The future of the Bristol Railway Path

[mark1964]

Apologies if covered elsewhere, but the suits responsible for transport policy in the SW are once again gazing at the old Railway Path with envious eyes....
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bris ... ol-1157315

Warning: Ad laden hell of a website

Some of us suspected that old bad ideas weren't really dead...

[brooksby]

Apologies if covered elsewhere, but the suits responsible for transport policy in the SW are once again gazing at the old Railway Path with envious eyes....
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bris ... ol-1157315

Warning: Ad laden hell of a website

Some of us suspected that old bad ideas weren't really dead...

Oh yes.

As regards the matter at hand, it doesn't surprise me. It'll never happen, but it doesn't surprise me that they want to try to have another go at removing the railway path (they might say it'll run alongside, but I wouldn't believe that for a minute... 'Elf 'n' Safety, innit).

Recreational paths are not considered important enough, or revenue-able enough. If they close the railway path to cyclists, then all those people would have to use the new LRT or whatever they're going to call it: guaranteed customer base

[mjr]

Recreational paths are not considered important enough, or revenue-able enough.

The BBRP is a main commuter artery as well, isn't it?

Another bit of local government so short-sighted it looks at a popular cycleway and think "we can put some engines along there"

[Bmblbzzz]

It is a HUGE commuter artery, both between Bath and Bristol and within Bristol. This plan would also receive opposition from Avon Valley Railway (I think that's what they call themselves), though it would be supported by regular rail commuters and enthusiasts. Meanwhile, we're going to have MetroBus in only 3 (or is it 33?) years...

[Bmblbzzz]

Also take note of this: https://bristolcycling.org.uk/railway-p ... lief-road/

[whoof]

Recreational paths are not considered important enough, or revenue-able enough. If they close the railway path to cyclists, then all those people would have to use the new LRT or whatever they're going to call it: guaranteed customer base

This is how both myself and Mrs Whoof get to work every day. The Bristol end is very busy every morning/evening with both cyclists and pedestrians commuting. It's especially busy with children walking or cycling to school.

[Bmblbzzz]

Recreational paths are not considered important enough, or revenue-able enough. If they close the railway path to cyclists, then all those people would have to use the new LRT or whatever they're going to call it: guaranteed customer base

This is how both myself and Mrs Whoof get to work every day. The Bristol end is very busy every morning/evening with both cyclists and pedestrians commuting. It's especially busy with children walking or cycling to school.

Talking of which, the "slow down" speed detector thing by the "zebra" in Easton doesn't seem to work anymore.

[Cyril Haearn]

Oh gr8 no need to go outside, I will soon be able to relax in an air-conditioned tram, soon (33 years?)

[SleepyJoe]

It’s not only the Bristol-Bath cycle lane which people have an eye on.
The is also the Tarka Trail between Braunton&Barnstaple which some people want to convert to a tram line
http://www.taw-link.org.uk
Both ex-railway tracks converted to excellent and well used shared use paths which are already nit wide enough.
I despair sometimes
Mark

[Cyril Haearn]

Trams can run on roads, up hills, out in the country
I doubt if there is enough space for trams + PoBs + PoFs

[Cunobelin]

Been there...

Gosport had plans for many years for a Light Rapid Transit on teh main Cycle Artery, and amazed by the support for cycling and walking

We had cycling on the route reinstated, and pedestrian access

It all then failed in favour of a Bus Transit route, and the fight starts again, this time we were successful in getting cycling access, but failed with pedestrian access. The extension is now planned and we Weill try again

As it is we have (so far) benefited with a nice wide cycle path that gets used by a bus every 5 minutes or so


http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/02/91/47/2914754_89b454a6.jpg

[Stevek76]

The current Bristol administration, the mayor and his advisors in particular, are not exactly on board with the idea of sustinable transport unfortunately. Hence the (re)appearances of this stuff in a desperate attempt to somehow provide more transport capacity without taking anything from the almighty motorists and spending nothing.

The really odd thing to me about this is that there's enough tribal morons in parts of south and north bristol who'd vote for a turd if you put a red rosette on it, so he really doesn't need to pander to those areas' existing inbuilt motoring habit to get re-elected on a normal May election. If anything he stands more to lose from the hippy/hipsterish areas that had a significant swing to labour (from green etc) off the back of the corbyn effect.

As regards the matter at hand, it doesn't surprise me. It'll never happen, but it doesn't surprise me that they want to try to have another go at removing the railway path (they might say it'll run alongside, but I wouldn't believe that for a minute... 'Elf 'n' Safety, innit).

To be fair, that wouldn't be a problem, a modern LRT would actually be narrower than the existing full gauge rail space that runs alongside most of the path. The various plans that have previously kicked about generally work ok from a transport perspective and result in a widened path.

Though like most of these things, stuff will be far more difficult on the ground than the council figures when someone in it looks at an old railway and thinks 'it was a railway, therefore we simply need to slap some rails down, job done'. And there's always the risk in the final design stages when the penny pinchers get involved and anything involving cycling and walking ends up the prime target.

The bigger issue is perhaps that the path is not just a transport route but has morphed into a rather long park of sorts, particularly on weekends/holidays.

The BBRP is a main commuter artery as well, isn't it?

Yes, hugely so. I used to commute along there, it's ridiculously busy at peak times. Sustrans's official figures are significantly under reporting it imo.

[Cyril Haearn]

Would the LRT (double-track) really be narrower than the old railway?

[Stevek76]

iirc, yes, I think they may have been running single track for parts with bypasses, not sure, it was some time ago and I wasn't a working adult at that point! Significant parts of the path have considerably more width of 'not path' than path.

I think to try and address it from a 'is it feasible in engineering/transport terms' is rather missing the point. The key issues here are that it's only being seen as a transport route, not the park/leisure site/green space/nature space it also exists as and, worse (to me anyway), its a reflection of the general fear of doing anything that might remove private traffic capacity. The bold leader would put a tram down the A420/432, Marvin isn't one unfortunately, pretty much the exact opposite, the only thing he's doing that could be considered 'bold' is trying to build high rise housing on council land, including in some really quite run down areas which, historically, hasn't usually turned out well. The A420/432 actually make somewhat more sense from a transport perspective as well given there's shops and employment down them that people might want to get to (!).

[Bmblbzzz]

The current Bristol administration, the mayor and his advisors in particular, are not exactly on board with the idea of sustinable transport unfortunately.

Definitely true.

Hence the (re)appearances of this stuff in a desperate attempt to somehow provide more transport capacity without taking anything from the almighty motorists and spending nothing.

The really odd thing to me about this is that there's enough tribal morons in parts of south and north bristol who'd vote for a turd if you put a red rosette on it, so he really doesn't need to pander to those areas' existing inbuilt motoring habit to get re-elected on a normal May election. If anything he stands more to lose from the hippy/hipsterish areas that had a significant swing to labour (from green etc) off the back of the corbyn effect.

However, I'm not sure about this. South Bristol is traditionally Labour (Bristol South constituency has elected a Labour MP at every election since 1935) but the North has a large body of Conservative voters. More importantly, this is not just a Bristol project; it needs backing from the Western-super-Mayor at WECA and he's a Conservative, largely off the votes of S.Glos and BANES. And the demographics of that area are such that residents of all political persuasions are largely dependent on their cars to reach jobs, schools, shops and so in the urban areas which they surround. (One of the things that's seriously wrong with local politics in the area is that large parts of the Bristol urban area, not to mention its travel to work area, are beyond its administration, being instead in S.G and Banes. But that's going a bit OT... )