Portishead approved

[AndrewE]

An argument against the project having no benefits. But the problem isn't that the project has no benefits, it's that the benefits are too small in relationship with the costs.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Oct 2023 ==


User time savings are valued quite highly in economic appraisal, both for car drivers and for those switching to the new public transport. Generalised journey times fall if a service is more frequent so this is undoubtedly reflected.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Oct 2023 ==

and the costs of respiratory disease? Or the benefits of (or even just the cash savings for the NHS from) a healthier population? What about the longer term decarbonisation agenda? I would have though that Portishead especially might appreciate invesment to stave off sea-level rise.
Sometimes far-sighted political leadership is more important than bean-counting.

 

[Starmill]

and the costs of respiratory disease? Or the benefits of (or even just the cash savings for the NHS from) a healthier population? What about the longer term decarbonisation agenda? I would have though that Portishead especially might appreciate invesment to stave off sea-level rise.
Sometimes far-sighted political leadership is more important than bean-counting.

Yes. Those things all must be mosnitised in line with the appraisal guidance, webTAG. This is the relevant section: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tag-unit-a3-environmental-impact-appraisal

Now you can argue those values are wrong, and I'd agree with you if you thought that in many cases, they're undervalueing carbon emissions. However, it doesn't change the underlying problem here, which is that it doesn't really matter, because hardly any carbon emissions from cars will be saved, because hardly anyone will be able to benefit from building this railway line while it can only run hourly.

 

[stuu]

which will cost about 10 times as much as it would have cost to build a worthwhile bit of public transport infrastructure first time round.
Why do we always spoil the ship for a ha'porth of tar?

Because it will never be a meaningful way of getting to and from Portishead. It would need a new tunnel past the gorge for that, and at British prices it's probably cheaper to move Portishead

 

[zwk500]

Sadly I don’t, but I agree it would be a very interesting comparison.

In that case are you sure there's a fundamental difference in appraisal methods and not simply a difference in the politically acceptable subsidy requirements? After all, most consultancies are multi-national businesses.

 

[lachlan]

Because it will never be a meaningful way of getting to and from Portishead. It would need a new tunnel past the gorge for that, and at British prices it's probably cheaper to move Portishead

How come? A new tunnel to where?

A major benefit of the rail link that seems to be little discussed is connecting Portishead to the wider railway network to enable longer journeys by train. Currently it's a long walk between the bus and railway stations or two buses to get to Temple Meads

 

[Dr Day]

two buses to get to Temple Meads

The perceived wisdom on these forums is generally that bus operators know their markets, therefore if there isn't a direct bus from Portishead to Temple Meads, maybe there isn't the demand for one?

 

[Farigiraf]

The perceived wisdom on these forums is generally that bus operators know their markets, therefore if there isn't a direct bus from Portishead to Temple Meads, maybe there isn't the demand for one?

X4 Badgerline goes into Bristol centre just not Temple Meads, Although from the bus station it's almost faster to Redland or Montpelier

 

[lachlan]

The perceived wisdom on these forums is generally that bus operators know their markets, therefore if there isn't a direct bus from Portishead to Temple Meads, maybe there isn't the demand for one?

Perhaps not demand for a bus connecting to rail, but in my own experience people like trains more than buses and will consider taking the train over the car much sooner than taking the bus.

 

[John R]

Some of these comments seem to ignore the fact that the white collar employment centre of Bristol has shifted over the last 30 years, and is now situated bang next to Temple Meads. (HL and a declining LBG being two notable exceptions). So Temple Meads is extremely convenient for a lot of office workers, added to which the Temple Gate complex is the wrong side of town for bus and car traffic from the Portishead direction.

Also, a lot of commuter traffic from North Somerset stations goes beyond TM to Bath, Abbey Wood or Parkway. Whilst it’s debatable whether the latter two would attract much rail traffic from Portishead, Bath would certainly be much more convenient than by road or bus.

 

[lachlan]

Some of these comments seem to ignore the fact that the white collar employment centre of Bristol has shifted over the last 30 years, and is now situated bang next to Temple Meads. (HL and a declining LBG being two notable exceptions). So Temple Meads is extremely convenient for a lot of office workers, added to which the Temple Gate complex is the wrong side of town for bus and car traffic from the Portishead direction.

Also, a lot of commuter traffic from North Somerset stations goes beyond TM to Bath, Abbey Wood or Parkway. Whilst it’s debatable whether the latter two would attract much rail traffic from Portishead, Bath would certainly be much more convenient than by road or bus.

Indeed, and the new university campus going in the other side of Temple Meads will extend the centre of Bristol further east.

Work has just started on a new eastern entrance to the station which will make reaching this area by rail more convenient.

 

[Starmill]

A major benefit of the rail link that seems to be little discussed is connecting Portishead to the wider railway network to enable longer journeys by train. Currently it's a long walk between the bus and railway stations or two buses to get to Temple Meads

A benefit, yes. A major one, no. Nearly all demand from Portishead is just to Bristol.

 

[John R]

A benefit, yes. A major one, no. Nearly all demand from Portishead is just to Bristol.

Maybe because Bath is very difficult by public transport at the moment, and not much better by road. There is lots of commuter (and indeed shopping) traffic to Bath from Yatton and Nailsea - no reason why it would be any different from Portishead if there is a realistic way of doing it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

Indeed, and the new university campus going in the other side of Temple Meads will extend the centre of Bristol further east.

Work has just started on a new eastern entrance to the station which will make reaching this area by rail more convenient.

Agree. That is going to be a massive new employment centre - not just education staff, but ancillary services too.

 

[stuu]

How come? A new tunnel to where?

The existing line is single track and winding and slow, it will never permit a decent frequency to be run. It would be essentially impossible to double it, without a new tunnel

 

[lachlan]

The existing line is single track and winding and slow, it will never permit a decent frequency to be run. It would be essentially impossible to double it, without a new tunnel

Which points are too narrow to be redoubled? You wouldn't need to redouble the whole thing to support a 30min frequency

 

[JKF]

The existing line is single track and winding and slow, it will never permit a decent frequency to be run. It would be essentially impossible to double it, without a new tunnel

Looking at RTT, railhead treatment trains (about the only thing currently running) are timetabled to take 14 minutes from Ashton Junction to Portbury Stop Board, and that‘s with a temporary speed restriction currently in place in the gorge. If you had loops at Ashton or Clifton Bridge station and at Pill, both of which were double track, then you could easily path two trains an hour through here.

The distance between Pill Station and Clifton Bridge Station is under 7km, less in fact than the single line section of the Severn Beach line between Clifton Down and Avonmouth, which manages a half-hour service with three intermediate stops.

One workaround suggested for increasing peak time frequency was to run a six-coach unit up to Portishead in the morning then have it split and return as two separate services, the second leaving once the first was out of the single line section. This would require space at Portishead to accommodate six coaches (not necessarily with platform) and additional staffing, but perhaps still cheaper than a loop at Pill.

 

[The exile]

Some of these comments seem to ignore the fact that the white collar employment centre of Bristol has shifted over the last 30 years, and is now situated bang next to Temple Meads. (HL and a declining LBG being two notable exceptions). So Temple Meads is extremely convenient for a lot of office workers, added to which the Temple Gate complex is the wrong side of town for bus and car traffic from the Portishead direction.

Also, a lot of commuter traffic from North Somerset stations goes beyond TM to Bath, Abbey Wood or Parkway. Whilst it’s debatable whether the latter two would attract much rail traffic from Portishead, Bath would certainly be much more convenient than by road or bus.

Was having a conversation with a colleague about her 2 hour commute from Pill to Parkway by bus only last week…

 

[stuu]

Which points are too narrow to be redoubled? You wouldn't need to redouble the whole thing to support a 30min frequency

Is moving ~600 people an hour a good use of £200m+ in capex?

 

[North-Valiant]

Is moving ~600 people an hour a good use of £200m+ in capex?

How long is a 600 car traffic Jam?

 

[contrex]

the white collar employment centre of Bristol has shifted over the last 30 years, and is now situated bang next to Temple Meads. (HL and a declining LBG being two notable exceptions)

I've lived and worked in Bristol and around, for 52 years, and I've no idea what 'HL' and 'LBG' stand for...

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've lived and worked in Bristol and around, for 52 years, and I've no idea what 'HL' and 'LBG' stand for...

LBG is probably Lloyds Banking Group, they still have a big site there. I suspect they might be surprised by suggestions of being in decline.

HL, if we're talking finance is it Hargreaves Lansdown?

 

[The exile]

LBG is probably Lloyds Banking Group, they still have a big site there. I suspect they might be surprised by suggestions of being in decline.

HL, if we're talking finance is it Hargreaves Lansdown?

In terms of building use (and therefore numbers travelling there)- it is definitely “in decline” - 3 buildings down to one. Hargreaves Lansdown is almost next door - both at Canons Marsh.

 

[Starmill]

How long is a 600 car traffic Jam?

Not very long in this context? The road has an awful lot more capacity per hour than that...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

Which points are too narrow to be redoubled? You wouldn't need to redouble the whole thing to support a 30min frequency

To offer value for money it'd need to run with at least a quarter-hourly pattern. No matter what you do there's absolutely no way on earth you're going to get that through Bristol Temple Meads, even if it did work with the unavoidable single lines. It would also be similarly unreliable as the all day 4tph service to Milngavie used to be.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

Also, a lot of commuter traffic from North Somerset stations goes beyond TM to Bath, Abbey Wood or Parkway. Whilst it’s debatable whether the latter two would attract much rail traffic from Portishead, Bath would certainly be much more convenient than by road or bus.

Yes, it would attract a very small number of new journeys, but as they wouldn't be direct it would still be a tiny proportion of overall demand. Apart from Bath and London there would be insignificant demand to everywhere else other than central Bristol and Temple Meads.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Not very long in this context? The road has an awful lot more capacity per hour than that...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==


To offer value for money it'd need to run with at least a quarter-hourly pattern. No matter what you do there's absolutely no way on earth you're going to get that through Bristol Temple Meads, even if it did work with the unavoidable single lines. It would also be similarly unreliable as the all day 4tph service to Milngavie used to be.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==


Yes, it would attract a very small number of new journeys, but as they wouldn't be direct it would still be a tiny proportion of overall demand. Apart from Bath and London there would be insignificant demand to everywhere else other than central Bristol and Temple Meads.

Very few regional services in the Central/West region even cover their operating costs. Are you arguing that even if a 3-car train could be filled every hour, it wouldn’t be worth opening the line? Even with the political likelihood that overcrowding (ie initial success) could lead to further investment to increase frequencies which might then turn it into a winner financially?

Just to add - what would your view be on the Exeter metro routes including Okehampton and hourly Barnstaple / half-hourly Paignton-Exmouth services. Presumably Okehampton wasn’t worth reopening either, as it already had a fast bus service (which notably has since been cut back) - despite the fact the hourly service has proved a massive winner for the town?

 

[Brush 4]

The subsidy non argument is invalid, for the reasons stated above. Not just the west but, most of the network needs subsidies. There is no reason why new or reopened lines should be expected to operate without subsidy. Why have different criteria for them?

Okehampton has a far better road connection to Exeter than Portishead to Bristol. A fast dual carriageway to Exeter that takes a more direct route than the line yet, the trains have done better than projected. Because the last part into Exeter is the slowest, queues for most of the day into town then, find somewhere to park, and pay for it.

Portishead will confound the sceptics, again. The descoping down to a short DMU on an hourly schedule is a self fulfilling shortfall. Designed to fail almost, it will have to be either longer trains or, more short ones. Longer trains would be easier to implement.

 

[Starmill]

Are you arguing that even if a 3-car train could be filled every hour, it wouldn’t be worth opening the line?

No, that it isn't worth building the new infrastructure simply to enable that.

Even with the political likelihood that overcrowding (ie initial success) could lead to further investment to increase frequencies which might then turn it into a winner financially?

Again, no, because that'd need substantial additional capital funding which would be far better used elsewhere.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

Just to add - what would your view be on the Exeter metro routes including Okehampton and hourly Barnstaple / half-hourly Paignton-Exmouth services. Presumably Okehampton wasn’t worth reopening either, as it already had a fast bus service (which notably has since been cut back) - despite the fact the hourly service has proved a massive winner for the town?

Again, no. The capital spending for the enablement of these services was very small by comparison, especially because no land acquisition or consents were required for the work, except for very small things such as some land and permission at Newcourt for example.

 

[John R]

To offer value for money it'd need to run with at least a quarter-hourly pattern. No matter what you do there's absolutely no way on earth you're going to get that through Bristol Temple Meads, even if it did work with the unavoidable single lines. It would also be similarly unreliable as the all day 4tph service to Milngavie used to be.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==


Yes, it would attract a very small number of new journeys, but as they wouldn't be direct it would still be a tiny proportion of overall demand. Apart from Bath and London there would be insignificant demand to everywhere else other than central Bristol and Temple Meads.

So none of the existing local services into Bristol Temple Meads offer value for money then? Interesting.

As for demand to Bath, I'm just wondering, given your location is marked as Manchester, what your up to date local insight is on the issue that makes you so sure? Were you aware of the massive new development now under way to the east of the station that will transform the area in the next two years in terms of the employment centre of gravity, and not just white collar workers.

Some of us live very close to Portishead, so are maybe better placed to comment (even though personally it will not benefit me as I live closer to another North Somerset station, so I actually have no vested interest).

 

[Starmill]

So none of the existing local services into Bristol Temple Meads offer value for money then? Interesting.

Not to run them if there were no railway to run them on currently, no.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

As for demand to Bath, I'm just wondering, given your location is marked as Manchester, what your up to date local insight is on the issue that makes you so sure?

I'm very sure

Were you aware of the massive new development now under way to the east of the station that will transform the area in the next two years in terms of the employment centre of gravity, and not just white collar workers.

I'm very familiar with the location of the new entrance and the view of the construction site from platform 15, yes. And also the existing entrances, and the experience of getting to Primark from them!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

Some of us live very close to Portishead, so are maybe better placed to comment

Well, nobody has tried to stop you commenting have they?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

If you are still skeptical of this point, take a look at Richard Rowson's tool of the new Origin-Destination Matrix data. Demand from Sea Mills, Shirehampton, Avonmouth, St Andrews Road and Severn Beach will be similar to demand on the Portishead services (https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/richard.rowson/viz/RailODManalysis/Topdestinationsbystation). Bath Spa ranks seventh on that approach at around 2%, or about 3,000 journeys per year. The absolute numbers will be a little depressed by the poorer service to Severn Beach that previously ran, and the continued recovery from the pandemic which was still taking place during 2021-22, plus the new station for which data obviously wasn't available prior to opening. However, in terms of proportions Portishead is going to max out at between 2.5 and 5% to Bath Spa. Nice to have, not going to swing it when we're talking this kind of capital spending.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

There is no reason why new or reopened lines should be expected to operate without subsidy.

I don't believe anyone has argued this? Although it is worth being aware that there are a large number of subsidised rail services in England that have been slashed due to the current funding situation.

However, it is important to prioritise the subsidy there is so that it is used in the best way.

Why have different criteria for them?

We don't have different criteria. If you were proposing capital spend to increase service frequencies on existing lines, such as building new platforms or track doubling, that capital spend would be examined in the same way.

 

[The exile]

Not to run them if there were no railway to run them on currently, no.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==


I'm very sure

I'm very familiar with the location of the new entrance and the view of the construction site from platform 15, yes. And also the existing entrances, and the experience of getting to Primark from them!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==


Well, nobody has tried to stop you commenting have they?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

If you are still skeptical of this point, take a look at Richard Rowson's tool of the new Origin-Destination Matrix data. Demand from Sea Mills, Shirehampton, Avonmouth, St Andrews Road and Severn Beach will be similar to demand on the Portishead services

Surely the demographic of Pill, Portishead and their respective catchments is somewhat different from that of the outer reaches of the Severn Beach line?

 

[Starmill]

Surely the demographic of Pill, Portishead and their respective catchments is somewhat different from that of the outer reaches of the Severn Beach line?

It's about the same in terms of population catchment and journey time, which are the factors that by far make the most difference. But it doesn't matter, because even if you got twice that number travelling and Portishead to Bath Spa journeys made up 10% of traffic, that'd still not change the equation. As I keep pointing out, even if every train from first to last were full, it wouldn’t really change the equation, because 1tph is not enough to justify such an expensive line, and more than 1tph can't run without incurring significant additional capital spend.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Oct 2023 ==

Maybe because Bath is very difficult by public transport at the moment, and not much better by road. There is lots of commuter (and indeed shopping) traffic to Bath from Yatton and Nailsea - no reason why it would be any different from Portishead if there is a realistic way of doing it.

From Nailsea & Blackwell to Bath Spa in 2021-22 there were just under 11,000 journeys, or just over 7%. From Yatton to Bath Spa it's even smaller, under 9,000 per year and just over 5%.

I'd like to point out how good of an example this is for conversations we see repeated across these threads. What to you is "lots of commuter and shopping traffic", is, in the big picture, a very small slice of the customer base of that station. It's not that you're wrong, you're not, Bath is the next most popular destination after the adjacent stations, Bristol and London. it's simply that it needs to be looked at in proportion, and with a clear mind.

Diesel-powered passenger train services are expensive per journey, especially if you're wanting a second member of staff onboard, and most especially when you only have two or three coaches per train. That's simply an unavoidable fact of life which isn't going to be changed. As such deploying more of them needs to be done very carefully. I know it's a very bitter pill to swallow given the car-dominance of Bristol, but this isn't a good use of them. Instead changing the car-dominance will need to be about changing our national approaches to the tax system, allocation of road space, and land use policy, and improving bus services. It also would benefit from more light rail. In most countries on the continent, Bristol would be borderline big enough for a central tunnelled metro, and Portishead or Clevedon would be the perfect outer limit for that in that direction.

 

[yorkie]

As for demand to Bath, I'm just wondering, given your location is marked as Manchester, what your up to date local insight is on the issue that makes you so sure?

That's a bit like wondering how someone based in Newcastle may know about dispatch procedures at King's Cross