|
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
- Introduction
- The Coach Traffic Survey
- The Amenity
- Damage to Property
- Living with Motor Vehicles
- Living with Bureaucracy
- Summary
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:
- Their presence destroys the visual
amenity for visitors
- They create slow moving columns of
traffic both in the Royal Crescent and
narrow approach roads
- They create pollution: noise, smell and
vibration
- They diminish the amenity value of the
residents' lawn
- The Corporation sponsored double decker
buses were considered to be a considerable
nuisance; the amplified commentary was
particularly irritating.
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 Household
Name
Address No: Royal Crescent
Floor Basement Ground First Second Third
Fourth
Telephone No
No of persons in household
Age Groups 0 16 17 to 35 36 to 60 Over 60
Location of Services
Front Centre Rear Television
Telephone
Sitting Room
Bedrooms
The Building
Are your front windows double glazed?
Yes/No In hot weather do you need to open your
windows for ventilation purposes? Yes/No Do
you normally have your windows open? Yes/No
Are the principal staircases Stone/Wood
CONFIDENTIAL (WHEN COMPLETE)
The Effects of Noise/Vibration
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.
Always Often Sometimes Never
Does the noise?
Startle
Disturb rest or relaxation Interfere with
television of radio Interfere with use of
telephone
Has living in the Royal Crescent caused any
member of your household to feel tense or
nervous Yes/No
If YES Is this seasonal Winter/Summer If
YES, give brief details
Have you noticed any effects on the
structure of the buildings or its contents,
e.g. ornaments rattle, pictures move
Yes/No
If YES, give brief details
Do you have any other comments?
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.
Go to Buses Part 1 / Go
to Buses Part 2 /
Go to Buses Part 3 /
Return to Achievements Page
|
