|
||
 |
||
|
Home |
General Information |
Gallery &
Reference |
History
|
News
& Events |
Community
|
Contact Us |
||
 |
| Crescent History | Bath History | Literary Bath | Bath at War| What If? |
|
Topless Talking Buses…The 1985 Society Traffic
Report
TRAFFIC IN THE ROYAL CRESCENT, BATH Report by the Traffic Committee of the Royal Crescent Society Contents Page
Annexes: A Results of the 1985 coach traffic survey B The pictorial record C Residents Survey Questionnaire D Summary of Questionnaire responses E Synopsis of correspondence between the Royal Crescent Society, the Bath City Council and Avon County Council on the subject of coaches and buses in the Royal Crescent Approved 30thNovember 1985 TRAFFIC IN THE ROYAL CRESCENT, BATH Report by the Traffic Committee of the Royal Crescent Society INTRODUCTION Background 1. Over the past two years, there has been an explosion in the number of tourists visiting Bath. The city is now number three on the tourists' list. Whilst generally beneficial to the economy of Bath, this increase in tourism, without commensurate local planning and allocation of resources to deal with it, has resulted in a number or difficulties concerning traffic flow and parking: a. Bath has long been a popular call for coach tours there is already a history of confrontation between the Bath City Council and Coach operators over the subject of inadequate coach parking facilities and parking fees. This has resulted in a number of coach tours passing through the city without the passengers ever leaving their transport or contributing anything to the City's economy. b. In an effort to help visitors see Bath without aggravating the already severe car parking problems, a number of operators have been licenced to provide local coach services. These include an open top double decker bus service complete with an amplified commentary. 2. The outcome of the above was, in 1984, a dramatic increase in coach traffic especially in the popular heritage areas of the city, many of which are not well placed or equipped to deal with such an influx. Following the experience of summer 1984, the Annual General Meeting of the Royal Crescent Society set up a Traffic Committee to look into ways of stimulating the local authorities into curbing the flow of coaches and buses passing through the Royal Crescent. The Society had already found that the spilt of environmental responsibilities between Avon County and Bath City Council had created difficulties in finding an efficient responsive channel of communications, through which resolution of the residents' problems could be achieved. Indeed, a measure of local authority insensitivity to the residents' feelings was demonstrated by the Council approval of the 15 minute interval bus service referred to in para. 1b above. A synopsis of the Society' s correspondence with the local authorities is at Annex E. 3. The Traffic Committee identified the requirement to collect evidence on the scale and effect of the Royal Crescent problem. A traffic survey was carried out during summer 1985 (see Annex A). How to measure the effect of traffic on the buildings and residents was another matter. Research has highlighted how little is known about the long term effects of Bath’s ancient buildings. This was confirmed by informal professional advice by several leading authorities and it was reluctantly concluded that the cost and time scale of such an investigation were outside the competence and resources of the Traffic Committee. It was agreed, however, that a more limited subjective survey should be undertaken among the residents. This report includes a summary of that preliminary survey. (Annex D) The Subjects of the Survey 4. To interpret the report it is necessary to appreciate: a. The nature of the houses in Royal Crescent and how they are used. b. The attitude of the residents. 5. The Royal Crescent is a Grade 1 Listed Building of 30 houses joined in a single semi ellipse; united by 114 massive Ionic columns, built in the late 18th century by John Wood the younger. Its beauty is now internationally recognised and among the many tributes to its qualities have been: "The greatest single achievement in the whole field of our urban achievements." (Walter Ison The Georgian Buildings of Bath) "One of the happiest moments of European sightseeing." (Jan Morris) "Like any other great work of art, its appeal is timeless'' (William Lowndes The Royal Crescent) “one of the most pleasurable (sights) that town planning has to offer." (Pevsner The Buildings of England) 6. Behind this magnificent uniform facade, every house is different, many having been extended to the rear in Victorian times . Two houses in the centre of the Crescent form the Royal Crescent Hotel. Number 1 is a museum. Of the remaining 27 houses, 5 remain as single family homes and the others are now divided into flats, up to five in some houses. In most houses the principal living rooms are located in the front which has a Southerly aspect. During the summer, it is naturally desirable to open the front windows to obtain adequate ventilation. 7. The residents include owner occupiers and tenants, both Council and private. The major factor which unites all residents is an appreciation of the privilege of living in the Royal Crescent and their duty to preserve it as an amenity to be enjoyed by visitors, residents and of course future generations. 8. Whilst this survey tries to concentrate upon the primary effect of traffic on the buildings and residents, the general comments offered in the survey are a reflection of the residents' feelings over the past few years. Scope of the Report 9. This report is presented under the following main headings: The Coach traffic survey The amenity Damage to property Living with motor vehicles Living with bureaucracy THE COACH TRAFFIC SURVEY 10. The Secretary's synopsis of correspondence between the Royal Crescent Society and Local Authorities at Annex E, notes the concern about the growing problems caused by coaches and heavy traffic in the Royal Crescent as far back as 1981. By the summer of 1984, the situation had worsened with 80 coaches a day being recorded. 11. To collect evidence in support of this report, video recordings were taken over prolonged periods throughout the summer 1985. The results of this survey are at Annex A. The survey confirms the spot checks on buses and coaches carried out in summer 1984. Highlights from the observations show: a. Weekly and daily averages range from 500 and 73 vehicles respectively, to 600 and 81 vehicles depending upon the season. b. The greatest number of buses and coaches in any one hour was 25. c. The numbers in September had only decreased by 10%. d. Of the vehicles passing through, 35% stopped on the yellow lines for up to 15 minutes, often with their engines left running. THE AMENITY 12. A number of aspects must be considered both from the visitors' and residents' viewpoints: Visual amenity Access Pollution Recreation Privacy Visual Amenity 13. Most of the visitors appear to be avid photographers. During the day time, it is difficult to find a period when there is not at least one coach parked in or crawling around the Crescent at the head of queues of motor cars coming in both directions. Better traffic management would route the coaches through the Royal Avenue enabling them to park legally and visitors to view the Royal Crescent from a much better vantage point and without the intrusion of coaches. On a more practical note, this point is adjacent to public conveniences. Access 14. Both visitors and residents are greatly affected. The stream of very slow moving coaches through the narrow access roads of Brock Street and Marlborough Buildings cause frequent traffic hold ups. Traffic flow problems are exacerbated by vehicles endeavouring to park and coaches taking up parking space sometimes for long periods. Pollution 15. a. Noise Coaches at low speed give rise to a steady low frequency rumble as they pass across the cobbles of the Royal Crescent. The amplified commentary from the coaches and open top corporation buses has been found to be a particular irritant. The shape of the Royal Crescent tends to focus and amplify all sounds. b. Fumes and Dirt During the summer weather, petrol and diesel fumes are in evidence throughout the day. Coach parties discard litter at the stopping points. Recreation 16. Few of the residents have personal gardens which they can use. For most residents, the Private Lawn in front of the Royal Crescent is the only place where the sun can be enjoyed. The amenity value of the lawn is diminished by the background of crawling traffic and parked coaches, often left with their engines running. Privacy 17. Those who choose to live in national monuments must expect to live in the public eye. Visitors' curiosity knows no bounds and whereas previously this was only a problem for basement and ground floor residents, the introduction of the double decker sightseeing bus and double decker coaches has extended the problem to the first floor. DAMAGE TO PROPERTY 18. As noted in para.3, the execution of a full quantitative environmental survey showing the structural response of the houses to passing coach traffic was outside the competence and resources of the Traffic Committee. The usual response of buildings to passing traffic, such as windows rattling, was noted by a number of residents. Some incidents of plaster cracking were reported although the actual cause of this is difficult to prove. 19. All houses have vaulted cellars which extend beneath the pavement. In general, long term attempts to use these and keep them watertight have proved fruitless. What is obvious however is that the continuing passage of coaches is causing damage to the cobbled road and it has been found necessary to relay areas of the sets from time to time. LIVING WITH MOTOR VEHICLES 20. Throughout the survey, coaches have appeared to residents as the villains of the piece, and the visual impact is well illustrated at Annex B:
21. Parking is a major problem in Bath. The inability to find parking near home, or indeed to double park whilst unloading, due to the presence of coaches, is particularly inconvenient to residents of the Royal Crescent. LIVING WITH BUREAUCRACY 22. The secretary's synopsis of correspondence between the Royal Crescent Society and the various Local Authorities at Annex E is self explanatory. SUMMARY 23. The experience of summer 1985 has confirmed that unrestricted coach traffic poses the major threat to Royal Crescent and its amenity value for both visitors and residents. The photographs at Annex B bear witness to this. As has been noted in para.13, a practical alternative exists in that the proper use of Royal Avenue would solve most of the problems. 24. A survey of Royal Crescent households revealed that 69% of those responding found the constant stream of coaches disturbing. The frustrations of access and parking are shared by residents and visitors alike. The other factors considered, downgrade the quality of life; windows are closed to reduce noise and fumes, residents increasingly feel the need to hide behind curtains or blinds and the residents' lawn is no longer a pleasant place to relax. 25. The Traffic Committee was unable to sponsor a comprehensive environmental survey which gave conclusive evidence of long term damage to the fabric of Royal Crescent. Such manifestations which do exist are difficult to attribute. Damage to the cobbled road caused by the passage of 9000 Tons of bus and coach traffic each week, is there for all to see. Annex A Survey Report on Volume of Bus and Coach Traffic in Royal Crescent, Bath. May September 1985 1. In order to accurately log the number of buses and coaches passing in both directions through Royal Crescent, a black and white television camera was positioned in a second floor window and trained on the Eastern end of the Crescent. The view of the road and a synchronised digital clock display were recorded onto videotape for detailed analysis. The field of view also covered a double and single yellow lined area favoured as a stopping point by tourist vehicles, a habit which causes traffic congestion in Brock St. and beyond. Direct observation and recording also provided additional data for the survey. 2. The phases of the survey and the results obtained are as follows: a. 11th to late May: Recordings made over 8 days totalling 76 hours and covering a period from 08.00 Hrs to 20.00 Hrs: 518 buses and coaches logged: Daily average of 72.97 vehicles. Weekly average of 510.79 vehicles. b. Mid July Recordings made over 5 days totalling 46 hours covering the same period. 385 buses and coaches logged. Daily average rose to 81.1 vehicles. Weekly average rose to 602.7 vehicles. c. September 12th: Final spot check indicated a slight drop of approximately 10% in above averages in the Autumn period. 3. Other points to note: a. The greatest actual number of buses and coaches in any one hour was 25. b. 35% of vehicles recorded on videotape stopped on the yellow lines within the field of view. c. As the buses and coaches were of the larger 40+ seater type weighing 10 15 tons each, the survey would indicate approximately 9,000 tons of coach traffic per week in addition to normal traffic load. 4. The daily pattern of coach and bus traffic is graphically plotted below. (apologise but the graph failed to scan correctly and will be added later) Annex B The Pictorial Record
Four typical views of the congestion caused by bus and coach traffic Summer 1985 Annex C CONFIDENTIAL (WHEN COMPLETE) ROYAL CRESCENT SOCIETY ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY Background Residents are already aware of the environmental and traffic surveys being sponsored by the Society. This questionnaire is designed to supplement the information being collected in the other surveys in areas where the effects of environmental pollution are less easy to measure. In assessing the completed questionnaires, it would be helpful to know a little personal information about the households. This information will, of course, be treated in the strictest confidence.
The traffic survey shows that most of the coach traffic occurs during the day between the hours of O830 and 1930. The pattern of noise, although of lower intensity, is akin to that around an airport i.e. is intermittent. There is a background noise level with intermittent peaks due to passing vehicles.
Signed CONFIDENTIAL (WHEN COMPLETE) Annex D SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO QUESTIONNAIRE Number of households canvassed 60 Number of households responding 49 (82%) Number of households who found that the passing traffic disturbed rest or relaxation Always/Often 20 Sometimes 14 (28%) Total 34 (69%) Other significant points raised under general comments: Vibration (eg of windows) Fumes Traffic Jams Parking Noise (including bus commentaries) Visual Amenity Amenity of Lawn Privacy Annex E SYNOPSIS OF THE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE ROYAL CRESCENT SOCIETY, THE BATH CITY COUNCIL AND AVON COUNTY COUNCIL ON THE SUBJECT OF COACHES AND BUSES IN THE ROYAL CRESCENT At its Annual Meeting in March, 1981, the Royal Crescent Society discussed the growing problem of coaches in the Royal Crescent and the damage they were doing to the fabric of the buildings, the cobbles and the cellars. Members pointed out the nuisance from fumes, the noise from running engines, from repeated commentaries and from the congestion caused by parked coaches, especially at the curve at the East end of the Crescent. Residents had sought redress from the police but there was little that the police could do. On 30th March 1961, the secretary sent a letter to the City Engineer pointing out concern that the Crescent was being spoiled by increasing traffic, which it was not fitted to bear and that coaches were destroying the view that the visitors came to see. The letter received no reply. Approaches were made to individual councillors with no success. In April 1982, the Society again discussed the problem which had grown worse. The secretary was instructed to write to the County Surveyor and Engineer of Avon. A letter was sent on 26th April 1982, in which it was pointed out that the problem of coaches coming in both directions and parking, sometimes for long periods, was causing traffic jams. The absence of any facilities for residents' parking meant that residents had to double park in order to unload passengers and goods and this exacerbated the problem. It was further pointed out that there was a perceptible darkening of the stone and wear and tear on the cobbles. The letter asked Avon to give urgent consideration to banning coaches and heavy vehicles from the Royal Crescent. Attention was drawn to the fact that this was done in other cities with environmentally sensitive areas. The letter received an acknowledgement from the County Surveyor who said he would seek the views of the Bath City Council and the Chief Constable. During the summer of 1982 there were a number of telephone conversations with the County Surveyor, who, though sympathetic, pointed out that banning heavy traffic would have 'far reaching effects' and he could promise no action. During 1932 Bath City Council produced the Bath City Plan. The Society obtained a copy and the Committee studied it. On 10th March 1983, the secretary wrote to the Principal Planning Officer setting out the growing problem of heavy traffic using Royal Crescent, often as a short cut to the M4. This included coaches coming in both directions, heavy lorries and car transporters and even overnight parking of caravans and dormobiles. Residents complained of the vibration, times, litter, noise, not being able to open their windows and the fact that their view was often obscured by parked caravans and coaches. An acknowledgement was received on 24th March 1983, saying that a report on the subject was being prepared. When completed a further letter would be sent. No reply was received by the Annual Meeting in April and the secretary was instructed to write again; this was done on 6th May 1983. Again no reply was received. On 15th November, after telephone calls, the secretary wrote once more. On 5th December a reply was received saying that: "The Draft City Plan would be discussed at the meeting in January 1984, following this we shall embark on a public consultation exercise." On 27th February 1984, the secretary wrote to the Assistant Director of the Department of Environment Services asking for the outcome of the meeting so that the Society could be informed at its Annual Meeting. The Secretary pointed out that she had participated in a phone in radio debate with a coach operator who had said that the coaches would not be willing to co operate on a voluntary basis. In March the secretary wrote to a number of City Councillors on the subject but no replies were forthcoming. The Annual Meeting was, however, informed by Cllr. Dr. Kersley that the City Council proposed approaching Avon with a view to restricting coaches to Royal Avenue. The secretary wrote to the Chief Executive Officer of Bath on 14th April and asked him to expedite the proposal. On Ist May the City Engineer replied that the matter was being pursued with the Avon County Council and "hopefully it will be resolved in the not too distant future." In June 1984, the Royal Crescent Society sent its comments on the Bath City Plan and reiterated the need to restrict heavy traffic in environmentally sensitive areas, pointing out that tourists complained about the obstructed view of the Crescent and of the difficulty in taking photographs. On 21st October 19849 the Society wrote again to the City Engineer pointing out how the traffic situation had worsened during the summer with 80 coaches a day being recorded. The letter received no reply. By now many private individuals had also written to both Bath City Council and Avon County Council. Councillors for the Kingsmead area were approached but did not reply. In February 1985, the secretary, who was a member of the Bath Residents' Parking Sub Committee, chaired by the Right Honourable Christopher Patten MP, wrote to him on the subject of coaches and open top buses in Royal Crescent. He replied that he was pursuing the matter with the Avon County Surveyor and that there was a campaign to get traffic management powers restored to Bath City Council. On 7th March 1985, the secretary wrote to the Chief Constable of Avon pointing out that the. traffic congestion caused by coaches, often parked for long periods on the yellow lines together with the open top bus every 15 minutes – was worsening. On 14th March the Chief Constable replied and sent a senior officer to see the secretary and to discuss the problem. The officer was sympathetic, but pointed out that there was little that the police could do within the existing law, unless they caught the offenders who parked for long periods. The officer's advice to the Society was to press for a restriction on heavy traffic in the area. On 12th February the secretary attended a deputation led by the Right Honourable Christopher Patten MP to the Avon County Council on the subject of Residents' Parking in Bath when she was able to put the problem of coaches and buses in Royal Crescent, which was not unrelated to the whole problem of parking and traffic congestion in the City. The Chairman of Avon County Council said that the matter would be discussed with the Bath City Council. No further correspondence has been received. This was reported to the Royal Crescent Society's Annual Meeting in April 1985 when it was decided to set up a Traffic Committee to press for urgent action.
|
|
Copyright 2011 Opus 57 Ltd , All rights reserved Website developed and managed by Opus 57 Ltd |