A lawyer has written to Bath & North East Somerset Council saying its proposals to make the Liveable Neighbourhood scheme at Bathwick permanent are ‘flawed’.
Looking down Sydney Place, with the LTN restriction in place
In April 2024, the council launched the experimental through traffic restriction at New Sydney Place and Sydney Road with bollards preventing drivers from cutting through to avoid the A36/Bathwick Street junction.
The council said that as a result, vehicle numbers had reduced by up to 90% on New Sydney Place and 70% on Sydney Road and trial data showed no significant difference to traffic flows, journey times or air quality on surrounding roads.
The United Sydney Unliveable Neighbourhoods Group (UNSUNG) has strongly disputed that.
In March, a B&NES Council scrutiny panel upheld the decision taken the previous month by Councillor Mark Elliott, the Liberal Democrat cabinet member for resources, that the scheme could be made permanent.
UNSUNG claimed in the summer that due to a “botched” legal implementation of the trial, the council was having to prepare a permanent Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) and repeat the consultation it did during the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO) trial.
The campaigners said the council had published an inadequate ‘Statement of Reasons’ to justify the scheme.
Campaigners Neil McCabe and Jon Avent at the traffic restriction
During the TRO consultation in July, UNSUNG submitted a group objection of nearly 700 signatures.
The long-running saga took a new twist on Friday 19th September, with UNSUNG spokesperson Neil McCabe writing on the group’s website: “We’ve just written to B&NES. They not only messed up the implementation of the ETRO, but they’ve messed up making it permanent.
“They haven’t got time to fix the mistakes before the ETRO lapses on 1 October.
“The current TRO introduces minor signage changes and doesn’t mention the works conducted during the trial, so these existing works have no legal standing when the trial period elapses on 1 October. We’ve pointed this out to them today.
“In addition, we’ve pointed out they can’t make a decision before the Lyncombe & Widcombe by-election on 9 October as folk from that ward have objected to the LTN.”
The Bath Echo has seen a copy of the letter sent to the council on behalf of UNSUNG by Rhiannon Cambrook-Woods, of Carbon Law Partners.
She highlights “errors” in the drafting of TRO 25-012 which prevent making permanent the works conducted under ETRO 23-031: “As a result, by law, the works implemented under 23-031 must be removed at the end of the statutory 18-month limit.”
She says the TRO draft which has been subject to statutory consultation introduced “minor signage changes” to Sydney Road.
“However, by not mentioning the previous works conducted under 23-031, no permanence was given to those works, which expire imminently at the end of the 18-month trial’s period.
“Furthermore, the restrictive nature of the 25-012 drafting meant that consultation with public transport providers was omitted as the additional works did not impact on a bus route.
“Therefore, if B&NES are to seek to make the ETRO works permanent, the TRO would need to be substantially amended to include the previous works, and subject to a new round of consultation, not only with the public, but with all affected statutory bodies.
“However, as the ETRO will have lapsed and must be removed by the time such renewed consultation can occur, this option is moot.”
Secondly, the solicitor says that no decision on the permanence of the TRO can occur prior to the Lyncombe and Widcombe by-election on 9th October.
“Despite B&NES’ claims that the decision to make the ETRO permanent was not key, it is clear from current and previous consultations that the ETRO did affect more than one ward, and that this stance was both incorrect and unlawful.
“UNSUNG’s recent group objection attracted a significant number of Lyncombe and Widcombe residents adversely affected by the ETRO, so the future of the LTN [low traffic neighbourhood] is a consideration in the by-election which should prevent any decisions being taken in the purdah period.”
She said that while the council may contest that Councillor Elliott’s decision pre-dated the purdah period, that was a decision in principle, which needed to be followed by consultation on a formal TRO.
“It is that latter decision which is now in purdah. It is therefore clear that B&NES cannot implement making the ETRO permanent before the statutory trial period elapses and should therefore make plans to remove the ETRO.”
Councillor Joel Hirst, cabinet member for sustainable transport strategy at Bath & North East Somerset Council, said: “The council is considering the letter and in the interim will continue to follow the normal processes with respect to Traffic Regulation Orders.”
