Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
 today - PEW / Broad Gauge (1)
today - ORR Station Usage figures out
13/12/2018 - ACoRP AGM
17/12/2018 - Removal of Severn Bridge Tolls
22/12/2018 - Christmas service changes
04/01/2019 - Look forward - 2019 Severnside
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
December 11, 2018, 05:45:45 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[124] Crossrail - The Elizabeth Line - ongoing discussion, merged to...
[74] Station Usage figures from the ORR
[59] MetroBus
[56] Passengers trapped on train for over 6 hours
[52] Cotswold Line - 2018 cancellation and amendments log
[34] Class 387 coming to Thames Valley - ongoing discussion
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Linked Events
  • Bath Clean Air consult ends: November 26, 2018
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Bath - clean air and congestion  (Read 430 times)
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22892



View Profile WWW Email
« on: October 23, 2018, 01:30:40 am »

Don't know where to start on this one!   Subject cropped up while I was working on server issues yesterday ...

http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/bath-breathes-2021-overview

Quote
BathBreathes2021

Welcome to our consultation on a Charging Clean Air Zone for Bath.

The following pages outline our proposal for Class D Clean Air Zone (CAZ) in the centre of Bath. The aim is to urgently reduce harmful levels of NO2 across the city, caused by vehicle emissions.

We encourage you to take part in the consultation by reading this information, completing a questionnaire or talking to us at a regular drop-in session or surgery.

No decisions have been made and weíre really keen to hear your views.

The consultation closes on 26 November 2018.

I picked this up on Facebook at
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157913778499196&set=a.10153700771924196
and felt it of sufficient significance to share on my own timeline
https://www.facebook.com/graham.ellis.5055/posts/10156755830852094

Some excellent comments there - including some from names very familiar to me who are here abouts too. They include ...
* Only NO2 not CO covered
* Moves problem elsewhere - A350 from M4 to Warminster
* Creates rat runs round back of Bath to RUH and through other housing just outside zone
* Severe cost on businesses which could be pushed under
* Puts people off travel into Bath
* A36 / A46 corner not a Bath but a Highways England issue
* Unclear on exemptions

These are part of issue only - suggest consider alongside
- Alternative A46 to A36 link
- Better facilities for public transport in from east including park at transport hubs and ride in the final section
- Market existing public transport
Public transport elements include (from east) D1, D3, MetroWest, x31, x72, 3A, 228
« Last Edit: October 23, 2018, 01:47:56 am by grahame » Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
Red Squirrel
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2414



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: October 23, 2018, 09:16:09 am »

Don't know where to start on this one...

...
* Only NO2 not CO covered
* Moves problem elsewhere - A350 from M4 to Warminster
...


Let's start here! CO2 emissions are a global problem; NOx emissions are a local one.

Post-Kyoto, motor manufacturers rushed to dieselise their products to reduce CO2 emissions. The downside is that these (now older) diesel vehicles produce toxins, including oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter, which badly affect the air quality locally. New diesel vehicles, incidentally, produce similar levels of pollution to modern (if that's the right word to use when referring to fossil fuels) petrol-powered vehicles.

I don't claim a detailed knowledge of the A350 from M4 to Warminster, but I imagine that for the most part it is better-ventilated and less populated than the streets of Bath - so maybe it makes sense to divert traffic that way?
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22892



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: October 23, 2018, 09:33:07 am »

I don't claim a detailed knowledge of the A350 from M4 to Warminster, but I imagine that for the most part it is better-ventilated and less populated than the streets of Bath - so maybe it makes sense to divert traffic that way?

Ah - but you're comparing a total route against a pinch point there.

M4 - A46 - A36 to Warminster is also "for the most part it is better-ventilated and less populated than the streets of Bath" - it's just the bit through Bath that's the problem.  Grin

M4 - A350 to Warminster is indeed for much of the route length better that the streets of Bath - however it too has its problems, snaking though the town of Westbury which has no alternative route, and also passing through some of the sprawl  of Melksham before getting to the bypass that avoids the town centre.  There's also the village of Beanacre and a bottleneck at Yarnbrook ... all in all just as big an issue (over a much longer distance) that the joining of the A36 and A46 in the Bath area.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
Red Squirrel
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2414



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: October 23, 2018, 10:28:39 am »

Well there's the conundrum.

There could well be significant economic benefits in improving connectivity between Bristol/Bath and Southampton/Bournemouth/Poole, whether by rail or road, though finding a suitable route for a road could prove challenging. Meanwhile people in Bath are dying, and their leaders are in a position to try to do something about it.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1664


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: October 23, 2018, 11:57:30 am »

Meanwhile people in Bath are dying, and their leaders are in a position to try to do something about it.
Or they aren't, or don't think they are. As it says on the page showing the proposed boundary:
Quote
Itís been amended since it was first published in Spring 2018 to take account of residentsí views,
I wonder how many of those views were along the lines of "Please extend the boundary so I get clean air too," compare? to those saying "Please make an exemption for Xyz Street as it's a major route to work," and how many councillors viewing the latter thought "Public health is more important than current commuting patterns" compared to those who said "I defend your right to get to work"?
Logged

Day return to Infinity, please.
Red Squirrel
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2414



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: October 23, 2018, 12:29:20 pm »

Meanwhile people in Bath are dying, and their leaders are in a position to try to do something about it.
Or they aren't, or don't think they are. As it says on the page showing the proposed boundary:
Quote
Itís been amended since it was first published in Spring 2018 to take account of residentsí views,
I wonder how many of those views were along the lines of "Please extend the boundary so I get clean air too," compare? to those saying "Please make an exemption for Xyz Street as it's a major route to work," and how many councillors viewing the latter thought "Public health is more important than current commuting patterns" compared to those who said "I defend your right to get to work"?

Well, as I say, it's all a conundrum. Who should take precedence when weighing things in the balance: people who live in a street, or those who don't live there but find it convenient to pollute it or park in it?

Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1664


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: October 23, 2018, 01:05:29 pm »

The conundrum is often solved by them being the same people!
Logged

Day return to Infinity, please.
rogerw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 516



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: October 23, 2018, 04:01:54 pm »

A few years ago BANES tried to put a weight restriction on Cleveland Place to remove north/south HGVs from Bath.  They backed down under the threat of a legal challenge as this forms part of a strategic route.  Being a cynical old b****r I can't help but to suspect that by proposing a totally unjustified high charge for HGVs they are trying to achieve the same aim by the back door.  I suspect this proposal will also be threatened with a legal challenge by the adjacent authorities who will gain the diverted traffic, some on unsuitable roads.
Logged

I like to travel.  It lets me feel I'm getting somewhere.
Red Squirrel
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2414



View Profile
« Reply #8 on: October 23, 2018, 04:32:54 pm »

The charge does not apply to Euro-6 compliant HGVs, if I've read it right - so it isn't an HGV ban.

As to whether £100 is justifiable: it sounds pretty punitive to me, but then I don't know much about the economics of running haulage. At a guess most logistics organisations already do their best avoid Bath.

As to whether adjoining authorities will have grounds for a legal challenge: Improving air quality has been treated as less-than-urgent for far, far too long, and I don't think I would be overstepping the mark to suggest that senior politicians have lied in an attempt to mask the scale of the problem. I absolutely support Bath's efforts, and would hope (probably forlornly given the nature of Bristol's current 'leadership') that Bristol would follow. (...and there's a concept I never thought to see: Bristol following Bath's lead). If this leads to higher NOx levels in Melksham or Beanacre or Yarnbrook, then they can also follow Bath.
Logged
froome
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 338


View Profile Email
« Reply #9 on: October 23, 2018, 06:49:33 pm »

Meanwhile people in Bath are dying, and their leaders are in a position to try to do something about it.
Or they aren't, or don't think they are. As it says on the page showing the proposed boundary:
Quote
Itís been amended since it was first published in Spring 2018 to take account of residentsí views,
I wonder how many of those views were along the lines of "Please extend the boundary so I get clean air too," compare? to those saying "Please make an exemption for Xyz Street as it's a major route to work," and how many councillors viewing the latter thought "Public health is more important than current commuting patterns" compared to those who said "I defend your right to get to work"?

The boundary has been extended quite a bit since the first publication, so presumably the first of the views you have quoted was the majority one.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1664


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: October 23, 2018, 10:55:19 pm »

In that case the people and councillors of Bath are leading Bristol in many ways!
Logged

Day return to Infinity, please.
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants