian Owners Avon River (ROAR), to introduce a code of best practice for the use by boats of the River Avon between Pultney Weir and Bathampton Weir and that delegated authority be given to the Head of Strategic Policy to agree, in consultation with the Head of Property and legal Services, the details of that code and any agreements to be entered into with the boat operators.

2.4. That a further report be presented to Committee should the Environment Agency seek a contribution from the Council in respect of the request to implement a speed limit.

3. RESOURCE AND CORPORATE POLICY IMPLICATIONS (Where necessary, the views of the Council's Statutory Officers are reflected in the comments below)

3.1. Financial: There are no direct financial implications as a result of this report. However, the enforcement of any code of practice may from time to time result in legal action and require specific resources which cannot be contained within existing budgets. These will have to be reported separately to Committee on a case by case basis. Also the Environment Agency has indicated that it may wish to approach the Council for a contribution towards enforcement of the speed limit if it is to be introduced. This will be the subject of a further report to Committee should this approach be made.

3.2. Staffing: There are no staffing implications as a result of this report. Any staffing implications resulting from a request for assistance from the Environment Agency will be the subject of a further report.

3.3. Equalities: None

3.4. Economic: The use of the River Avon along this stretch by passenger-carrying boats provides a tourist facility and attraction and such boats are operated commercially. The introduction of a speed limit is not regarded by officers as being likely to have an effect on the viability of such activities. Comments of two of the three passenger boat operators are attached as appendices to this report.

3.5. Environment: This stretch of the River Avon is an important site for wildlife (see BEELAB’s ecological report) and is an attractive natural asset. The river is designated as a Protected Wildlife Site under the Bath Local Plan and as a Site of Nature Conservation Importance under the Deposit Wansdyke Local Plan. Much of the length of the riverbank is natural and supports a range of trees. These contribute significantly to the quality of and appearance of the landscape both within the City of Bath and the countryside areas through which the river flows. The control of the speed of the boats to prevent undue erosion of the natural riverbanks is important to the conservation of the river environment.

3.6. Council Wide Impacts: None

4. BACKGROUND AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK

4.1. Members are advised to refer to the Committee report presented to Committee on 14th November 1996, and in particular Appendix 1 of that report, as this contains much of the background and legal framework for this report. This report updates where necessary.

4.2. In December 1997 the Council commissioned BEELAB, the commercial arm of the University of Bristol, to undertake a survey of the River Avon between Pultney Weir, Bath and Bathampton Weir. The objectives behind the study were:

1. To assist the Council’s understanding of the environmental effects of activity on the river.

2. To determine where there is erosion of the riverbank, which cannot be explained by the natural action of the river or by unusual (one-off) occurrences.

3. To assess, if possible, the likely cause of any ‘unexplained’ erosion and identify measures which might address them.

4.3. The study comprised two parts. One was the study of the riverbank erosion and its probable causes. The other was an ecological assessment of the river. Reports on both aspects were presented to an informal meeting of this Committee in March of this year and have been deposited in each of the Political Group’s rooms for reference. A summary of the findings and recommendations, together with Professor Sellin’s amended recommendation of 7th May 1999, are attached as Appendix 1.

4.4. The main recommendations of the study relate to controlling the speed of boats using this section of the river and requiring boats to observe a code of best practice. This report is concerned largely with these recommendations. The other ameliorative measures recommended to improve boidiversity and bank stability will form part of on-going discussions with the Environment Agency, other sections of the Council and other landowners as part of the Council’s developing Biodiversity Action Planning process, but will be subject to the necessary resources being available. This will be the subject of separate reports to Committee.

4.5. The Council has no particular duties or powers, as a local authority, which enable it to control use of the river in general, other than an enforcement responsibility under the Health and Safety at Work setc. Act 1974 relating to the activity of hiring out of pleasure craft for use on inland waters. This does not cover situations where people pay to be taken on a site seeing trip, as they are not hiring a boat. The Council is currently clarifying the situation with the Health and Safety Executive regarding the enforcemnet responsibilty for the trip boats.

4.6. The River Avon between Pultney Weir and Bathampton Weir is classified as ‘non-navigable with no public right of navigation’. There is no Navigation Authority for this stretch of the river (unlike downstream of Pultney Weir, where British Waterways is the Navigation Authority). Your officers’ understanding is that, subject to no other right of navigation being proved, a riparian owner can in theory control navigation on water which flows over his or her property. The Council is a significant riparian owner along this stretch of the River Avon.

5. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

5.1. On the basis of the understanding set out above, the issues raised in the 1996 report and BEELAB’s findings, it is recommended that the Council act in its capacity as riparian owner, jointly with other riparian owners, to finalise and introduce a code of best practice for use of the river by boats. Through its introduction, riparian owners would seek to encourage environmentally sustainable use of the river. It is intended that the code would be developed as an agreement, which operators of boats, who could not prove that they had rights of navigation, would be required to enter into in order to navigate the river. This would include all boat users whether private, recreational or commercial.

5.2. The Environment Agency, which has assisted in the overall study, has indicated that it has powers under its Land Drainage Bylaws to implement a speed limit on this stretch of the river in accordance with BEELAB’s recommendations. Furthermore, the Agency has informally indicated that, in principle, it is willing to do this, but is concerned that proper arrangements for enforcement are set in place prior to its introduction. Such arrangements will have significant budgetary implications for the Agency, which would have to be considered alongside other priorities.

5.3. The matter is to be considered by the Environment Agency’s Bristol Avon Local Flood Defense Committee in December of this year. Officers of the Agency have advised that the Council should make a formal request to its Committee to consider the matter favourably. In addition an indication that the Council would be willing to consider a joint working arrangement on the issue would also be welcomed. It is not possible at this stage to indicate the details of such a joint venture, but it might include for example a financial contribution towards setting up costs and/or assistance or contributions to on-going enforcement. These would have to be the subject of a further report, but it should be noted that no allowance has been made for this within the current budget making process for 2000/2001. Currently the Agency are seeking only an in principle statement that the Council would at least consider such an approach. It is recommended that Committee agrees this and also makes a formal representation to the Environment Agency.

6. CONSULTATION

6.1. Following the presentation to Members in March, BEELAB’s reports were also sent to the main passenger boat operators on this stretch of the river. They were invited to comment on the reports and informed that their comments would be reported to Committee ‘some time in the autumn’. Two out of the three operators have responded, although the main operator has not. Their responses are attached as Appendix 2 to this report. Professor Sellin of BEELAB has commented on these responses in his letter dated 1st November1999. This is attached as Appendix 3.

6.2. This report has not been sent to Trades Unions because there are no staffing implications resulting from this report.

,

This version was printed 08/11/99 17:14