# Plans to make the Bristol-Bath Cycle Path a Bus Route



## skids (19 Jan 2008)

Details here!

I use this facility on a regular basis and am very much against the idea. I know they've muted the idea before but this time the local councils really do seem up for it!

Facebook Save the path group here


----------



## summerdays (19 Jan 2008)

I've submitted my comment too - thanks for bringing it to my attention. I don't use it very often myself - more with the kids rather than to commute on but then I work in Bristol. I'm suprised I haven't heard about it via work ... I will forward it to some others in Bristol.

I voted in some poll last week to bring in congestion charging in the centre of Bristol (probably on the BBC web-site). I feel sorry for the folks in the buses but to be honest most of Bristol motorists would have to be forcably ejected from their cars and have them crushed before they would consider an alternative. 

(That said - hubby has just gone - in the car - to drop the older two kids round at friends houses about a mile and 2 miles away in the horrible rain - I am a hypocrite!!!! normally they would walk or cycle but they are both going on sleep overs complete with pillows).


----------



## andygates (19 Jan 2008)

Some sort of advanced megatram nonsense? Bristol has been talking about those since 89 at least. And the route is wildly inappropriate for it. Attend the meeting! Point and laugh!


----------



## jonesy (19 Jan 2008)

andygates said:


> Some sort of advanced megatram nonsense? Bristol has been talking about those since 89 at least. And the route is wildly inappropriate for it. Attend the meeting! Point and laugh!



Looks like guided bus rather than tram, so much more likely to go ahead as it isn't as expensive as light rail. A similar scheme on a former railway route is now under construction in Cambridge and another one from Luton to Dunstable has been given approval. Note that the Cambridge guided busway includes a parallel cycle route. 

I'd be inclined to look at the detailed proposals rather than give a knee-jerk reaction. This is a former railway route and I understand always has been considered for some form of rapid transit. In most other European countries a city of comparable size would have a decent rapid transit system, so I don't see why the idea should be considered ridiculous for Bristol. Personally I'd prefer light rail to guided bus, not least because the concrete guideways are much more physically intrusive and occupy a wider alignment than a rail based system would take; sadly however the UK government doesnt' seem to want to pay for light rail so guided bus may be the only option until Britain changes its transport appraisal methodology to one that recognises the difference between value and cost.

http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/transport/guided/


----------



## andygates (19 Jan 2008)

The idea of rapid transit for Bristol isn't absurd at all. But since 1989 or so, certainly since then because that's when I moved there, they've been talking about rapid transit and never actually putting anything in place. The idea is good, but their competence in deploying it is so feeble as to be comical.


----------



## jonesy (19 Jan 2008)

andygates said:


> The idea of rapid transit for Bristol isn't absurd at all. But since 1989 or so, certainly since then because that's when I moved there, they've been talking about rapid transit and never actually putting anything in place. The idea is good, but their competence in deploying it is so feeble as to be comical.



I don't think it is fair wholly to blame the Bristol LAs. The main obstacle has simply been the government's refusal to fund it. Likewise in Leeds, Liverpool and Southampton: millions has been spent developing schemes that then got scrapped because the Treasury considered them to be poor value for money, often citing concerns about cost over-runs, even though road schemes also usual exceed their costs.


----------



## andygates (19 Jan 2008)

Well if they didn't have funding they shouldn't have blethered on about it as if it was a done deal. I _do _blame the LAs. They haven't delivered on this in twenty years, which is old enough for some of the original numpties' _children _to be screwing it up this time.

Back on topic, I bet Sustrans are just happy-clappy with the idea, neh?


----------



## summerdays (20 Jan 2008)

If Bristol City Council want to do anything why not link Portishead with Bristol given how many people live there, work in Bristol and want a rail link (I assume its along the existing rail track).

I must admit I'm fed up with the number of initiatives they have thought up, spent lots of consultancy money and then failed to do anything.


----------



## Danny (20 Jan 2008)

Better still build the guided bus route along the A4!


----------



## domd1979 (20 Jan 2008)

Since "Sustrans" is short for Sustainable Transport, I'm sure they'll be giving the whole thing due consideration since mass-transit is a more sustainable form of transport than the motor car.




andygates said:


> Back on topic, I bet Sustrans are just happy-clappy with the idea, neh?


----------



## User482 (22 Jan 2008)

The proposal for rapid buses in Bristol is part of a bid to the DfT from all four LAs that used to be Avon County Council to access central govt.Transport Innovation Funding (TIF). One of the routes _may_ use a small part of the cycle path, but until more details are available, I'm going to avoid condemning it.

There are many valid criticisms of the authority, but it should be remembered that they have been encouraged to develop schemes by central government in the past, only to be knocked back at the last minute.

I understand that details are likely to emerge in the summer, and will be subject to consultation.


----------



## sheddy (29 Jan 2008)

Sustrans view - http://www.sustrans.org.uk/default.asp?sID=1201109800166


----------



## summerdays (29 Mar 2008)

Sustrans are having a Celebrate the Railway Path day, tomorrow. 

There is either a walk in from Fishponds at 2.30 or if you fancy a ride, start in the centre at 12 out to Mangotsfield and back again joining the walk.

Details here for anyone interested: http://www.railwaypath.org/node/4

and apparently the council are debating a motion by a Green councillor that "_asks that Bristol City Council request the West of England Partnership to leave the Railway Path out of their plans", on _Tuesday next week. This should apparently highlight which councillors are for or against the scheme.


----------



## skids (29 Mar 2008)

*Excellent news if correct*

BBC are reporting the plan has been scrapped 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7320101.stm


----------



## summerdays (29 Mar 2008)

Thanks I hadn't seen that , I would still have liked to see which way the councillors would jump.


----------



## mgarl10024 (6 Feb 2011)

Hi all,

Should I be worried about this at all?

I still haven't been able to work out the route and whether it involves the cycle path (probably deliberately so). http://www.westofengland.org/media/175309/2 transport map v3.pdf shows a route between Temple Meads and Bath, but a pre-election dated article here would suggest that the route hasn't been decided and yet politicians aren't willing to commit to not use the path.

I'm confused.  And I keep getting concerned when reading things like this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12376259 which says that a part of a different rapid transit route has been agreed to (I guess not involving the path?), but that it joins other bits.

Thanks,

MG


----------



## ufkacbln (6 Feb 2011)

We have one being built in Gosport.

The original plan was to ban cycles all together, but after local protest this was rescinded. Pedestrians however are still banned. You are allowed to walk to the stops, but the present routes to local schools are to be closed.


There is also the fiasco in St Ives Cambridgeshire where the cost is now at over £180 million and rising without a single bus running and no sign of one doing so in the near future.


----------



## summerdays (7 Feb 2011)

mgarl10024 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Should I be worried about this at all?



I wouldn't say it was completely safe - but certainly last time there was large opposition to using the path - it is such a well known and well used path not just by cyclists. As the comment at the bottom says ... I don't think all the councils are in total agreement about it's future though.

I used to follow Chris Hutt's blog whose ear seemed to be very close to the ground about finding out about those sort of things - and he was definitely someone who knew his way around Bristol too.


----------



## TheDoctor (7 Feb 2011)

If the Cambridge guided bus is anything to go by, it'll be an unmitigated disaster. Massively late, massively over budget.


----------



## jonesy (7 Feb 2011)

But that hasn't stopped DfT giving the go ahead for another one on the former Luton to Dunstable railway line, apparently to be built by the same contractor!


----------



## Flying Dodo (7 Feb 2011)

About the only people who want the Luton one are Luton Council. The other councils involved only agreed reluctantly on the basis that they couldn't see any way of getting anything else agreed, and local opinion has always been generally against it. 

About 6 months ago they started clearing off all the overgrown trees and lifted the old rail tracks. Then it all went quiet for 2 months, but now they're taking out the old bridges. But yes, it looks like it will be another white elephant.


----------



## jonesy (7 Feb 2011)

At least (or so I understand) the Luton one will actually provide a bus priority route into the central area. The Cambridge one ends at the science park, so returns the buses back to the normal, congested, roads to get into the city centre. Putting back the rail service would have been much cheaper, but sadly DfT seem to be determined to do anything to avoid re-opening railway lines. Perhaps all the bureaucracy and cost associated with the franchising and regulatory process puts them off...


----------



## captain nemo1701 (22 Jul 2011)

Folks should go and read the Joint Local Transport Plan 3 here:

http://www.travelplus.org.uk/our-vision/joint-local-transport-plan-3

Ok, it's a draft copy, but there area few worrying diagrams which are:

Pages 9 & 17 - that pink line from Emmersons Green most certainly follows the path route.

Page 36 - Worrying dashed green line right up the path route which is 'not aligned'

As an engineer, I can tell you that this phrase is corporate-speak for something you really would prefere to do.

Page 67, figure 6.4: Worrying purple line must follow the path.

I bought my house near the path so that I can use it for commuting by bike. We defeated the plans in 2008 and it was shelved. Are the West of England partnership (now defunct?) still suggesting it?.

No wonder the anti-cycling paper The Bristol Evening Pest...sorry..Post supports the proposed Indepenedent Transport Authority (b**tard child of the WEP) if it means destroying the Railway Path in favour of a guided bus route for their pals, First Worst Group (the swine have just put up my train fare to London by £51  )


----------



## Red Light (22 Jul 2011)

andygates said:


> Some sort of advanced megatram nonsense? Bristol has been talking about those since 89 at least. And the route is wildly inappropriate for it. Attend the meeting! Point and laugh!



And don't forget to remind them of all the red faces in Cambridge over the Misguided Bus fiasco and the Edinburgh tram disaster.


----------



## summerdays (22 Jul 2011)

captain nemo1701 said:


> Folks should go and read the Joint Local Transport Plan 3 here:



I've come across the following map through the ASK consultation site:

http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/60538319

It doesn't show/mention the cycle path (though they would want to hide that hand for as long as possible), on the website map. Though I'm pretty certain that some would like to include the path in the plans. Not sure I'm that keen on the M32 bus only junction!


----------



## Richard Mann (23 Jul 2011)

Bus lanes, preferably squeezing space for traffic down to one narrow lane each way, are a much better idea. Guided busways (or trams, or heavy rail for short journeys) are a collosal waste of money when there's perfectly good tarmac to be reallocated instead.


----------



## captain nemo1701 (3 Aug 2011)

Thanks Summerdays.

As an engineer, I have learnt that 'route not assigned' is sometimes corporate-speak for something that you really want to do and are prepared to go ahead with it but are just waiting for the right moment to announce it.

My take on the situation is that they want to use the path and are waiting for two things:

1) The population of Emmersons Green to expand so that demand rises - the new science park may well achieve this although if I worked there, I'd damn well live nearby!.

2) If the planned BRT from Ashton Gate to the centre is a success, they will try and make the case for the railway path.

My gut feeling is that around 2015, we might see a renewed bid to put BRT on the path.


----------



## snibgo (3 Aug 2011)

The Cambridgeshire Misguided Busway has been mentioned a few times. I'll mention that it is due to open this Sunday 7 August, when buses should start running. The adjacent cycletrack ("maintenance track") will also open, mostly. The rest will open sometime later. And we are told it won't flood much. At least, not as much as it currently does.

And I'll mention that one (alleged) advantage of guided versus tarmac is that it takes less width (because the buses can pass close to each other), so they can squeeze in two bus lanes and a cycle track in the width the old railway took. Mostly.


----------



## Riverman (5 Aug 2011)

jonesy said:


> I don't think it is fair wholly to blame the Bristol LAs. The main obstacle has simply been the government's refusal to fund it. Likewise in Leeds, Liverpool and Southampton: millions has been spent developing schemes that then got scrapped because the Treasury considered them to be poor value for money, often citing concerns about cost over-runs, even though road schemes also usual exceed their costs.



Southampton doesn't need mass transit systems beyond occasional buses for long journeys. It's not big enough and besides, Southampton is a very easy city to get around by bike. Like may other cities what Southampton needs are improved cycle routes but most importantly a campaign to get people cycling. I have lived in Southampton for ten years and have cycled for about five of those years. I would never go back to using buses, they're a joke and always will be a joke no matter how frequent they are. They're just not very well suited to serve this city.


----------



## jonesy (5 Aug 2011)

Riverman said:


> Southampton doesn't need mass transit systems beyond occasional buses for long journeys. It's not big enough and besides, Southampton is a very easy city to get around by bike. Like may other cities what Southampton needs are improved cycle routes but most importantly a campaign to get people cycling. I have lived in Southampton for ten years and have cycled for about five of those years. I* would never go back to using buses, they're a joke and always will be a joke no matter how frequent they are.* They're just not very well suited to serve this city.



Why not? Buses work very well in Oxford, Cambridge and other medium sized cities. The key point, as Richard says earlier, is that they need to be given priority and have road space reallocated to them from cars. You can't expect cycling to replace all local trips, some people simply can't or won't cycle and even in cities where cycling has a large modal share it is predominantly for the shorter trips or up to 2 or 3 miles. I find it highly unlikely that Southampton has such unusually short trip lengths that there isn't a role for buses to replace car journeys in significant numbers for those journeys that are outside mass walking or cycling distances. As regards rail based systems, clearly they are much more expensive, and I'd agree with Richard's view that you should start by prioritising buses properly, however other countries have managed to make light rail work successfully in cities like Southampton (which is of course part of a much larger conurbation, with many other large population centres close by).


----------



## Riverman (5 Aug 2011)

jonesy said:


> Why not? Buses work very well in Oxford, Cambridge and other medium sized cities. The key point, as Richard says earlier, is that they need to be given priority and have road space reallocated to them from cars. You can't expect cycling to replace all local trips, some people simply can't or won't cycle and even in cities where cycling has a large modal share it is predominantly for the shorter trips or up to 2 or 3 miles. I find it highly unlikely that Southampton has such unusually short trip lengths that there isn't a role for buses to replace car journeys in significant numbers for those journeys that are outside mass walking or cycling distances. As regards rail based systems, clearly they are much more expensive, and I'd agree with Richard's view that you should start by prioritising buses properly, however other countries have managed to make light rail work successfully in cities like Southampton (which is of course part of a much larger conurbation, with many other large population centres close by).



What I said is that residents of Southampton don't need mass transit systems beyond beyond occasional buses for long journeys. They'll always be a need for buses in cities but unless more are modified to carry bicycles I don't think they have that much of a future.

Personally I've always been a strong advocate of the use of private transport for short journeys. I will admit there is a danger of course that enthusiasm for private transport gets mistaken for enthusiasm for the car which means pointing out flaws in mass transit systems can be a bit counter-productive, because the last thing I want are loads of people driving cars, especially for short journeys.

We can argue about what a short journey actually is. No city is the same but the bicycle or electric bicycle should be the most efficient, reliable, healthy, environmentally friendly way of getting people from A to B. IMO what makes cycling stand out most is that it's a private form of transport and therefore has so many advantages over bus services for short journeys.

Whilst the obstacles to cycling are numerous and can be hard to overcome for some, especially during certain times of the year, at least with cycling you don't stand the chance of your form of transport arriving late, and having to take a massive detour around the houses to pick other people up.With cycling you won't have to pay extortionate amounts to private companies to run the service, you don't have to stop almost 20 times on the way to your destination.... etc. etc...

Who are the people most likely to take up cycling? In my experience the people most likely to cycle are people who use bus services and don't drive cars. Therefore we should not hesitate to point out the limitations of using bus services. The vast majority of people in this city would find it easier IMO to get around using either a bicycle or in some cases (and certainly for the more hilly cities) an electric bike. Sadly the initial outlay of an electric bike makes that not an option. I only hope that the cost of these electric devices begins to really come down. I will admit there's a greater need in getting people out of their cars and onto bikes, than there is in getting people out of buses but I just think that bus users are likely to appreciate the benefits of cycling more than motorists.


Obviously there are certain groups that will always need to use buses.. women on their way home sometimes, or elderly people but even then there should be other infrastructure in place to enable them and to make them feel safe on at least part of the journey on their way home, if they want to use a bike on part of it. This is where bike racks on buses would come in especially.


----------



## Richard Mann (5 Aug 2011)

Riverman said:


> Southampton doesn't need mass transit systems beyond occasional buses for long journeys. It's not big enough and besides, Southampton is a very easy city to get around by bike. Like may other cities what Southampton needs are improved cycle routes but most importantly a campaign to get people cycling. I have lived in Southampton for ten years and have cycled for about five of those years. I would never go back to using buses, they're a joke and always will be a joke no matter how frequent they are. They're just not very well suited to serve this city.



Journeys to central Oxford (inner cordon counts) show a whopping 43% bus (and only just over 10% bike). Oxford has a lot of in-commuting, but I daresay Southampton does too. People from the further suburbs, and dormitory settlements are much more likely to use a bus than cycle. 

There are other ways of doing it, of course, but if you major on buses, with bikes playing a complementary role, you're more likely to have success in reducing the impact that traffic has on your town.


----------



## Riverman (5 Aug 2011)

Richard Mann said:


> Journeys to central Oxford (inner cordon counts) show a whopping 43% bus (and only just over 10% bike). Oxford has a lot of in-commuting, but I daresay Southampton does too. People from the further suburbs, and dormitory settlements are much more likely to use a bus than cycle.
> 
> There are other ways of doing it, of course, but if you major on buses, with bikes playing a complementary role, you're more likely to have success in reducing the impact that traffic has on your town.




Absolutely. I'm sorry I guess I just still feel that Southampton just isn't big enough on its own to justify a huge bus network. Maybe if you include the outer areas like Hedge End, Chandler's Ford, Totton etc but technically that's not Southampton and even then places like Totton are very commutable. You can do Southampton to Totton on a bike almost all along side roads and cycle paths in about 15 minutes. It's almost all flat.

Problem with that commute is it's along the docks, and the cycle route isn't very clearly marked and because of the docks there are loads of lorries which must put a lot of people off cycling there. They really need to sort it out.

Ah sorry to hijack this thread!


----------



## jonesy (6 Aug 2011)

Riverman said:


> Absolutely. I'm sorry I guess I just still feel that Southampton just isn't big enough on its own to justify a huge bus network. Maybe if you include the outer areas like Hedge End, Chandler's Ford, Totton etc *but technically that's not Southampton* and even then places like Totton are very commutable. You can do Southampton to Totton on a bike almost all along side roads and cycle paths in about 15 minutes. It's almost all flat.
> 
> Problem with that commute is it's along the docks, and the cycle route isn't very clearly marked and because of the docks there are loads of lorries which must put a lot of people off cycling there. They really need to sort it out.
> 
> Ah sorry to hijack this thread!



It isn't the council boundary that matters, it is the travel to work area, the location of origins and destinations etc. Last time I was down that way there was an awful lot of car traffic on the roads, and pretty major roads at that! You merely need to look a map to see that the built up area along that part of the south coast is much larger than could be served by walking and cycling (remembering that mass cycling is for short distances, what you or I, or others on this forum might be prepared to do is largely irrelevant to this discussion), and is also larger than places like Oxford and Cambridge that are well able to sustain a comprehensive network of high frequency bus services.


----------



## Riverman (6 Aug 2011)

jonesy said:


> It isn't the council boundary that matters, it is the travel to work area, the location of origins and destinations etc. Last time I was down that way there was an awful lot of car traffic on the roads, and pretty major roads at that! You merely need to look a map to see that the built up area along that part of the south coast is much larger than could be served by walking and cycling (remembering that mass cycling is for short distances, what you or I, or others on this forum might be prepared to do is largely irrelevant to this discussion), and is also larger than places like Oxford and Cambridge that are well able to sustain a comprehensive network of high frequency bus services.



Yeah, we seem to have got our wires crossed here. I was referring to Southampton the city. I understand people commute from those areas and I know this sounds pedantic but that doesn't mean they're part of Southampton.

The point I was trying to make is that there is no need for most people who live within the city of Southampton to use buses when travelling within the boundary. This 'city' is very easy to get around using bikes. I should point out that there are entire bus companies in Southampton dedicated to serving people WITHIN the city boundary (Uni-link for eg.) and plenty of buses that operate that only operate within that boundry. IMO there's hardly any need for them at all.

http://www.unilinkbu.../networkmap.pdf

edit: I forgot that Uni-link has now merged with Bluestar, so technically they now serve a wider area. coincidently though they happen to be some of the busiest buses. Obviously a lot of students use them but they're quite popular with locals.


----------



## Riverman (8 Aug 2011)

Looks like there's calls for these 'bus ways' to become common place in the UK, considering these buses don't even take bikes it's a bit rich to put them on disused railway lines that as the OP says are traditionally used by bikes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14405734

Not 100% against the idea but it seems a bit silly to design the route for the bus rather than the other way round. Why not create a bus that can more efficiently use the space?Using regular buses is just a cheap way of doing it. It may be practical at first but what would be really cool is to design a really long bus that splits once it reaches its destination and one that actually takes bikes! The addition of a trailer would probably be the easiest way to do it. 

I see they go at 55mph and 30mph when they reach public highways. Seems a bit slow if they are to compete with motorways especially as they have to make loads of stops which has always been a major and overlooked problem with bus travel.


----------

