Opposition to the Bus Rapid Transit
Date: July 2010Do you oppose the Bus Rapid Transit 2? FOSBR & Transport for Greater Bristol Alliance (TfGB) is opposing the BRT2 guided busway in support of environmentally sustainable and more effective alternatives.
TfGB is co-ordinating local opposition to the BRT by opposing the application for a Transport and Works Act Order to ‘construct and operate works and to compulsorily acquire land for a guided busway system’ by Bristol City Council and North Somerset Councils for the first part of the route from Ashton Vale up to Prince St and including works to the Bristol Harbour Railway. We understand that in order to get a public Inquiry, it is necessary for 50-100 local residents to put in written objections (postal or email). Route This is the Ashton Vale to city centre route which will run from the Long Ashton Park and Ride site, alongside the proposed stadium, crossing the Portishead rail line and then running alongside it, via the back of the old Megabowl site, over the Ashton Avenue (Create centre) bridge, along the Cut and then under the Cumberland Road bridge past the new Industrial Museum and then over Prince St bridge and onto the Centre.
To object, you need to do the following:
- Send your objection (by post or email) to be received by the Secretary of State on or before Thursday 22nd July.
- State the grounds of your objection or representation.
- Indicate who is making the objection (your full name).
- Give the address to which correspondence relating to the objection may be sent. If you have emailed you still need to give a full postal address.
- Emails to: transportandworksact@dft.gsi.gov.uk Please head your email ‘ The Ashton Vale to Temple Meads and Bristol City Centre Rapid Transit order'
- Letters to: the Secretary of State for Transport, Dept for Transport, c/o TWA Orders Unit, Zone 1/31, Great Minster House, 76 Marsham St, London SW1P 4DR.
- In addition please send a copy of your email to TfGB at info@tfgb.org.uk. Any ground for an objection is valid. You will not be obliged to attend the public inquiry and TfGB will not contact you further unless you indicate you want to be kept informed.
Reasons to object:
- Damage to New Cut in an area of limited open space. The intrusion into the environment of the harbour and the New Cut of double decker buses and bendy buses, rebuilding of local historic bridges, loss of bio-diversity and air pollution from existing and proposed BRT (diesel) vehicles.
- Incredibly low value for money. Using the same total cost of £47m, the West of England Partnership could introduce a new smartcard system for the whole of West of England, set up an Integrated Transport authority and still have money left over to carry out a 5-10 year cycling programme. An ultra light tram along the same route would also be cheaper, greener, more appropriate and more popular vehicle on this rail route with far less environmental impact.
- Duplicates service already in existence - Long Ashton Park and Ride service into town and bus priorities on Hotwells Road. The complete reorganisation of the bus network to accommodate the BRT will involve the loss of bus services to Hotwells Road and loss of coach parking on Cumberland Road.
- BRT has no positive impact on urban regeneration.
- High risk of ongoing financial liability to local people resulting from escalating costs due to current low estimate of only £2 million cost for work to adaptation to four existing historic bridges and the building of an additional bridge and unforeseen engineering complications and costs arising from the rebuilding alongside the New Cut and the harbour.
- The proposed continuing route to Cabot Circus fails to achieve public transport connectivity, as it does not connect with Temple Meads Station; the nearest point to the route is over 400 metres from the T M ticket office.
Friends Of Suburban Bristol Railways (FOSBR) support "the half hourly clock face services" proposed in the Rail Vision of the Joint Local Transport Plan of the West of England Partnership (WEP) 2006 - 2011. The more frequent service on the Severn Beach line, financed by public money, has resulted in a considerable increase in passengers shown in the annual Severnside Community Rail Passenger counts. This should be used as a model for more frequent services creating a local network of cross city services linking Yate, Weston-super-Mare, Bristol Parkway, Bristol Temple Meads, Bath and other local stations.
The extensive and underutilised rail infrastructure
The (WEP) JLTP 2011 – 2026 confirms that ‘rail services in 2008/09 carried almost 41m passengers (long distance and local), a substantial 44% increase over the previous 5 years’. (Rail census by councils). The JLTP accepts “that rail offers an alternative public transport option for people having access to a local station but is currently constrained by limited network and rolling stock capacity”.
This is inaccurate. The network is limited by inadequate frequency of service. Neither Keynsham, Patchway or Parson Street have a 30 minute frequency. The WEP – as a transport authority – should be lobbying with central government to create a viable service. Having dismissed the rail infrastructure existing within Greater Bristol, BCC feels confident in introducing the bus rapid transit.
To create the BRT:
- The Harbour Railway would be taken up and relaid inside the guided busway, and would operate only on Sundays.
- The railway would be removed from the Ashton Swing Bridge.
- Although the route purports to serve Temple Meads, the stop is in fact several hundred yards from the station, across a busy road.
- The plan would establish guided bus as the basis for Bristol’s transport system, making further guided bus routes more likely than any light rail scheme.
- The route could be used for buses from Portishead rather than reopening the Portishead railway line.
FOSBR's formal objection
Dear Secretary of State,
Re: The Ashton Vale to Temple Meads and Bristol City Centre Rapid Transit Order
I write on behalf of the Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways (FOSBR) to object to the proposed Ashton Vale to Temple Meads and Bristol City Centre Rapid Transit Order.
It may seem strange that, as campaigners for improved public transport, we resist this plan for a new rapid transit route. However, we believe that what is proposed is far from being in the best interests of public transport users in Bristol .
We base our objection on the following grounds:
- What is proposed is a diesel-powered bus route, guided in one direction for part of its length. This will bring none of the environmental benefits of a light rail system: it will create as much pollution as an ordinary bus, and will not have the proven potential of light rail (as seen, for example, in Manchester and Nottingham ) to attract car users to public transport. A diesel-powered bus route will not promote the objective of tackling climate change set out in the Department’s paper Delivering a Sustainable Transport System.
- The guided part of the route will use the alignment of the Bristol Harbour Railway from Smeaton Road to Prince Street Bridge . The railway will be taken up and relaid to accommodate the guided buses, will be shortened at its western end, and will operate only on Sundays. The Harbour Railway is an important part of the texture of the harbourside, not only valued as a tourist attraction but also used by residents as an enjoyable way to get between the city centre and Ashton Gate and Hotwells at weekends. It has the potential to form part of a light rail system for Bristol , and should be preserved and enhanced, not converted for use by buses. It is disappointing that the archaeological report in Appendix 8 to the application says little about the damage that the proposal will cause to the railway, and to other harbourside structures such as bridges.
- We particularly object to the lowering of the track that will be necessary to accommodate buses at the Cumberland Road overbridge. This will necessitate a dip in the line that will be disruptive to the operation of the railway.
- The Ashton Gate Swing Bridge will have its railway track removed so that it can be used by the buses. While the refurbishment of this bridge is welcome, the removal of the railway is not. The bridge should be used to reconnect the Harbour Railway with the national rail network at Ashton Gate.
- The proposed route suffers from poor connectivity with other modes of public transport. It really does little more than provide transport between the Ashton Vale park and ride facility to the city centre — a route served effectively by buses already. Although it is claimed that interchange with national rail services at Temple Meads station will be possible, the bus stop would be over 400 metres from the booking office, across a busy road. This proposal will do nothing to improve journeys between Temple Meads and the city centre.
- It is suggested that buses from other destinations to the south-west of Bristol , such as Weston-super- Mare , Clevedon and Portishead, could use the route. While this might result a small speeding up of some journeys, it will do little to reduce traffic on the local road network. It would, however, be expensive, as new vehicles would need to be bought. In the case of Portishead, it would be much better to use the money to reopen the Portishead railway line to passenger service. Buses, even if guided for a small part of their route in Bristol , will travel just as slowly along the congested road to Portishead as they do currently.
- If this first bus-based rapid transit route is built as proposed, it is likely that future rapid transit routes in the city would also be bus-based, in order to be compatible with it. As we have said, however, a bus-based system will not produce the modal shift away from the private car that Bristol needs. Only a light rail system, integrated with the heavy rail network, can do that. We support the light rail alternative outlined in the submission you have received from the Transport for Greater Bristol Alliance.
In summary, the Harbour Railway is not only a unique and attractive part of Bristol ’s heritage; it also has the potential to play an important part in a light rail system, and should be preserved for this purpose. We suspect the main reason why Bristol City Council has applied for a bus-based rather than rail-based scheme for this route is the previous government’s bias towards funding bus rather than light rail schemes, as highlighted in the All-Party Parliamentary Light Rail Group’s recent report, Light Rail and the City Regions Inquiry, rather than any true local preference.
Even if the Order is approved, it is unlikely that funds will be found for the scheme. We believe that the inevitable delay caused by current financial constraints should be used to plan a rail-based system that will meet Bristol ’s transport needs in the long term. We therefore urge you to reject this application, or, at least, to order a public enquiry.
Yours sincerely,
Brendan Biggs
Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways