Bristol connections: Metro, Bus Rapid Transit, PTE, ITA and local councils - discussion

[whole diary]

[TonyK]

Probably as close to the mark as it gets, swrural, although the Government doesn't pay anything like the full cost. For BRT2, for example, the maximum Government contribution is ^34.5 million. Bristol CC's exposure is ^12 million, plus 80% of any further cost overruns. The announcement of the funding for BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) was done as part of George Osborne's first budget statement, and smacked of a desperate need for some good news amongst the Tales from the Economic Grim Reaper that constituted the rest.

If I was pouring scorn on previous portfolio holders, it wasn't intended - with the exception of WEP (Edit: and Atkins), upon whom I would heap all available scorn. Mark Bradshaw in particular deserves respect for the courage of his convictions, and is a very capable man. He at least sees that the watered-down remnant of BRT will do little to help, even if telling the world hasn't won him many friends in the political clique. The mix of four councils and a few unelected add-ons is never likely to come close to a true ITA^▸ (Integrated Transport Authority) in terms of results.

The South Hampshire BRT, whose proposed light rail system was turned down at the same time as Bristol's, is up and running. It hasn't set the world alight, as this report from the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) shows.

[Timmer]

The South Hampshire BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit), whose proposed light rail system was turned down at the same time as Bristol's, is up and running. It hasn't set the world alight, as this report from the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) shows.

If it had been light rail I bet the above news report would have been very different. Buses however quick and frequent they run won't get people out of cars but a tram will but it will cost a lot more.

[swrural]

Probably as close to the mark as it gets, swrural, although the Government doesn't pay anything like the full cost. For BRT2, for example, the maximum Government contribution is ^34.5 million. Bristol CC's exposure is ^12 million, plus 80% of any further cost overruns. The announcement of the funding for BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) was done as part of George Osborne's first budget statement, and smacked of a desperate need for some good news amongst the Tales from the Economic Grim Reaper that constituted the rest.

If I was pouring scorn on previous portfolio holders, it wasn't intended - with the exception of WEP. Mark Bradshaw in particular deserves respect for the courage of his convictions, and is a very capable man. He at least sees that the watered-down remnant of BRT will do little to help, even if telling the world hasn't won him many friends in the political clique. The mix of four councils and a few unelected add-ons is never likely to come close to a true ITA^▸ (Integrated Transport Authority) in terms of results.

The South Hampshire BRT, whose proposed light rail system was turned down at the same time as Bristol's, is up and running. It hasn't set the world alight, as this report from the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) shows.

@FTN and also replying to Timmer.  Yes, I used to be active in regional discussions on transport strategy.  I knew all the Bristol leading lights and had many discussions with them both on formal and informal occasions.  I regard Mark Bradshaw as a young man who has conscientious intentions, as did his colleague Helen Holland and the other party representatives such as Peter Abrahams (Con) and a scholarly LD rep, whose name I have forgotten, and whose Leader was Barbara Janke, all good people.  The 'b^tes noires'  for integrated transport in the Bristol area were and I suspect still are, the jealous surrounding councils, chiefly SGC and NSC.  (Bath and NES was 'OK').  The competing car-dependent Mall at Patchway is perhaps the worst planning development, other than the closure of Filton airport (could have been rail connected, as well as to motorway) and the Bradley Stoke car-dependent housing developments.  Yes I know that one can get buses to the Mall but one should think of getting rail and tram services to replace car in massive new developments.  I sometimes had dreams of converting the Mall into an airport terminal (gone now). 

On BRT and the Gosport to Fareham, I note only part of the original formation is in use.  My own feeling about the BRT concept is that if a rail formation was saved from other development, that would be a plus but this would be just an insurance while awaiting what really needs to be done.  I have the same attitude to the 'light tram' proposal by the'Stop BRT2' campaign.

The challenge to achieve modal shift from car, in the Bristol area, is composed of many sub-challenges, not least of which, indeed the beginning point, is Government meeting the need to impose one overall Transport Authority that will put forward the schemes, much in the way that the others around the country are now doing and which can override the parochial jealousies and competition.  There should be no opportunity in such an authority that any locality could possess a 'veto'.

The subject of what could be done at Bristol goes far beyond the improvement (essentially reinstatement) of lines.  I'll leave it there for now. but appreciate the debate and thank the moderators.   

[TonyK]

swrural,

My sentiments exactly! I would guess that the scholarly LD rep is Dr Jon Rogers, whose support for BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) probably did much to undermine his pitch for mayor. The other authorities' unwillingness to engage in an ITA^▸ (Integrated Transport Authority) is understandable when one recalls the Bristocentric nature of Avon County Council (shudder!), be it real or perceived. But heads will really have to be bashed together, as the four areas are so intermeshed.

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the Bristol Post:

New lease of life planned for tracks behind Thornbury quarry

Calls have been made for a railway line to be restored in Thornbury following the closure of a freight line.

South Gloucestershire councillors Brian Hopkinson and Trevor Jones are spearheading a campaign to bring the line, which once took passengers to Yate and on to Bristol but until recently served Tytherington Quarry, back into use.

​
The entrance to Tytherington quarry

They are lobbying transport chiefs to ask that the old railway, which stopped transporting passengers in 1944, is reopened in order to ease congestion on nearby roads.

The councillors believe now is the perfect time for the reinstatement as Tytherington Quarry, operated by building materials company Hanson UK^▸ (United Kingdom), was recently mothballed, meaning the tracks that run behind it could be given a new lease of life and returned to their original purpose. They believe that the local authority should "grab" the opportunity to request that Network Rail reclaim the line.

In a letter sent to chief executive Amanda Deeks they said: "We believe that it is within South Gloucestershire Council's strategic transport remit to request that Network Rail reclaim this line and protect its potential for future use and we request that this is attended to swiftly. We cannot countenance this line being scrapped and parts of the trackbed used as a cycle track/footpath or just allowed to 'return to nature' without the potential this line offers for commuter route alternatives being investigated."

Tory councillors Mr Hopkinson, who represents the Bradley Stoke Central and Stoke Lodge ward, and Mr Jones, who represents Frenchay and Stoke Park, say they regularly hear of Thornbury residents' "frustrations" about lack of public transport and employment opportunities. They also say the line could help cut thousands of lorry journeys if put to use should the planned construction of a nuclear power station in Shepperdine goes ahead.

In their letter they say: "With the Hitachi/Horizon new nuclear development at Oldbury back on the table, this line has the potential for running right into Oldbury. The amount of concrete, steel, equipment and construction workers coming into this area will be enormous. To see a greater part of this coming in by rail and the waste removed via the same route would, in our opinion, not only massively reduce the impact on our existing road infrastructure but could enhance the speed of construction and may well reduce overall costs to the developer. In addition it would fulfil the requirements for a long-term local legacy. We believe the council should act now to, at the very least, protect future options."

According to the West of England Area Rail Studies report published in April 2012, reopening the line would cost ^38 million with operating costs of ^3 million each year.

The Greater Bristol Metro Rail campaign, which aimed to bring former stations back into use and increase services' frequency, was launched by the four local authorities, including South Gloucestershire Council, last year.

Thornbury was not considered as part of the project's first phase, which is due to be rolled out around 2017, or second stage. But the two councillors have told The Post this does not mean the town should be disregarded and are they hoping the ^38 million necessary to make the line operational again will become available.

No one from South Gloucestershire Council was available for comment yesterday.

[swrural]

It would seem logical to extend the Bristol metro (I wonder if a better term could be devised?) to Thornbury.  Pity some of the terminus area was lost but I suppose the main use would be commuting to Bristol and North Bristol rather than the reverse direction.

Meanwhile, I see that it will not be 'Four Track Now' but it will be Four Track in 2016, starting with Grip 6 (construction and commissioning) in 2014.  I have wondered about these community gardeners at Stapleton Road.  Are they affected or have they been already bought off, so to speak?   

[JayMac]

I suspect the community garden is there by the grace of the landowner, Network Rail. I doubt Eastside Roots have any title to the area used.

[TonyK]

Other forummers may not know what you are on about. Fortunately, I took some pictures for another purpose, back in the summer, at Stapleton Road, and I will share some of them here:

This is the community garden mentioned:



It is in the space where two lines formerly ran, something shown more clearly by this picture of the newer bridge over Stapleton Road:



I am told this bridge, which extends over the M32, is the reason the two tracks were lifted. I have read that it is not considered strong enough for even a JCB to help with ballast removal. Perhaps one of the many experts here could tell me if that is truth or urban myth? It looks a bit ramshackle, but mending is usually cheaper than demolition and rebuilding.

That garden gives the impression of a treasured bit of town, which given the sometimes dubious reputation of the area is refreshing. The muriel on the up platform adds to that impression. Finding an ingredient for my favourite beverage growing there simply put the tin hat on it for me:



And finally, I think I found evidence that the garden may be preparing to close soon:



I am sure they will find a new home, and I wish them all the very best. But Four Track, by 2016 is an exciting prospect, and one that I welcome. It will be interesting seeing the work progress, and shows a real commitment to the other projects.

I like the Thornbury idea. Although it's a bit of a roundabout route to Temple Meads, it will be popular if it happens. I wonder, though, whether South Glos have blown their chances by getting so deeply involved in the Bust Rabid Transit project? It "benefits" them more than Bristol, and costs an eye-watering pile of cash for what it probably won't do well.  The new nuke may be the answer, although there is an option to transport a lot of the stuff be water, as Hinkley are planning to do.

[swrural]

I suspect the community garden is there by the grace of the landowner, Network Rail. I doubt Eastside Roots have any title to the area used.

Is that what they are called? It is in a neck of the woods not too far from where the 'urban warriors' of the PRSC hang out, so I hope you are right.

I thus stand a good chance of seeing this completed before I leave you all (I am 67).  With a third (or is it fourth) new Portishead station being opened, I can go happily.  Pity about the killing off of the Bristol area Midland Railway stretches, though.  Clifton to Bath - direct - would be a popular overground metro now, not to mention a direct route to Gloucester with an already available fly-under of the M4 at Westerleigh, thus relieving the Stoke Gifford area.   We need it all, now, but we lost much of it.  The Midland line, now, would have brought you down to the quayside, where a walk across the old river brings one straight into TM^‡(resolve) station, just a hundred yards and of course right in the middle of the office developments.

Thanks to FTN for those photos.  I am very sympathetic to such uses but hopefully the people will see the benefits of a better local service.

[anthony215]

Seems the Portisheaad branch could be open by 2017 at least thats what the Bristol evening post are saying.

I must say that I will be glad to see the line opened the only problem is the rolling stock will there being any 165's available to work services around Bristol especially since we are waiting for the new thameslink units to displace the clas 319's to the GW^▸ (Great Western) local routes around Reading & the Thames Valley.

Unless of course the government take up the order of those extra electrostar vehicles and send them to the Thames Valley region instead of the  class 319's which could be used to work between Bristol TM^‡(resolve) & Cardiff Central as well as going to north west england.

[TonyK]

The timescale seems to be setting in concrete, and it looks like it all will happen. December 2017 is forecast as the date of the first train to Portishead.

Tomorrow will see Mayor Ferguson's official announcement that he will not allow the stupid ^50 million BRT2 route to run over Prince Street bridge, and through the Harbourside. Good call!

[anthony215]

Good the mayor is not afraid to put his foot down. Lets hope the other BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) schemes in Bristol are cut trams do seem a like a much better option.

I would like to see how Trampower are getting on with their low cost tram proposals which might be good for Bristol and easier to install since you wont have to move all the utilities etc

I wonder if we will see him heping to campaign for the local branches around Bristol to be wired during CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024) especially if the crosscountry core route between Birmingham & Plymouth is wired in the futurel.

I look forward to seeing some class 165's operating around Bristol again.

[JayMac]

Seems the Portisheaad branch could be open by 2017 at least thats what the Bristol evening post are saying.

That latest news item from The Bristol Post (no longer 'Evening'  ) can be read at the following link:

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Rail-electrification-year-ahead-schedule/story-17798462-detail/story.html

[TonyK]

I think we can now regard the Northern Fringe element of BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) as a purely South Glos project that can use the streets of Bristol, like any other bus. That bridge, and the crossing it was due to lead to, were pivotal to the whole scheme south of the river. It would never have worked anyway, although I am slightly puzzled that the mayor has acted before the outcome of the Public Inquiry. If that had been announced, and was of the same mind, George may have saved the small amount of opprobrium likely to be heaped on him. He may think the thanks he is already receiving outweigh that.

[swrural]

On BRT^▸ (Bus Rapid Transit) I see that a 'review' indeed has been ordered.  The route being promoted now is the same from TM^‡(resolve) but now using Cumberland Road, Clarence Road to Temple Gate.  That sounds very sensible.  Someone has suggested a return via Anchor Road and Hotwells.  I assume the harbour would be crossed at Merchants Bridge.

That route is as flat as a pancake and, frankly, could be achieved just using ordinary buses now.  So what was all the faff about and does it not beg the question that it could be just as easily trammed?

How was a double-decker supposed to cross the New Cut Swing Bridge, by the way?   I can't remember what the plans stated - a replacement bridge, I suppose.