Fair fares

The Post reports that, 'A Mayoral candidate has promised to introduce £1 and £1.50 bus fares in Bristol if he is allowed to take control of the city's bus services. Liberal Democrat Jon Rogers, a cabinet councillor who used to be in charge of the city's transport department, wants to see a "Transport Bristol" authority set up to run them – in the same way as London.'. If this is a good idea now then why was implementation not started a few years back??? Jon Rogers and his Lib Dems have been and are running the city! Yes to lower bus fares and yes to a transport authority for Bristol but yes also to judging politicians by actions and outcomes and not just words.  

Bendy buses

I'm an opponent of the current Bus Rapid Transit plans but as a keen advocate of communal, public transport I'd like to see investment in BOTH the Bristol bus and rail system (in addition to walking and cycling) and in combining all of these smoothly (see story and comments here).

Light rail is just about the most energy efficient form of motorised transport and it is likely to be more successful in getting car drivers to switch modes. However, it should not be a matter of rail vs bus, though I acknowledge that there is only so much money being made available.

FOSBR are right to oppose BRT, not least because of unsuitable routes and new roads,  but I'm not so sure about all their reasoning. The case I'd make against bendy buses is that they have potential problems with: insufficient effective motive power; slower speed and acceleration due to the extra weight; overheating leading to stalling, or even a fire if diesel fuelled; in crowded areas with narrow streets and tight turns the accident rate may exceed than conventional buses. Bendy buses are supposed to be highly fuel efficient but this must be dependent on the city and the system they are running on and so in practice I have doubts that they will be more efficient in operation than double deckers here in Bristol. Mind you some parts of FOSBRs rail alternative are non-starters - a tunnel under St Mary Redcliffe is both impractical and likely to be far too costly.

There is a problem with money availability if we are to invest in both buses and rail. Yet we need to invest several times what is available for BRT if we are to make a serious dent in Bristol’s traffic and traffic-related problems. It will be interesting to see how the Mayor elected in November approaches this. There is a problem with our congested roads because we need to make the existing bus system more effective and efficient and extensive, if we are genuinely trying to meet targets such as absolute traffic reduction and significant lowering of pollution - so are we willing to make a decent number of existing roads car and lorry free?? And would a Mayor be willing to bite this bullet?

More thoughts on sustainable transport here:

Parking proposal

Plenty of whinges but not much in the way of constructive suggestions from commenters on this story 'Bristol businesses facing workplace parking levy'. Bristol's transport system has large and longstanding problems, such as from congestion and pollution. It costs city dwellers and workers a lot in money, health and environmental terms. What solutions do the whinging commenters propose?

For me the area shown in the map (above left) showing two possible boundaries for the workplace parking levy scheme is far too small and has many inconsistencies - and the city's proposals for 'sustainable' transport and 'green' taxes (if indeed they meet the proper definition of sustainable and green) are often too timid, unintegrated and lacking in coherence. A properly stategic approach is what is needed, so that all council policies pull in the same direction.

Opposing the 'South Bristol Link' (ring road)

Passing on details of this group and campaign (campaign postcards are now available I think): For the past five years, Transport for Greater Bristol Alliance has opposed the West of England Partnership's proposal to build a new road through South Bristol and its greenbelt. A previous application to build a road by North Somerset was turned down by the Government in 2002 as 'poor value for money'. As originally proposed in 2006, the road was seen as completion of the Ring Road, a dual carriageway running between Long Ashton through South Bristol to link up with the existing Ring Road at Hicks Gate. The Council decided to drop Stage 3 (Hartcliffe to Hicks Gate) due to strong local opposition. The road was renamed the 'South Bristol Link' and a Bus Rapid Transit has been added. The SBL is now being sold as an essential part of a wider BRT network. We continue to oppose the current scheme.

On 9th Sept 2011, the Partnership (four local councils) is applying for funding to the Department for Transport (DfT) for this £45m scheme along with BRT2 (Long Ashton P and R to Cabot Circus) and BRT3 (Northern fringe to Hengrove). TfGB has produced postcards addressed to Norman Baker, Under-Secretary of State for Transport for members of the public to use to object to SBL (deadline 7th October). You can get postcards and further information from pip_sheard@hotmail.co.uk. On the campaigns page is a four page briefing outlining details of the current scheme and why we believe the combined road and Bus Rapid Transit is poor public transport value for money and environmentally damaging and should be rejected by the DfT.

Transport for Greater Bristol

BRT = Build Ring-road Tomorrow

Millions of pounds on what is supposed to be an integrated, 'seamless' approach to public transport - and the bendy buses wont even stop at Temple Meads! No joined up thinking there then.

BRISTOL City Council's flagship Ashton Vale to Temple Meads bendy bus route will not actually stop at the station, it has emerged.

The £50 million scheme is one of three rapid transit routes the council is finalising, ahead of submitting funding bids to government in September.

The idea is that the three routes will make life much easier for people who want to get from one end of the city to another.

It is also supposed to be part of an integrated approach to transport, so buses, rail and rapid transit all work seamlessly together.

The problem is that the latest version of the Ashton Vale to Temple Meads route doesn't stop at Temple Meads because there isn't enough money to pay for a stop there.

That means people arriving into Bristol by train won't just be able to just jump on the bendy bus or vice versa.

Instead the stop for the Temple Meads area is actually outside the KPMG building in Temple Street, the other side of the Temple Circus roundabout.

So anyone who wants to get from the bendy bus to catch a train has at least a five-minute walk across one of the busiest roundabouts in Bristol and several sets of traffic lights...

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/New-bendy-buses-stop-Bristol-Temple-Meads-station/story-13003610-detail/story.html

I'm not a fan of bus rapid transit Bristol-style - especially as it involves new road building. The Lib Dem Cabinet member in charge, Cllr Kent, says "They will cut congestion, reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere" There is no evidence for this. I persistently asked questions at public meetings about modelling and projections that had been done and the 'answers' given to me were totally inadequate. Where was the early, timely, high quality information when it was being asked for?? Increasing the capacity of the road network has on all past occasions increased total carbon emissions as the space fills with traffic and becomes congested and this 'link' - as their spin is now calling it - will do likewise.

Cllr Kent has also referred to 'massive public transport improvements'. Massive? No - and certainly not matching the scale of Bristol's transport problems. Improvements? Evidence of this is seriously lacking. Developments like a transport hub at Temple Meads and an integrated transport authority would begin to bring significant improvements - but these dont appear to be on the table at all due to political failures over decades.

Cllr Kent and Libe Dem colleagues seem to have forgotten that its hardly green to build over green space that is finite in supply, with its consequent loss of biodiversity, aesthetic and health benefits - and of course the greenery is no longer there to soak up carbon dioxide emissions.

Talk, talk, talk on local rail and integrated transport

This is spot on: ...GREATER Bristol is more interested in carrying out rail studies than actually reopening stations, according to a rail expert.

Former London Rail boss Ian Brown has published a study for the Railway Development Society, which looks at investment in local rail services.

The study shows that while 356 stations have re-opened across the country since 1960, in Bristol there has been just two in half a century.

Mr Brown concludes that "the Bristol region has not as yet shown any evidence of fulfilling the role of an effective 'client' for rail, although there has been considerable expenditure on seemingly endless 'studies' ".

Local rail campaigners point out that areas with one body to sort out transport – Integrated Transport Areas – have fared much better, and Mr Brown agrees.

That includes West Yorkshire with 22 re-opened stations, Merseyside with 16, and Greater Manchester with 15...

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/City-interested-studies-stations/story-12963382-detail/story.html