Great Western Coffee Shop

Just to prove that the good Burghers of Gloucester are still living in the 70s >:(

http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/news/story?id=6212

From that story:


Aren't there are elements of comparing chalk and cheese by associating these items, except that they mey link to the same budget. A parkway station on the edge of town would have provided long distance travel opportunities from Gloucester / Cheltenham, whereas a park and ride for the city provides a way of people getting into the town.

As someone who doesn't know Gloucester very well, I have to ask if there would be any logic in building a park and ride for both the train and the city centre at the same point ... with the added advantage that people who didn't have their cars could share the bus services out to the station with the drivers, then hop on a train.

Look - if they had built this station:

(a) Calls by XC at Cheltenham would be reduced, to prevent journey time increases.

(b) Usage of Gloucester station would have plummeted (less than a mile away, if it were to be built on the other side of the triangle), and calls by FGW would be reduced to prevent a reversal, but the station would need to be kept open to allow ATW services to terminate here.

So I'm glad. Now, if they repositioned the station at Gloucester to prevent reversal, but still keep terminus platforms, that would be better.

As someone who also doesn't know Gloucester very well, couldn't the current station serve as a park and ride site:

1, it is not very central and buses could run from it to the city centre.
2, it is fairly accessable from the Motorway from the east
3, There appears to be lots of sidings and semi-used railway land arround it that could be used for parking.
4, trains already run to it so any improvement needed to make it a "parkway station" would be purely on the non-railway side of things and therefore cheaper.

Happy to be shot down by those who better know what they are talking about.

It's pretty central -- at least, more central than main stations in other places such as Bristol and Cambridge -- and was called Gloucester Central before Eastgate closed (I'm just old enough to have caught a train to Eastgate once).

The most recent parkway station proposal was for a site at Elmbridge Court on the north-east edge of the city, adjacent to the A40, not at Barnwood on the through side of the triangle.

It caused uproar in cheltenham, given the likely loss of many XC stops, and the prospect of masses of extra traffic in that part of Gloucester didn't exactly go down a storm with the people living nearby either.

Gloucester Central is pretty much that, just someone shoved a dual carriageway between it and the city centre - good old town planners. And closing Eastgate was short-sighted but was obviously a great development opportunity at the time.

How did Eastgate work? Can someone explain how it was a through station. Was it on the other side on the triangle?

Here's a link to a simple diagram of the location of Eastgate:

http://disused-rlys.fotopic.net/p36508734.html

Thanks, I finally know the layout! :)

Well, it is clear to me that Eastgate should have been kept. :'( Could they not have slapped a few terminus platforms onto the Eastgate station, shut Central to turn it into a car park and bus interchange.

Ah, but what would've happened to services on the Gloucester-Newport line? How would they've got in and out of Eastgate?