This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Easy access versions

Forums

Mast misery
Post new topic   Reply to topic    St Werburghs Forum Index -> General discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Des



Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Montpelier, Gateway to Sneyd Park

PostPosted: Mon 13 Oct 2008 4:55 pm    Post subject: Mast misery Reply with quote

I sympathise with the anger at the Network Rail mast in St Werburghs. A similar monstrosity was erected at Montpelier, with little or no consultation with residents, as such masts are exempt from normal planning laws.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jonrogers



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 18
Location: St Andrews

PostPosted: Tue 14 Oct 2008 2:50 pm    Post subject: Is it also in the way of a cycle expressway? Reply with quote

This mast may also obstruct Josh Hart's innovative proposal that we try and develop a "Cycle Expressway" for walking and cycling initially between Montpelier, Bristol/Bath Railway Path and Lawrence Hill station.

The use of one of the spare, unused railway track lines would allow a gentle pedestrian friendly, slope, crossing Glenfrome Road, the M32 and St Marks Road.

http://tinyurl.com/bristol-cycle

We are pushing for a feasibility study to be included as part of the Cycling City bid.
_________________
Jon Rogers 0117 914 2558
Ashley Ward Lib Dem Councillor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
contrex



Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 211

PostPosted: Wed 15 Oct 2008 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't see how you could make a continuous railside cycle path from Whiteladies Road to Temple Meads, since:

1. There are 2 tracks, occupying the whole trackbed, from the mouth of Clifton Down Tunnel to a point several hundred metres east of Clifton Down station, forming a passing loop for trains coming off the single track sections on either side.

2. The single track between the eastern end of the passing loop and Narroways Junction moves from one side to the other of the former double track formation to allow for better track alignment. Thus (heading towards Temple Meads) the track is on the left at Redland but by the time it reaches Montpelier it is on the right. This is often done when formerly double track railways are singled. So how eould the cyclists get across the railway?

3. The cyclepath would need to cross the main line at Narroways somehow.

4. There are 4 tracks all the way from north of Dr Day's Bridge Junction all the way into Temple Meads.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Des



Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Montpelier, Gateway to Sneyd Park

PostPosted: Wed 15 Oct 2008 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yep, contrex, this plan is pure pie in the sky.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
harrymac



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 712
Location: St.Werburghs

PostPosted: Wed 15 Oct 2008 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What I'd really like would be a little St Werburghs station - say where the gas holder is - now that would be a benefit for us locals.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonrogers



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 18
Location: St Andrews

PostPosted: Wed 15 Oct 2008 10:32 pm    Post subject: From Montpelier, not Clifton Down to Lawrence Hill Reply with quote

Thanks for the comments.

Contrex - my understanding of the answers to your points...

1. The proposal is to Montpelier, not Clifton Down.
2. As above - there is an empty track space on the left as you go from Montpelier to Narroways on the left hand side.
3. The existing foot bridge could be used to cross the main line.
4. There are only two tracks between Narroways and Lawrence Hill station, and two spare tracks. Network Rail have indicated that they want one for expansion, that still leaves one track.
Best wishes
Jon
_________________
Jon Rogers 0117 914 2558
Ashley Ward Lib Dem Councillor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
contrex



Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 211

PostPosted: Sat 18 Oct 2008 12:10 pm    Post subject: Re: From Montpelier, not Clifton Down to Lawrence Hill Reply with quote

jonrogers wrote:
1. The proposal is to Montpelier, not Clifton Down.


What's this then? (from the page pointed to by your link)

Quote:
Imagine being able to ride from Whiteladies Rd. in Clifton through Redland, across the famous Gloucester Rd. arches, through Montpelier, St. Werburgh’s, gliding safely across the M32, through Easton and it’s incredible new Eastside Roots Community Garden Centre, and finally arriving at Temple Meads station, without leaving a flat paved pathway, safely separated from the passenger rail line by a fence.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonrogers



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 18
Location: St Andrews

PostPosted: Sun 19 Oct 2008 11:17 am    Post subject: How far can it go? Reply with quote

Hi Centrex
Thanks for the comments.

From Lawrence Hill to Temple Meads I would expect the route to join the Bristol Bath Railway path, which now goes pretty directly, mostly off road, to Temple Meads.

I was looking to Montpelier, possibly just Ashley Hill as a first stage. The Section from Montpelier to Clifton Down is, as you say, more challenging. The simple option might be to cross at the pedestrian bridge at Montpelier then continue on the spare track space on the left to Redland Station. At Redland Station, come off the railway path and then along the flat and relatively quiet roads to Clifton.

I have asked that there is a feasibility study into this option as part of our Cycling City bid.

Jon
_________________
Jon Rogers 0117 914 2558
Ashley Ward Lib Dem Councillor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
contrex



Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 211

PostPosted: Sun 19 Oct 2008 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed. These proposals, if implemented, might stop those annoying sods who bring bikes onto the train during rush hours and spoil my commute! And then ride on the pavement in town!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jonrogers



Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 18
Location: St Andrews

PostPosted: Sun 19 Oct 2008 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

harrymac wrote:
What I'd really like would be a little St Werburghs station - say where the gas holder is - now that would be a benefit for us locals.


Thanks Harry

Stations serving St Werburghs and Horfield would be great but if this was implemented it would be a pleasant 500m off road walk (10mins) on the flat from Glenfrome Road by the gas holder to Stapleton Road station.

Jon
_________________
Jon Rogers 0117 914 2558
Ashley Ward Lib Dem Councillor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Des



Joined: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 186
Location: Montpelier, Gateway to Sneyd Park

PostPosted: Sun 19 Oct 2008 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Banging on my usual ecological drum once again (sound of people yawning) I would not want to see any further infrastructure (including a permanent cycle path) alongside the railway at Montpelier. The plant communities that grow along the ballast here (when not being destroyed on a regular basis by Network Rail contractors) is quite special as Harry will tell you - it's a kind of 'alternative flora', a rag-tag collection of plants rarely encountered away from railway tracks and therefore inextricably bound up with our industrial heritage. Not only will a cycle path eradicate this unique flora forever, but increased public access to the rest of the railway bank will disturb valuable habitat currently used by birds, insects and mammals and degrade its status as a wildlife corridor.

Make the roads safer for cyclists - cut car traffic by investing in decent public transport and everyone (even contrex...but then again perhaps not) will be happy Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
harrymac



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 712
Location: St.Werburghs

PostPosted: Sun 19 Oct 2008 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not sure my position would be as 'deep green' as this Des, after all there is pretty good biodiversity alongside the cycle track to Bath in terms of flora.

I do agree that disturbance is an underrated factor with urban wildlife - Narroways for example hosts free ranging dogs during a lot of daylight hours and this must be impacting on birds and mammals. I notice the New Forest National Park Authority is trying to reduce dog access in some areas to encourage ground nesting birds to the inevitable outrage of the doggy community.

However I do kind of like the idea of walking through a green route over the M32 to get to Stapleton station - though I would fear this becoming a bit of a mugger's alley like parts of the Easton cycletrack.

So - a mass on inconsistencies as usual!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
harrymac



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 712
Location: St.Werburghs

PostPosted: Wed 05 Nov 2008 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

(Evening Post letter from former British Rail booking clerk, Colin Radford)

I WRITE with regard to the article in the Post on October 31 about the Lawrence Hill to Montpelier cycle route ("New cycle route to bridge M32 divide").

I would like to express a view as the last booking clerk at Montpelier (July 1961-December 1964), when the branch was double track.

It is now single track from Narroways Junction, where it leaves the main line to Montpelier, using what was the down line to Avonmouth.

A cycleway would use the other trackbed and no way would railway authorities allow the use of a tunnel by cyclists when the other track is in use. Regulations, safety and health, would not allow the use.

Also, how would cyclists leave Montpelier without having to cross the line?


The mainline Lawrence Hill to Filton direction was originally four lines – the now abandoned trackbed (which was going to be used by the aborted tram system) is, in fact, opposite the Narroways Junction. How is it planned to cross over the main lines to access the abandoned trackbed to Montpelier?

I was given to understand that the two mainline tracks going through Stapleton Road were abandoned due to the state of the bridge. There would also have to be idiot-proof fencing along the route.

Colin Radford, Hanham.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    St Werburghs Forum Index -> General discussion All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Top | Back