Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum
from GWR - Travel with confidence
Forum in and beyond Coronavirus
Great Western Coffee Shop
[home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 today - Initial Emergency Measures end
22/09/20 - Tuesday Club - ONLINE
23/09/20 - ConnectedCities Oxford, ONLINE
24/09/20 - Reform Pub Trans / Closes
Random Image
Train Running Polls Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
September 20, 2020, 10:10:04 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[139] Beyond current Emergency Measures - where will we be on 21st S...
[108] 2020 - TransWilts cancellation and amendment log
[93] Reading Green Park
[78] Chris Grayling does it again - and is now gone
[55] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[23] Train fire at Mortimer Station
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Linked Events
  • JLTP Consultation closes: March 20, 2019
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
Author Topic: WECA Alphabet Soup  (Read 10676 times)
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3810


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: February 14, 2019, 08:51:59 pm »

Not quite answering your question, but according to section 4.36 of the DMRB junctions should be at least 2km apart. The proposed Jct 18a of the M4 is just outside this distance from Jct 19 (M32).
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4956


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: February 14, 2019, 10:10:10 pm »

Not quite answering your question, but according to section 4.36 of the DMRB junctions should be at least 2km apart. The proposed Jct 18a of the M4 is just outside this distance from Jct 19 (M32).

It's possible to put junctions closer than that, with overlapping slip roads, and by designing the whole thing together. For an example, see the collective junction 12 of the M27 at the north end of the M275. Usually this involves more grade separation (to avoid those "weaving lengths"), and omitting some inner slip roads in favour of traffic going to the other junction to join the through motorway further along.

Whether this detracts from the utility of the road for through traffic I guess depends on how many lanes are left clear for it.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2982


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: February 15, 2019, 05:42:46 pm »

It's not just the effect of joining and leaving traffic on the main carriageways, which can probably be minimised by slip-road design, it's also that placing junctions close together attracts local traffic using the motorway in preference to A or B roads.
Logged

Tuesday had come down through Dundrum and Foster Avenue, brine-fresh from sea-travel, a corn-yellow sun-drench that called forth the bees at an incustomary hour to their bumbling.
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3810


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: February 15, 2019, 07:05:07 pm »

It's a fair point, but then the M4 (J19 - J20) and M5 (J15 - J18)  do act rather like an outer ring road for Bristol (sorry, 'the west of England') anyway...
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2982


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: February 15, 2019, 07:38:18 pm »

That's true, which is why it was a more general point, not just WECA. (And plenty of other examples in other places: M42, M25 explicitly so, etc).
Logged

Tuesday had come down through Dundrum and Foster Avenue, brine-fresh from sea-travel, a corn-yellow sun-drench that called forth the bees at an incustomary hour to their bumbling.
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3673


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: February 15, 2019, 07:42:32 pm »

Not quite answering your question, but according to section 4.36 of the DMRB junctions should be at least 2km apart. The proposed Jct 18a of the M4 is just outside this distance from Jct 19 (M32).
I am told that Highways England tend to quite rigidly enforce the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB).  So I would not expect any relaxation of such standards. 
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3810


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: September 03, 2019, 04:42:18 pm »

Quote

Plans to build 105,000 homes should be scrapped as councils sent back to drawing board

It would have seen new homes built in 12 significant locations across the four authorities

Government officials have rejected major plans to build 105,000 homes across the West of England.

Planning inspectors have advised the local authorities for Bristol, North Somerset, South Gloucestershire and Bath and North East Somerset to take their joint spatial plan back to the drawing board.

The regional plan was put through its paces during an examination held in public in Bath last month.

Planning inspectors Malcolm Rivett and Steven Lee were tasked with deciding whether the plan was sound and legally compliant and could be adopted straight away or needed modifications first.

Instead, the inspectors concluded they had “significant concerns” about fundamental aspects of the plan and advised the four councils to withdraw it.

In a letter dated August 1, Mr Rivett and Mr Lee wrote: “We think it only fair to advise you that we currently consider that withdrawal of the JSP from examination may well be the most appropriate way forward.

(...continues)


Source: Bristol Post

The JLTP serves the JSP, so logically you'd have to assume that the JLTP will need to be rewritten too... from a public transport viewpoint this could be good news, as the planned 'garden villages' at Banwell, Churchill and Buckover were particularly contentious because among other things they relied on the private motor car as the main means of transport. In the context of WECA's declaration of a climate emergency, one might hope for a change of emphasis when the plan is rewritten!

Watch this space! This news item was a month old when I posted this, but thus far there's no reference to it on the WECA website.

Rivett and Lee's letter is here. Deary me.
Logged
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 796



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: September 04, 2019, 07:13:21 pm »

Quote
The JLTP serves the JSP, so logically you'd have to assume that the JLTP will need to be rewritten too... from a public transport viewpoint this could be good news, as the planned 'garden villages' at Banwell, Churchill and Buckover were particularly contentious because among other things they relied on the private motor car as the main means of transport. In the context of WECA's declaration of a climate emergency, one might hope for a change of emphasis when the plan is rewritten!

This is interesting, and demonstrates that adding another level of local government does not do anything to solve the problems facing planning policy formulation. It looks like another example of planning authorities hoping to avoid the NIMBY problem by concentrating new housing in new settlements. That might be appropriate in Cambridgeshire, where there are wide open spaces around a tightly drawn green belt around Cambridge with very little infrastructure and a huge demand for new housing, but the Planning Inspectorate has pushed back at this approach elsewhere applying the National Planning Policy Framework even where they have been proposed in locations with reasonable public transport links where the inspectors feel that there has not been a full and proper assessment of the sustainability of the locations has been undertaken.

If RS is right, and some of these WECA candidate Ecotowns/Garden Villages are dependent upon private car transport, then WECA has done a poor job in selecting them as major strategic housing allocation sites.
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3810


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: September 04, 2019, 08:28:23 pm »

...If RS is right, and some of these WECA candidate Ecotowns/Garden Villages are dependent upon private car transport, then WECA has done a poor job in selecting them as major strategic housing allocation sites.

The Banwell and Mendip Spring Garden Village plans revolve around a new Banwell Bypass to the north of the A371, and a new junction 21A where the M5 crosses the A371.

Buckover is on the A38 just north of Thornbury.

These are deliberately low-density developments.

In each case the concept diagrams refer to access by road and, peripherally, cycle paths. Buckover, it is said, " will also assist make the case for a step change in public transport in the locality, by extending Metrobus routes from the major employment centres of North Bristol, providing for additional bus services and supporting the case to reopen Charfield railway station."

It may be noted that Charfield is about 8km from Buckover by the most direct route.

On the face of it you can see why some might think that these proposals did not spring from the planning process, but drove it.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2982


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: September 05, 2019, 10:36:03 am »

Buckover is on the A38 just north of Thornbury.
I wish they'd get around to fixing that patch of melted tarmac at the top of the hill opposite the pub. But other patches are far worse.
Logged

Tuesday had come down through Dundrum and Foster Avenue, brine-fresh from sea-travel, a corn-yellow sun-drench that called forth the bees at an incustomary hour to their bumbling.
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3810


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: January 27, 2020, 09:54:28 pm »

Some interesting stuff in the results of WECA's JLTP4 consultation, according to the Bristol Post:

* People's highest priority? New and improved railway stations and services.

* Strong support - mainly in Bristol - for congestion charges or a new levy on workplace parking to bring in extra funding.

* People also wanted to see a comprehensive and safe network built for walking and cycling, and more road space used for public transport, walking and cycling.

* Three in five people found buses unreliable and poor value for money, and said it was not easy to plan journeys.

If you read the article, you may notice that the Bristol Post listed these in a different order...

Meanwhile, WECA plan to spend £100s of millions on roads for cars...
Logged
johnneyw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1489


Still want to be a train driver when I grow up


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: January 27, 2020, 11:00:19 pm »

Some interesting stuff in the results of WECA's JLTP4 consultation, according to the Bristol Post:

* People's highest priority? New and improved railway stations and services.

* Strong support - mainly in Bristol - for congestion charges or a new levy on workplace parking to bring in extra funding.

* People also wanted to see a comprehensive and safe network built for walking and cycling, and more road space used for public transport, walking and cycling.

* Three in five people found buses unreliable and poor value for money, and said it was not easy to plan journeys.

If you read the article, you may notice that the Bristol Post listed these in a different order...

Meanwhile, WECA plan to spend £100s of millions on roads for cars...

Which makes one speculate what the public consultations are really for.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4956


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: January 27, 2020, 11:17:47 pm »

The full Draft Joint Local Transport Plan 4 Consultation Report is on Travelwest's JLTP page.
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3810


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 01, 2020, 09:31:04 pm »

Dr Steve Melia of UWE has written a thought-provoking piece on JLTP4 for the Bristol Cable. He reiterates his view that it's not enough to provide better public transport; we need to reduce road capacity too:

https://thebristolcable.org/2020/01/plans-for-new-road-threaten-bristols-countryside-and-undo-action-on-the-climate-crisis/
Logged
johnneyw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1489


Still want to be a train driver when I grow up


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 01, 2020, 10:58:25 pm »

Dr Steve Melia of UWE has written a thought-provoking piece on JLTP4 for the Bristol Cable. He reiterates his view that it's not enough to provide better public transport; we need to reduce road capacity too:

https://thebristolcable.org/2020/01/plans-for-new-road-threaten-bristols-countryside-and-undo-action-on-the-climate-crisis/

I think he was given a quick interview on local TV news a day or two back saying that the plan falls between two outdated stools and that they need to go back to the drawing board to come up with something that addresses the challenge more realistically.

Edit. Minor punctuation.
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page