Portishead branch

[AJR]

North Somerset Times -01/06/2005:

http://www.thewestonmercury.co.uk/archi ... 1Track.asp

=======================

The fight to get Portishead's railway reopened could have reached the end of the line - after Government chiefs earmarked the area as possible land for housing.

The former Portishead branch line is one of 700 sites which the Government is investigating building affordable homes on.

If the housing plan gets the green light, 5.3 hectares of land, which runs from Portishead to Portbury, could be used to build homes for first time buyers.

But the news has angered campaigners who have been fighting to get the line - which is owned by the British Railways Board - reopened.

Councillor David Pasley has been leading a special drive to clear the line of plants and shrubs in a bid to raise the profile of the railway.

Cllr Pasley said: "Hearing this news has made me feel like blowing a gasket.

"Even considering using this land as a site for housing shows a total lack of understanding of the problems we have in Portishead.

"We need the railway, not more homes.

"I invite John Prescott down here, if he has the courage, to face the residents who have to live in what has become Britain's biggest cul-de-sac.

"If it goes ahead I will personally hold some form of protest to make John Prescott sit up and think.

"Yes we need affordable homes in Portishead, but not at the expense of the railway."

Last year the Portishead Heritage Rail Project was set up to raise awareness for the need for a rail link to Bristol.

Portishead currently has a population of nearly 20,000. But this is expected to rise to more than 40,000 as a result of the massive regeneration of the docks.

Acting chairman of the Portishead Heritage Rail Project Bishop Roger Sainsbury said: "Although I support building houses on brownfield sites in Portishead, unless we have an adequate transport system extra homes will only cause trouble."

Representatives from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister are unable to say when a decision will be made, how many sites will be chosen, or if more buyouts are likely in the future. The Government has already snapped up a number of redundant NHS sites for affordable homes.

The Portishead to Bristol railway line opened in 1867. It ran until 1964 when passenger services were stopped. Freight continued to run for a while but was also stopped in 1981 when the line closed.

[James]

Sheer lunacy...how the hell are people going to get in and out of the bloody place? It's gridlock already!

[madhattie]

Sometimes I read things that genuinely make me want to have the ability to buy firearms so I can rid this country of the idiots that make decisions such as these.

Anyone, not just those with an interest in railways, can see that the Portishead line needs to be reopened. The roads out of the place are at a standstill.

I daresay someone, somwhere is going to have a nice big backhander when this all goes through. We can finally see why those in power have consistently refused to let the track go back down. Because of the cost my arse.. a couple of grand in the bank account more likely..

[John Ball]

Usual British mentality - build over the line so it can't be reopened - that would look like admitting what a mistake it was to close it. Only surprise is that it has taken them so long to build over the track.

John

[Graham]

The problem with these excuses for politicians and planners is that they just don't know what it's like to travel around Portishead - they no doubt just make decisions without even visiting the place!

I travelled to Portishead a few years ago and we were stuck in several jams...imagine how bad it will be now, and with more houses built! The fact that they want to build over a potential lifesaver for the traffic choked town adds insult to injury. (and what was that the government were saying about wanting to cut pollution? Talk about hypocrisy...)

[Marc T]

I agree, it's absolutely crazy. I echoe all the words from those above.

I personally would not use the line(apart from a trip or two along it if it were to reopen) myself as I do not live or work anywhere along the line. But I would have loved to saw this branch line re-open. If it were to re-open it would be of much use to those who live and work in the Portishead & Portbury areas. And would also help ease road congestion too.

The traffic congestion in Bristol is ridiculous as it is, with the highest car ownership(outside London) in the country. Why is the Government and Avon County council not working on ways to improve the situation? Whilst building new/rebuilding old lines in the region would now be an impossiblity due to housing/supermarkets, etc allready in place in those areas, plans to build new housing along rail lines where the infrasture is still there is sheery bloody craziness. Those government officials need to take a reality check on what the traffic levels are like in Bristol.

Way to help ease congestion in the Bristol area would be to re-open the Portishead line, redouble the full length of the Severn Beach line for a more intensive service, plus also re-open the line from Avonmouth through to Filton Junction for passenger service including the re-opening of Henbury and North Filton stations. The infrasture is allready there, so it wouldn't be that far fetched for it to happen. Why it has not happened or there are no current plans for it to happen is beyond me.

[Bartonhillbum]

Good Morning from Barton Hill

The Portishead Line is a very viable line, as any one with a bit of sense will know, I and several others started the formation of P.R.A.G. with the holding of the Railway Development Societies (Bristol Branch) A.G.M. in Portishead, some 8/10 years ago now. After meeting with Graham (chair of P.R.A.G. as it became) and heavy leafleting of Portishead, P.R.A.G (Portishead Railway Action Group was formed

I had several meetings, with First Port whilst they were in talks with both the S.R.A. and the E.U. for funding for the re-opening of the line from Ashton to Royal Portbury Docks, because of loading restrictions and the width of the tunnels it is not possable to have double running tracks for the length of the track, but it would have been possible to have double track upto the old Clifton Bridge station and perhps 400M beyond, then to have had single track working to the juction of the Docks and Portishead. The additional cost - would if memory serves me right would have been ú16M (for signalling and track building etc).

We (RDS) local branch suggested tha tthe passenger line was taken to a point just short of Ashton Station and taken across the Iron bridge onto the old Bristol Docks Railway so it could serve the centre of Bristol rather than Temple Meads, this would give the flexability of running peak trains via the City Centre (Metro Style Trains) as well as normal trains to Temple Meads. Our suggestion was thrown ouit by the S.R.A and Bristol City Council as being impracticle.

We now have the D of T spending ú24M on improving the M5 between Jun 19 & 20 in building a 4th lane for slow moving caravans etc.. I thought the message from Government was 'Speed Kills'.

A very sad


Bartonhillbum

p.s. Why do not all of Wales & West/Alpha Line Trains stop at Lawrence Hill and Stapleton Road, I resent having to travel and PAY for the journey from Lawrence Hill to Temple meads, just to traval back through Lawrence Hill when I am only going to Gloucester/Cardiff

[James]

p.s. Why do not all of Wales & West/Alpha Line Trains stop at Lawrence Hill and Stapleton Road, I resent having to travel and PAY for the journey from Lawrence Hill to Temple meads, just to traval back through Lawrence Hill when I am only going to Gloucester/Cardiff

Erm, can't you just buy a ticket for Lawrence Hill - Cardiff? Surely travelling to Temple Meads to change is considered a valid route, as there's no other option!

[madhattie]

Welcome to the forums

because of loading restrictions and the width of the tunnels it is not possable to have double running tracks for the length of the track, but it would have been possible to have double track upto the old Clifton Bridge station and perhps 400M beyond, then to have had single track working to the juction of the Docks and Portishead. The additional cost - would if memory serves me right would have been ú16M (for signalling and track building etc).

I can't understand why they went to all the expense of building a junction at Portbury so the Portishead branch could be reopened to passengers, but didn't go the extra mile and stick the necessary signalling works in. I would have thought with a passing loop at Pill and the double section of track to just beyond Clifton Bridge, the capacity of the line would be more than adequate taking into account the level of freight that currently uses the line.

Also, and similar to my post in the congestion charging thread, why are the TOCs not simply looking at the 10,000 new homes being built in Portishead, looking at the local road system, and rubbing their hands with glee!! I can't understand why the TOCs aren't falling over each other in an attempt to capture such a lucrative captive market.

[James]

Who actually runs trains these days?

First = BUS COMPANY
Wessex Trains = COACH COMPANY
Arriva = BUS COMPANY
Stagecoach = BUS COMPANY

[madhattie]

Who actually runs trains these days?

First = BUS COMPANY
Wessex Trains = COACH COMPANY
Arriva = BUS COMPANY
Stagecoach = BUS COMPANY

I wonder how many local councilors are also directors of said companies and if there's a correlation as to why so much council tax gets spent 'improving' the city with bus lanes etc?

[Bartonhillbum]

Good Morning
With referance to several comment made;- re my first posting on the Portishead line


As a consession to our request (RDS, Bristol Area) The Irish chap, who's name I cannot remember, but who was in charge of First Port's bid to open the line to Portbury, did put a set of points in, so that if the line did ever reopen there would be less disruption to the portbury line during the re-in-statement of the bit to Portishead, also the reason why it was not carried on is ownership and the fact of where to build the station and the ancileries (car-park/bus turnround etc..)

With referance to James and his comment re the buying the ticket on the Severn beach line train (Lawrence Hill to temple Meads for only to travel back,over the same track). the answer is NO, the only way I can do it is to get the 0756 or whatever time train it is to Gloucester and change at Parkway for Cardiff, but there is NO return train that stops at Lawrence Hill.

I can't understand why they went to all the expense of building a junction at Portbury so the Portishead branch could be reopened to passengers, but didn't go the extra mile and stick the necessary signalling works in. I would have thought with a passing loop at Pill and the double section of track to just beyond Clifton Bridge, the capacity of the line would be more than adequate taking into account the level of freight that currently uses the line

sorry mudhattie the answer is MONEY The SRA would not allow First Port to align the line to one side of the establised trackbed, but they had to align it in the centre of the bed, so if the passing loop or double track were to now be instaled all the established track would have to be lifted and moved over - I think it is called lets make it "cost-a -lot"


Bye for now

Bartonhill bum

[madhattie]

also the reason why it was not carried on is ownership and the fact of where to build the station and the ancileries (car-park/bus turnround etc..)

I've heard people say that when I was down there taking pics. I stood on this huge strip of unused land and listened to a developer say they didn't know where to build the thing! I scratched my head in bemusement

Of course, with Precott's recent announcement about using the station site for housing it is all clear. What they meant is they don't know where to put the station because the station site is going to generate a lot of dosh for everyone, why should they care about fitting a station on there!

sorry mudhattie the answer is MONEY The SRA would not allow First Port to align the line to one side of the establised trackbed, but they had to align it in the centre of the bed, so if the passing loop or double track were to now be instaled all the established track would have to be lifted and moved over - I think it is called lets make it "cost-a -lot"

I didn't realise that! I knew they had deliberately laid the track in the centre of Pill Viaduct because of weight distribution, but didn't know the SRA had made them do it elsewhere! Pathetic!

It must be very frustrating to be a member of PRAG! Do you feel like you are wading through mud a lot of the time?

[Bartonhillbum]

Good Morning Madhattie

i have never been a member of P.R.A.G. as I have enough to do as it is. but I can understand the frustration of being botha resident of Portishead and a member, good grounds for 'prozac' I'd have thought.

Byeee for now

[Bartonhillbum]

Good afternoon/evening to those who read this,

Yesterday, Monday, I went to a presentation by First Great Western, on their bid for the Greatern Western Francise, it seems that first have NOT ruled out the option of appling for the re-opening of the Portishead Line although it is not within the ITT (Invertation To Tender) document, from the S.R.A.

You never know concorde may fly again

byeeee for hnow

Bartonhillbum

ps How does one upload pictures onto this site.