Report shows scope of deadly pollution

Further to my letters during last autumn concerning Bath’s road traffic levels and pollution and council responses via the Bath Chronicle, I feel that some matters have now become clear and therefore a review would be useful.

I want readers to understand that both main parties are equally to blame for the present serious problem of pollution.

We now have a CAZ report beginning in March 2021 ending December 2021. Some details were published in the Chronicle and I am not sure that those that received this report knew what to expect.

However in summary there were some reductions but also some considerable increases in various zones in the level of nitrogen dioxide. Cleveland Place and some other areas were cause for concern.

The CAZ has achieved what was considered to be likely. It has reduced the level in the the restricted zone and spread it about more generally. A longer term benefit will be a reduction due to more efficient vehicle usage.

It should be noted that brakes and tyres produce pollution which will continue as now.

Clearly the CAZ report shows just how serious our pollution is in its scope and its level.

The following paragraph shows that councillors were less than satisfied with the results of the CAZ.

It appears that councillors felt that we should consider adjusting the area of the CAZ and also increase the charge per vehicle.

It also appears that officers were instructed to acquaint Wiltshire’s officers of the BANES proposal.

Wiltshire Council leader Richard Clewer in an open letter stated “I will not condone any proposal which simply shunts polluting vehicles away from Bath on to Wiltshire’s roads and has an adverse effect on communities and residents in West Wiltshire”.

I can confirm that Wiltshire Council will formally oppose any proposal that (to summarise Defra’s guidance)... results in the displacement of the most polluting vehicles... to surrounding areas.

I understand that South Gloucestershire Council have also indicated that they are concerned about the extra pollution that they are receiving since they have allowed us to use their roads while Cleveland Bridge is being repaired.

The above Wiltshire statement leaves BANES in no doubt that it will not tolerate our pollution.

I am bound to agree with them. We have no moral right to think differently. Since the Second World War administrations of both parties in Bath have neglected their duty to protect the citizens. Councillors have to take responsibility for our own pollution and be determined to reduce it at what ever cost.

The 6th January Chronicle contains Statements by the two main parties

Kevin Guy, the leader of the governing party states ‘Bath’s road Network is at 95 per cent capacity, so it only takes a small change to cause disruption.’

The stated capacity of 95 per cent means that we are deep into the situation where any momentary uptick in the incoming traffic flow leads quickly to disruption and bottlenecks.

However we are told that we are going to have LTNS . Now LTNS will increase traffic on the main roads and therefore Wells Way (A367),

Bradford Road (A3062), Frome Road and Rush Hill (B3110) will be given more traffic .

I give these as an example simply to show that main roads will have increased traffic. Therefore the question is in the light of the main roads already having a 95 per cent loading can they take this extra traffic? The answer is no they cannot.

When is our council going to get serious? Fooling around with LTNS, more cycling etc does not even start to deal with the prime reason for our serious life threatening pollution.

HGVS passing though our city must be stopped now, not some vague time in the future. I repeat Nature has spoken loud and clear in 2021, our nation is going to have to change. Nature will force us in Bath to change. Have people got to die before we act?

David Layton

Combe Hay