City Deal

The £100-million Bristol Metro train network which will bring massive improvements to local railways is to go ahead with the first services running by 2016. It comes as a result of the City Deal agreed between local council and the Government which was announced yesterday...(more here).

Business rates to be kept in Bristol and used to raise more money for investment is very welcome. Plans to improve the local rail network are also welcome. Lets hope what is planned is effective and efficient. I do think there is a democratic deficit in all this thinking though and would like to see much greater and inbuilt opportunities for public participation, creating better openness and accountability - it wont be sufficient to simply lobby our authorities to use this money in the best way.

Details of the 'City Deal' for Bristol, according to The Post, are:

* A new growth incentive and the economic investment fund, which will allow West of England to keep 100 per cent of growth in business rates over 25 years to invest in projects, allowing authorities to deliver an investment programme worth £1 billion over 30 years.

*  Ten years of major funding allocation for the Greater Bristol Metro; flexible delivery for the Bus Rapid Transit Network which will allow savings to be recycled locally; and new powers over rail planning and delivery.

*— A Public Property Board will manage up to £1 billion of city council assets and an estimated 180 land and property assets to unlock more land for economic growth or housing and to lever in additional investment.

* A city growth hub with up to £2.25 million of government funding which will provide additional support to inward investors. This will be based in the Temple Quarter Enterprise Zone and will work closely with UK Trade and Investment.

* The business community and local enterprise partnership will have more influence in skills provision in the city region, in particular the £114 million Skills Funding Agency funding for Further Education colleges for post-16 provision, to help capture employer demand.

Trains and planes

Improving the local rail network - great (see story here) Very consistent with cutting carbon emissions by at least 80% from 1990 levels by 2050, as outlined in the Climate Change Act. However, the Govt then faces in completely the opposite direction by supporting an expanding Bristol Airport - ten million passengers a year will increase not cut carbon emissions (as well as depriving our local and national economy of money and support for local businesses when people spend abroad instead of here).

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:

Sustainable suggestions

‘Creative’ and ‘exciting’ ideas sought for derelict depot land Bristol Temple Meads station. Er...its right next to Temple Meads so doesn't that strongly suggest a sustainable transport development of some kind and/or something that large numbers of people would need to get to...like an arena? Also next to a river with big water movements, which suggests a renewable energy facility...

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

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

Optimism on sorting Bristol's transport problems

The Bristol Evening Post says 'Bristol's metro is not as far off track as you might think'. I hope they are right and can help build up momentum for change on this issue. As many of my blog posts show I'm in favour of a Greater Bristol Integrated Transport Authority that implements a sustainable transport plan. History points to lack of agreement and cooperation between the local authorities though. If agreement and cooperation is reached they still need to get the process of decision making right: exploring the situation; formulating problems, opportunities and systems of interest; identifying feasible and desirable changes; taking actions; and re-exploring etc as appropriate. They need to fully involve as wide a range of people as possible right from the start, ensure good quality, comprehensive information is widely disseminated, get genuine cross-party and cross-organisational cooperation, agree the right goals, get finances sorted, assess technologies fairly and broadly, find a combination of technical, behavioural and socio-economic change that will consistently take us in a firmly sustainable direction... Its nothing like as straightforward and obvious as this Post report - which has a strong technocratic, techno-optimist slant - suggests.

Lose a local election, continue to run the council

Despite election losses the Lib Dems will continue to run Bristol (see link at end*). No surprise there, especially given the electoral arithmetic when we elect only a third of councillors at any one time. I doubt that any other party relishes taking on running the city in a time of cuts in any case (no doubt they are happy that their opponent will continue to take the blame).

I'm pleased to see the green spaces sell off halted subject to review, though I'm someone who opposes the principle of selling off green spaces whether the decision is taken by the council or more local Neighbourhood Partnerships. We need more not fewer green spaces for a wide variety of economic, health, social and environmental reasons.

I also welcome a prompt decision on the town green in Ashton Vale, though I have grave doubts about the basis on which some councillors will be deciding, given the fairly frequent and commonplace statements about wanting to see a football stadium on this greenbelt land. The matter will end up in the courts.

The new group set up to consider major transport issues like tram proposals, the bus rapid transit schemes and the Temple Meads transport interchange is a good idea. Should have been set up before now. I'm not yet clear on what its full role is and what power it will/can have to propose and enact changes though. This is a vital issue given the heavy traffic and poor public transport and integration is one key reason why Bristol is far from being a green city.

*http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Lib-Dems-stay-control/article-3568496-detail/article.html

Also see: http://www.bristolgreenparty.org.uk/News/greens-celebrate-new-influence-on-council.html

Plot 6 - a breakthrough? | Cabinet Councillor Hopkins confirms a proper transport hub

This has all been prompted by the excellent, persistent campaigning of Stockwood's Green Party Campaigner Peter Goodwin and work on the council by Green Party Councillor for Southville Tess Green. We must hold Councillor Hopkins and his Lib Dems to the words he has spoken on Radio Bristol.

Campaigners in Bristol are giving a guarded welcome to hints that Plot 6, at Temple Meads, could become the city's core transport hub.

In a BBC Radio Bristol interview on Wednesday, the city's executive member for Transport, Gary Hopkins, showed unexpected enthusiasm for the Green Party policy, which has previously been shunned by other politicians. Answering questions from presenter Steve Le Fevre, Cllr Hopkins confirmed that so far as the council is concerned, Plot 6 is definitely going to become a transport hub, bringing huge potential benefits...

Plot 6 - a breakthrough? News

Bristol Lib Dem cuts in support for public transport

FERRY and rail services will be affected by one of the biggest shake-ups of taxpayer-funded public transport Bristol has seen.

Bristol City Council is putting all of its subsidised transport services out to tender from next month, inviting companies to bid for the right to run them.

The Evening Post revealed how this would affect local bus services last week, but it will also affect a number of ferry and rail services that serve the city.

The council part-funds the Bristol Ferry Boat Company weekday commuter service between Cascade Steps and Hotwells Road; the cross-harbour ferry between the ss Great Britain and Porto Quay; and the Severn Beach rail line between Severn Beach and Temple Meads...

Bristol's transport boss Cllr Gary Hopkins says this not about cuts. The Post story says the council would like to cut its support for train, ferry and bus services by this move. Something's got to give somewhere if support is cut, so does Cllr Hopkins want to correct his statement or does he not bother with logic much??

Government at all levels should ensure the incentives are right for all modes of transport and should ensure that the price we all pay for travelling reflects its total net cost ie accounting for external costs and benefits as well as private costs and benefits. This would mean that clean, efficient and safer, more sustainable transport would be cheapest, so improving the incentives to use it and putting all transport on a rational footing. As it is now dirty, unhealthy, unsafe, inefficient transport modes like cars and lorries are wrongly given priority.

Trains and transport hub not bendy buses

I've been to a lot of meetings about bus rapid transit. The more I went to and the more questions I asked the more I realised just how poor the plans are - and that's as a person very strongly in favour of more, better and cheaper public transport. No surprise then that I agree very strongly with this latest press release from Bristol South Green Party and admire the work of Cllr Tess Green, green activist Pete Goodwin and others:

Bendybus is just a vanity project, say Greens

Threats to government funding for Bristol's first bus rapid transit route hasn't yet stopped the council spending on it. At the council meeting earlier this month, only one member voted against.

That member was Southville's Cllr Tess Green. She believes that even if it does win government cash, the new concrete guided bus route into the city from Long Ashton will be a white elephant. She says money would be better spent on schemes that could really make a difference - like light rail from Portishead into the city centre, or a first-class transport hub for all of Bristol at Temple Meads. Now she's lobbying the Department for Transport to explain her concerns.

Bristol South Green Party, meanwhile, has joined Tess and other local organisations in asking the government to refuse an order allowing it to go ahead.

"We've been studying the case made for this first bendy-bus route" said spokesman Pete Goodwin, "and find it doesn't do what it says on the tin. Traffic and congestion in the next twenty years get much worse with or without the bendy- bus. All this project does is encourage more commuting by road from North Somerset. They've conveniently forgotten about climate change, peak oil, and the awful congestion that we already suffer."

"This is a reckless waste of public money at a time when much more vital services are being cut, and community assets are being sold off. So far as we can see, it's just another part of the council's bid to turn the Green Belt around Ashton Vale into a big sports and entertainment venue, it serves no other major purpose. That makes it more a vanity project, at the cost of real public services."

ENDS
Note: The formal objections from Cllr Green and from the Bristol South party to the Bus Rapid Transit project can be read here .

Let's talk: Transport Matters | Travel+

Let's talk: Transport Matters Travel+

The West of England Councils are working together to produce a new transport plan for the area.

Transport is an important issue, affecting everyone, and we want your views on it.