An action group has analysed air quality data in Bath and accused the council of “creating a public health emergency” with its Liveable Neighbourhood schemes by merely displacing traffic onto already congested roads.
Bath & North East Somerset Council has however disputed the findings of the resident-led UNited Sydney Unliveable Neighbourhoods Group (UNSUNG).
UNSUNG was set up after the council launched its experimental through-traffic restriction in New Sydney Place and Sydney Road a year ago. Bollards prevent drivers from cutting through to avoid the A36/Bathwick Street junction.
A six-month consultation took place and the council said that whilst most respondents opposed the trial being made permanent, the reasons cited for objection – increased congestion and pollution – were not supported by hard data from traffic and air quality monitoring.
Those living closest to the scheme were most supportive, saying it has improved pedestrian and cyclist safety and improved the area.
In February, the council’s cabinet member for resources, Councillor Mark Elliott (Lansdown, Liberal Democrat), decided to make the Liveable Neighbourhood (LN) scheme permanent. His decision was called in by opposition councillors, but a B&NES scrutiny panel upheld his decision.
Now UNSUNG has analysed data for two key air quality sites on roads that feed LNs and says that its findings have “horrific consequences” for the health of residents suffering from displaced traffic.
In a press release UNSUNG said: “By comparing openly available data between December 2023 and April 2024, prior to installation of the New Sydney Place and Lower Lansdown Liveable Neighbourhoods with data from December 2024 to April 2025, UNSUNG has discovered alarming increases in pollutants.
“The monitoring site on the London Road, which feeds traffic into the bottleneck caused by the New Sydney Place Liveable Neighbourhood, has seen an 11% increase in harmful nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and a 59% increase in particulates.
“The most dangerous particulate, PM2.5, now averages nearly three times the World Health Organization recommended limit.
“The monitoring site on Gay Street, which feeds the Lower Lansdown Liveable Neighbourhood, has seen a 52% rise in NO2 and a two to threefold increase in particulates.”
The group says exposure to particulates is associated with respiratory conditions, cardiovascular disease and lung cancer, and that there is emerging evidence for associations with dementia, low birth weight and Type 2 diabetes.
Neil McCabe, spokesperson for UNSUNG, said: “By implementing Liveable Neighbourhoods without any consideration of congestion and pollution due to displaced traffic, B&NES are deliberately putting the health of residents at risk for the sake of a few privileged areas.
“Bath is the fifth most congested city in the UK, and we need to reduce car travel. However, by not integrating LNs with a traffic and public transport plan, and de-funding public transport, B&NES are creating a public health emergency in the city by merely displacing traffic onto already congested main routes.”
But Councillor Manda Rigby, Bathwick, Liberal Democrat), the cabinet member for transport, told the Bath Echo: “Our own monitoring of locations in and around Sydney Road does not show any increase in NO2 levels and we do not recognise the pollutants figures quoted.
“We are aware that elevated levels of particulate matter were observed regionally in January and March 2025, which are likely associated with weather-related events and cannot be attributed to individual Liveable Neighbourhood schemes.
“The Liveable Neighbourhood trial in Lower Lansdown is still ongoing and there is no evidence that London Road and Gay Street have been impacted by traffic because of them.
“We are co-designing Liveable Neighbourhoods with communities to address issues commonly found in residential streets, including improving active travel routes.
“Giving people spaces to walk and cycle and therefore enabling cars to be left at home helps improve air quality and people’s physical and mental health.”
Mr McCabe responded: “It’s a shame that a council that claims to be ‘data driven’ in its decisions ignores nationally recorded data on https://www.ukairquality.net/ which indicates that pollution levels in Bath are going the wrong way.”
He said attributing a regional rise in particulate levels to the increases seen in Bath was “cherry-picking data”.
“In comparison to Bath, the monitoring station in Yate (in South Gloucestershire) did see particulate levels rise by 35%, but not the 59% and 168% levels seen on the London Road and Gay Street respectively.
“Also pollution levels at Gay Street rose dramatically from November when the LN was implemented, not January, as Ms Rigby suggests.
“In addition, nitrogen dioxide levels in Yate rose by 1%; those at the Bath sites rose by 11% and 52% respectively. By not dealing with displaced traffic, B&NES are doing harm to our residents.
He said Councillor Rigby’s claim that traffic on the London Road is not worse is not what residents are seeing daily, and that she had ignored the majority of residents in her own ward regarding the scheme for New Sydney Place and Sydney Road.
Challenging the decision
UNSUNG has not given up its fight against B&NES Council’s decision to make the New Sydney Place and Sydney Road Liveable Neighbourhood permanent.
It says the council did not publish an adequate statement of reasons setting out the aims of the experimental traffic regulation order (ETRO) and believes that as a result there is no legal basis in law to convert it to a permanent order.
On the group’s website it says the type of statement of reasons used has already been proven inadequate in the legal objection to the Lower Lansdown scheme, so UNSUNG believes it has “strong grounds” to challenge in court any move to make the New Sydney Place/Sydney Road ETRO permanent.
UNSUNG spokesperson Neil McCabe said contributions to the group’s GoFundMe page to fund a legal challenge if required are steadily rising.
Meanwhile, UNSUNG says it has lodged a complaint about the council’s scrutiny panel being “misled” about the scheme being compliant with Department for Transport guidance.
The group has also complained to the Local Government Ombudsman that the West of England Combined Authority (WECA) didn’t follow its own rules in scrutinising the Liveable Neighbourhoods business case last September.
