Well, it appears BANES is drifting towards another largely avoidable clash with WECA and mayor Vote Dan! Norris, this time around the funding criteria of Liveable Neighbourhoods (LNs). Up until now WECA has taken a clear position that LNs need to deliver significant reductions in through motor traffic, which tends to mean including a traffic filter (planters, bus gates etc…). The Full Business Case (FBC) BANES has put forward does not propose this for a number of the locations e.g. Entry Hill.

We have been here before. BANES has not made a successful bid for Active Travel England ‘Tranche Funding’ since the first round (of 4) in 2021. In one case it appeared that a scheme was resubmitted unchanged having already been declined in a previous round . In another case, BANES proposed a single scheme that cost more than the top end of what could be bid for. In both cases, simple rules were not followed and the schemes could not be accepted for consideration regardless of their merits.

(NB. It is not always possible to remember exact details or even find them online, but as far as I can recall the above is a fair summation of the two events, those being ATE Tranche 3 and 4 funding bids. Also, Mount Road LN was not accepted by WECA so BANES had to pay in full for the zebra crossing from their own budget).

And here we are again, with what appears to be an FBC for Liveable Neighbourhoods funding that does not consistently meet the funding criteria. This may well mean WECA is not able to accept the document. Note, this is not a case of saying “yes or no”. It is just a case of saying “we cannot accept this”. If the rules have not been followed, there is no actual decision to be made.

This is not to say there is not some good stuff in the FBC, although the details are still pretty vague at the moment. Section 2.9 of the document is the bit most worth reading if you are short of time. It is just odd that in a location such as Entry Hill the report notes “Traffic volumes are deterring active travel, especially during the hours of 7-10am and 3-6pm on weekdays during term time. There are problems with traffic volumes include speeding and congestion; there is also insufficient space for two-way traffic to pass each other”.

The solution to all this danger, speed and congestion?

• Traffic signals at Entry Hill Bridge
• Widened footway at two locations on Entry Hill
• ‘New Road Layout Ahead’ signage for signals

Hum… that sounds like it results exactly the same challenges with one location where people can cross the road in relative safety. But hey- the signage will make a world of difference!

Of course, there is no knowing exactly what is going on ‘behind the scenes’. WECA are finding it surprisingly hard to spend money at the moment, at least by the 2027 deadline they have for the City Region Sustainable Transport Settlement pot. Maybe any opportunity to get money allocated will be taken? Then again, would you want to be the person who signed off something that may or may not meet the funding criteria if the DfT came knocking?

We will find out soon enough- the FBC will be considered at the next WECA Committee Meeting on September 20th. In the meantime, here is the written statement I provided to WECA for that meeting. I wrote it before the FBC was released, but my view remains the same.