Councils not capable of tackling pollution
It was good to see that the council has taken note of my request to consider seriously the large amount of HGVS and other traffic which is merely passing though Bath. (Chronicle, 16th September)
However I note it is suggesting it might be able to get a TRO (traffic regulation order). The council has tried this in the past and failed.
More particularly B&NES has had great difficulty recently in getting neighbouring councils to allow us use of their roads so we can repair Cleveland Bridge.
I am amazed B&NES feels neighbouring councils would want to become involved with our high pollution level. They have every right to resist our request. I certainly support them in that.
Unfortunately at least since the Second World War we have had administrations of both political persuasions who have been too busy looking for votes instead of considering a long-term future for the city. For instance planning permissions for residential properties and office/factory accommodation have been issued like confetti.
There has been no concern for the necessary road infrastructure and proper parking facilities and public toilets to support such development. Consequently we have arrived at 2021 with our roads spurring dangerous toxic pollution.
Even so we continue to permit more development in the coming two years. If after 1945 every time property was sold along the line of the Lower Bristol Road the council had used compulsory powers to purchase enough land to dual up the road, it would have been possible to now dual that road from the city to the A39 junction.
The council’s response to my letters set out in the article (Chronicle, 16th September) is negative in its tone and really implies that they doubt their ability to reduce the HGVS unnecessarily passing through the city. It’s our neighbour councils’ fault they suggest.
Really? Why should Wiltshire accept a whole new heap of pollution?
The article ends with a statement from Ms Rigby: “If we don’t manage to find a mechanism to reduce HGVS using Bath as a throughroute, It won’t be for the want of trying’.’
This problem has been obvious since at least 1945 and there have been, I am told, several attempts to produce schemes to relieve it. These have all be rejected.
I have proposed a ring road around Bath which would mean that we could stop the through route traffic from the city.
I am sure that our citizens would on occasion also use the ring road for local journeys.
The council knows and believes that a ring road would be a possible solution since it has not stated otherwise. However the council also knows from past experience that such a proposal would produce a very strong negative reaction from
some of its citizens. It would probably lose its mandate for a time.
It is clear successive administrations have known of our road problems and the resultant high level of dangerous pollution. You can smell it when you come into the city.
Councillors tell the citizens at election time that their job is to look after our interests. Clearly that is rubbish. Their aim is to grasp political power and that pushes the dangers of pollution to one side unfortunately.
Instead they choose to dabble at the edge of this problem by for instance promoting LTNS, cycling, TROS and CAZ. The problem just goes on and gets progressively worse.
What are the consequence? Someone dies and pollution is stated as a contributory factor. There would be court proceedings
The citizens would ultimately pay the bill but the reputational damage would be very considerable. Furthermore that might cause other additional people to consider if pollution is a factor in deaths close to them.
We could lose our World Heritage Status.
It is very possible, even probable, that there will be a major incident with loss of life - maybe even two incidents at the same time when the city will shut down for two to three days.
It seems to me the council is not the right vehicle to deal with this matter of traffic and pollution, particularly bearing in mind that it has had several goes in the past and has not succeeded.
We need someone who will look at this matter in the best interest of all the people. Someone whom we can trust.
This pollution can not go on, people will die. action is needed. David Layton Combe Hay