MetroBus

[whole diary]

[Bmblbzzz]

Metro without the bus?
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-underground-one-step-closer-648615

[johnneyw]

Metro without the bus?
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-underground-one-step-closer-648615

The caption on one of the pictures mentions a route from Bristol to Bath yet this is a route covered by rail already with a good 4 to 5 services an hour for much of the day. Duplicating rail routes 19th century railwaymania style and burying it in a field seems as insane as Metrobust (if that is possible).

The proposed Bristol to airport route is rather less barking but underground???

[Bmblbzzz]

It's just padding in his "State of the City" speech. The redevelopment of the Cumberland Basin, though, fits in with his (Reese's) ideas.

[Red Squirrel]

Metro without the bus?
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-underground-one-step-closer-648615

The caption on one of the pictures mentions a route from Bristol to Bath yet this is a route covered by rail already with a good 4 to 5 services an hour for much of the day. Duplicating rail routes 19th century railwaymania style and burying it in a field seems as insane as Metrobust (if that is possible).

The proposed Bristol to airport route is rather less barking but underground???

But you wouldn't be duplicating the heavy rail route from Bristol to Bath, would you? An LRT route would have a lot more stops - not something the main line could easily be expanded accommodate - and would presumably better cover the populated areas. And I wouldn't get too hung up on the 'underground' label - surely it would only be in tunnels where that made sense.

It's just padding in his "State of the City" speech. The redevelopment of the Cumberland Basin, though, fits in with his (Reese's) ideas.

A very interesting idea. The Cumberland Basin flyover complex was designed to fit on the end of an urban motorway that was to run along Spike Island; we can all be grateful that this didn't happen. It now has redundant elements as well as some badly-engineered quasi-free-flow junctions. It is hard to justify the land-take. Marvin's plan may have legs... maybe he can get George to design the new scheme?

[johnneyw]

True that LRT could have more stops but with options being looked at for reopening St Ann's & Saltford stations in addition to Keynshan and Oldfield Park already existing, there really are not many other worthwhile stop options that LRT could serve there. Better to spend the money on a route not currently served by anything.

[Timmer]

The caption on one of the pictures mentions a route from Bristol to Bath yet this is a route covered by rail already with a good 4 to 5 services an hour for much of the day. Duplicating rail routes 19th century railwaymania style and burying it in a field seems as insane as Metrobust (if that is possible).

The proposed Bristol to airport route is rather less barking but underground???

During peak times the trains that do run between Bath and Bristol are packed, the roads the same. Lots more housing in the Keynsham/Bitton area. I think there is every case for a second line of some description between Bath and Bristol on the former line. Will it happen??? In this current financial climate no chance, just a dream like all the other schemes.

You can't fit many more trains on the current line hence the extra Bristol to London trains going via Parkway. I'd say there would have been more of a case for one of them to stop at Bath so it would have three trains an hour like Parkway but I don't think they can fit it in with current capacity near full when you factor in local stopping services.

[Red Squirrel]

..there really are not many other worthwhile stop options that LRT could serve...

I think there are!

How about a new route that followed the B&NS as far as Stockwood, then swung down through to the south-east of Keynsham (2km from the main line station), followed the main line for a bit (giving the possibility of an interchange) and thence tunnelled under Twerton and Englishcombe to approach Bath station from the south? That would cover large residential areas, many of which are currently very poorly served by public transport.

[johnneyw]

..there really are not many other worthwhile stop options that LRT could serve...

I think there are!

How about a new route that followed the B&NS as far as Stockwood, then swung down through to the south-east of Keynsham (2km from the main line station), followed the main line for a bit (giving the possibility of an interchange) and thence tunnelled under Twerton and Englishcombe to approach Bath station from the south? That would cover large residential areas, many of which are currently very poorly served by public transport.

An interesting suggestion and one that should see an expansion of it's catchment area for the foreseeable. My main concern still remains though as to whether there or not there are potential routes in and around Bristol that are more needed. The old midland line running parallel to the cyclepath as an LRT always sounded like good sense linking southeast and east Bristol with the city centre area. The trackbed is largely there and the cost of sorting out pinch points/obstructions would be rather less than even a short bit of tunneling.

Edit: Or was that part of the route (B&NS) you were suggesting? Apologies if I was actually just saying what you already largely said.

[Red Squirrel]

I'm sure you are right that other routes would probably take priority.

If you look at the Avon Metro proposal, you can see that it is based on old or existing heavy rail routes with a few (but expensive) additions - an inverted U-shaped line running from Temple Meads up to Broadmead and The Centre, looping back to Temple Meads via Parson St (some or all of which may have been intended to go underground), a (perhaps surprising) link from Broadmead to Clifton Down, and a line from Parson St to Hartcliffe. Ignoring the Hartcliffe line (whose business case is weakened by MetroBus), it is possible to imagine that the Marvin Underground could consist of nothing more or less than the central loop. But that would be one hell of a thing, if it was fully integrated with MetroWest!

The B&NS route (not in the ATA proposal) runs south from Temple Meads to Brislington, and passes over this viaduct on its way to Radstock and Frome. It doesn't connect with the Midland.


Photo by Finn the Dog

[johnneyw]

Thanks RS. Really fascinating Evening Post article you added there. Makes me think 'what if'? Cannot believe how long ago that was but recall thinking at the time that this was a bit ambitious for Bristol. I also remember questioning if we would ever really justify it's expense although now it would seem money well spent. Pity it hit the rocks along with many other good idea shipwrecks.

[Red Squirrel]

Re-reading the Modern Railways article, I'd missed the fact that the central loop used on-street running with the odd flyover. Also interesting that the Portishead line was to terminate at Wapping Wharf - why, one wonders..?

[johnneyw]

Yes, it was not a Post article was it. As for the Wapping Wharf termination I can only guess at the reasons but could it be that the Metro was seen as a rather separate entity from what was then BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) and this line's termination at Wapping Wharf reflected that?

[Bmblbzzz]

It's just padding in his "State of the City" speech. The redevelopment of the Cumberland Basin, though, fits in with his (Reese's) ideas.

A very interesting idea. The Cumberland Basin flyover complex was designed to fit on the end of an urban motorway that was to run along Spike Island; we can all be grateful that this didn't happen. It now has redundant elements as well as some badly-engineered quasi-free-flow junctions. It is hard to justify the land-take. Marvin's plan may have legs... maybe he can get George to design the new scheme?

Actually, this would probably be something they would agree on, I reckon.

[Red Squirrel]

I found this map of the proposed Bristol Outer Circuit Road, on the very wonderful SABRE website:



Takes a moment to get your bearings, even if you know Bristol well!

Starting at 1 o'clock, the M32 junction looks familiar - but hang on, there's a flyover! The section of the Outer Circuit Road from Lawrence Hill to St Paul's was all going to be elevated. This explains why Lawrence Hill and St Paul's junctions are so massive.

At 4 o'clock, there's a junction for Feeder Road - when the Spine Road was built, following more or less the same alignment, this was omitted.

Next, at 5 o'clock is the vast sprawl of the Three Lamps interchange. I watched from the No.3 bus as day by day they ripped apart and burnt the quirky maze of hills and backstreets that was Totterdown for this junction. It was over 40 years ago, and it still makes me weep to think of it.

The odd twiddly bit at 7 o'clock is where the current St John's Lane, having been extended across Victoria Park, hits Bedminster Parade (quite close to Asda).

And then (get to the point, I hear a strangled cry!) we get to Spike Island. At its core, there's an elevated road heading west which hits a large multilevel interchange right where the SS Great Britain is now. Heading north from this is a link to Jacob's Wells Rd, but continuing west is a major road that connects to Cumberland Basin at Brunel Way. This explains the odd knot of link roads by Brunel Lock Road; somewhat oversized given that they only really access a few dozen houses and a pub.

Oh, and note the grey bits - Jacob's Wells Rd, Tyndall's Park Road, Cotham Brow, Montpelier... I've seen plans of the multilevel interchange at Queens Rd, but I've never quite understood how the road was going to cross Cheltenham Rd.

It was this scheme that formed my view that the private motor car is inappropriate as a means of transport in cities, ladies and gentlemen. Compared to this, MetroBus is a thing of beauty.

[Bmblbzzz]

The contrast between the inner ring road plans and MetroBus, as well as the newly announced housing plan on Spike Island, show how priorities have changed over the decades. And budgets.