Cheltenham Racecourse connection?

[jayah]

Once again, you fail to realise the size of Bishop's Cleeve these days, and exaggerate the time taken. The bus only takes twenty minutes from Cheltenham town centre to The Swallow with its small parade of shops, and then another fifteen minutes is taken up by going out on the Gotherington road and then through a new estate, circling back to its official end point in Mill Parade. If you are envisioning the station for your proposed "fast connection" being at or near the site of the old GWR station, how does that benefit the new developments on or around the Evesham Road? As with your earlier Churchdown example, by the time these people have got to your proposed station, they could virtually be in Cheltenham centre via the Stagecoach D service - which, of course, eventually stops right outside Lansdown station...oh, and by the way, do you have a site in mind for the Cheltenham terminus?

I haven't exaggerated the time taken, you have reimagined Cheltenham Spa to be the town centre. Not for the first time.

 

[jayah]

But not well served by buses going anywhere near Cheltenham station

Gloucestershire Parkway at Elmbridge anyone

There can't be an easier way to speed up London - Cheltenham by 10mins. Indirectly would probably improve connections from Swindon to the North.

Site has very good road connections and plenty of tin sheds nearby that can be knocked down for the inevitable car ****.

But it must include some easy and fast means of getting to the City Centre and not become some detached or remote Bristol, Chester or Cheltenham type affair.

 

[4141]

I haven't exaggerated the time taken, you have reimagined Cheltenham Spa to be the town centre. Not for the first time.

My apologies, yes, I misunderstood that part. However, what makes you believe that there is sufficient demand for a rail connection? The D bus is my local service, and from my experience (and I'm NOT saying this has any weight) on arrival in Cheltenham centre , the bulk of passengers from Bishop's Cleeve get off and a different set get on for the section to the Rail Station and Hatherley - I cannot recall more than a handful making the through journey.

 

[jayah]

My apologies, yes, I misunderstood that part. However, what makes you believe that there is sufficient demand for a rail connection? The D bus is my local service, and from my experience (and I'm NOT saying this has any weight) on arrival in Cheltenham centre passengers from Bishop's Cleeve get off and a different set get on for the section to the Rail Station and Hatherley - I cannot recall more than a handful making the through journey.

That is because as a Cleeve to Railway service the bus is completely useless. Cleeve has an ideal demographic for rail use and there will be plenty of rail users almost all driving and parking, just like what will inevitably be going on at Churchdown.

Joining the whole lot together would be a massive improvement - Gloucester, Churchdown, Cheltenham (change for Birmingham & Bristol) then Cleeve not a short sighted failure mitigation like Racecourse P&R.

Churchdown also has available development land to bulk up the catchment - why not break the lifetime habit of throwing up new housing in fields disconnected from all public transport?

 

[4141]

You seem to be arguing all railways are a waste of time in that case. Just because you can find one person who won't benefit, nobody should benefit.

Railway succeed when they connect places of residence with places of work. Connecting Cleeve with Cheltenham and connecting Churchdown with Birmingham, Gloucester and Cheltenham would provide useful connections and relieve the congestion stemming from building more and more housing remote from rail access.

You seem to subscribe to the "if you build it, they will come" school of thought - sadly, those holding the purse strings don't work that way these days. Personally, I don't believe that "all railways are a waste of time" and I hate being a realist, but...

 

[jayah]

You seem to subscribe to the "if you build it, they will come" school of thought - sadly, those holding the purse strings don't work that way these days. Personally, I don't believe that "all railways are a waste of time" and I hate being a realist, but...

I have explained where railways will succeed and where they won't. Those basic facts haven't changed in 50 years. Unfortunately rail rarely succeeds when confronted with out of town shopping and employment except where these are built around new stations.

A railway from Gloucester to Churchdown, Cheltenham and Cleeve would connect housing and employment as well as relieving congestation. Building a car park half way between the two is a state of failure.

 

[PartyOperator]

I have explained where railways will succeed and where they won't. Those basic facts haven't changed in 50 years. Unfortunately rail rarely succeeds when confronted with out of town shopping and employment except where these are built around new stations.

A railway from Gloucester to Churchdown, Cheltenham and Cleeve would connect housing and employment as well as relieving congestation. Building a car park half way between the two is a state of failure.

Joining them all up with a tram makes more sense than a full-blown railway. Given the existing 20-or-so public buses per hour (each way) going between Cheltenham and Gloucester at peak times there might well be sufficient demand, especially if journey times and reliability can be greatly improved. Frequent light rail services, stopping at intermediate points including park and ride and town centre(ish) locations would have a much better chance of achieving meaningful modal shift than a two train per hour heavy rail service, without making existing heavy rail services worse. This would also offers the possibility of on-street and/or tram-train extensions, wider regeneration benefits (especially if extended south through Gloucester) and more potential for commercial and housing development around tram stops.

Perhaps the climate-emergency-declaring local authorities and MPs could even see fit to reconsider their decision to invest £650m in new roads and maybe try to get investment in something more sustainable...

 

[Llanigraham]

You seem to be arguing all railways are a waste of time in that case. Just because you can find one person who won't benefit, nobody should benefit.

Railway succeed when they connect places of residence with places of work. Connecting Cleeve with Cheltenham and connecting Churchdown with Birmingham, Gloucester and Cheltenham would provide useful connections and relieve the congestion stemming from building more and more housing remote from rail access.

Err?? No I'm not.
What I am pointing out that central Cheltenham is most unlikely to be the employment centre of those that live in Bishops Cleeve and therefore the link would be of no use to them.

 

[GlosRail]

For the short term at least more trains need to stop at Ashchurch, although now with the limited service the car park is still full most days.

I live in Bishops Cleeve, and I use either Evesham or Ashchurch alot more than Cheltenham Spa as both are quicker to get to even though Cheltenham is just about closer than Ashchurch.

 

[jayah]

Err?? No I'm not.
What I am pointing out that central Cheltenham is most unlikely to be the employment centre of those that live in Bishops Cleeve and therefore the link would be of no use to them.

That is highly speculative and as Cheltenham is still the closest central business and employment area probably not true either..
A debate about whether the number is <>50% or less is fairly pointless, a lot of people will be driving from both Cleeve to Cheltenham and the railway station regardless how many are at GCHQ or elsewhere. The fact it won't help them doesn't diminish the benefit for those it will.

Railways succeed when connecting housing, employment and shopping and that is exactly what such a link would do.

 

[jayah]

Joining them all up with a tram makes more sense than a full-blown railway. Given the existing 20-or-so public buses per hour (each way) going between Cheltenham and Gloucester at peak times there might well be sufficient demand, especially if journey times and reliability can be greatly improved. Frequent light rail services, stopping at intermediate points including park and ride and town centre(ish) locations would have a much better chance of achieving meaningful modal shift than a two train per hour heavy rail service, without making existing heavy rail services worse. This would also offers the possibility of on-street and/or tram-train extensions, wider regeneration benefits (especially if extended south through Gloucester) and more potential for commercial and housing development around tram stops.

Perhaps the climate-emergency-declaring local authorities and MPs could even see fit to reconsider their decision to invest £650m in new roads and maybe try to get investment in something more sustainable...

The tram option could be viable but will require a change at Cheltenham Spa for heavy rail.

The existing buses Cheltenham Gloucester are very slow and being able to do central Gloucester to central Cheltenham in on go on the same vehicle, in about 12 mins vs 50-60mins by bus, would be a great benefit.

 

[4141]

The tram option could be viable but will require a change at Cheltenham Spa for heavy rail.

The existing buses Cheltenham Gloucester are very slow and being able to do central Gloucester to central Cheltenham in on go on the same vehicle, in about 12 mins vs 50-60mins by bus, would be a great benefit.

So where in Cheltenham would you site your station?

 

[PartyOperator]

The tram option could be viable but will require a change at Cheltenham Spa for heavy rail.

The existing buses Cheltenham Gloucester are very slow and being able to do central Gloucester to central Cheltenham in on go on the same vehicle, in about 12 mins vs 50-60mins by bus, would be a great benefit.

My suggestion (though the idea has been around for ages) was for a tramway all the way into Gloucester. The railway was previously quad-track so there's plenty of space for parallel tracks. Probably would need a flyover to get into central Gloucester, but that's cheaper for trams than heavy trains. It would also improve the heavy rail situation with more sensible use of the existing Cheltenham and Gloucester stations (e.g. by terminating more trains in Gloucester). As you say, the buses are just really slow and not an option chosen by many people who can afford a car. The roads are congested but this affects the buses even more than cars.

On heavy rail, the most popular destinations are Bristol and Birmingham which don't have any trains terminating in Gloucestershire anyway, so even with a central Cheltenham station or extension to Bishops Cleeve most people would end up changing. Better to connect via a frequent tram than have to deal with infrequent trains and long waits. The 10 minute wait in Gloucester for reversals also rather spoils the attraction of direct rail services.

 

[jayah]

So where in Cheltenham would you site your station?

It is called 'speculative ideas'?

Somewhere central, convenient for shopping, education and employment.

 

[crablab]

Somewhere central, convenient for shopping, education and employment

I think the point being made is...where would that be given geographical and town planning constraints.

 

[Llanigraham]

It is called 'speculative ideas'?

Somewhere central, convenient for shopping, education and employment.

But much of Cheltenham's employment is NOT in the centre.

 

[jayah]

I think the point being made is...where would that be given geographical and town planning constraints.

If strategic infrastructure is needed it can and should be built. The rest are just excuses by people who don't want whatever is being proposed.

 

[Llanigraham]

If strategic infrastructure is needed it can and should be built. The rest are just excuses by people who don't want whatever is being proposed.

They are not excuses, they are factual and realistic points, many of which have given correct facts to support them.

It is very well having speculative ideas BUT they need also need to be realistic AND be able to be supported by practical and explainable arguements. At present this isn't something you are doing, and you're just accussing people of just not wanting this.

 

[jayah]

But much of Cheltenham's employment is NOT in the centre.

That point has been covered already. You are fixated on who would not benefit from a link to central Cheltenham rather than the many who would.

 

[jayah]

They are not excuses, they are factual and realistic points, many of which have given correct facts to support them.

It is very well having speculative ideas BUT they need also need to be realistic AND be able to be supported by practical and explainable arguements. At present this isn't something you are doing, and you're just accussing people of just not wanting this.

The arguments for a link to central Cheltenham are explainable and have been explained.

You have become fixated by out of town employment and other excuses.

It is perfectly possible to do but very unlikely as it is not very high up any list. That doesn't mean it is without merit.

 

[Llanigraham]

The arguments for a link to central Cheltenham are explainable and have been explained.

You have become fixated by out of town employment and other excuses.

It is perfectly possible to do but very unlikely as it is not very high up any list. That doesn't mean it is without merit.

Or perhaps it is that I do know Cheltenham, I do know where people work, I do understand how public transport works, and I do understand the economic and social aspects that affect public transport. That is not being "fixated" as you put it, but being realistic.

Perhaps it is you that meets that description?

 

[jayah]

Or perhaps it is that I do know Cheltenham, I do know where people work, I do understand how public transport works, and I do understand the economic and social aspects that affect public transport. That is not being "fixated" as you put it, but being realistic.

Perhaps it is you that meets that description?

I am afraid you come across as fixated on where people don't work and use that as a justification to not build something that would bring great benefit.

Cheltenham is not unique in having out of town employment but certainly would be if you are suggesting it doesn't have a lot of employment in the centre, or that railways are not about connecting where people live and where they work.

 

[johnnychips]

Please could you explain where you would put a more central station in Cheltenham and what route it would take from the existing network?

 

[jayah]

Please could you explain where you would put a more central station in Cheltenham and what route it would take from the existing network?

The same route it took before it was closed.

 

[4141]

The same route it took before it was closed.

So where on that route would you site your station, giving due regard to car parking, public transport links and general accessibility?

 

[30907]

The same route it took before it was closed.

AIUI you are suggesting a line from Bishops Cleeve to Lansdown Jn (the thread started with a greenfield new-build from Racecourse to the ex-LMS, so just checking!). I imagine there would be a station adjacent to the present one, designed to take terminating London trains so 2 platforms, and another further north (the old Malvern Rd site would be pointless), maybe somewhere near High St, which would be on single track. I don't know Cheltenham so have no idea if that is feasible.
That would be considerably more expensive than the original suggestion, whose business case I and others doubted.

 

[PartyOperator]

AIUI you are suggesting a line from Bishops Cleeve to Lansdown Jn (the thread started with a greenfield new-build from Racecourse to the ex-LMS, so just checking!). I imagine there would be a station adjacent to the present one, designed to take terminating London trains so 2 platforms, and another further north (the old Malvern Rd site would be pointless), maybe somewhere near High St, which would be on single track. I don't know Cheltenham so have no idea if that is feasible.
That would be considerably more expensive than the original suggestion, whose business case I and others doubted.

The old Malvern Road site is now a housing estate and the old St James's site is a supermarket, flats and offices so no space at either of those. There probably is space for a basic station in the cutting between Malvern Road and St George's Road but it's less than half a mile from the existing station and not that much closer to the town centre. Not sure the residents of the new housing along the route would be happy about diesel trains trundling past at 5am, plus it would mean the loss of a popular public park that's well used by walkers, cyclists, runners, dogs, children etc.

Edit: the wall visible at the end of this road (through the houses) is the retaining wall at the other side of the former railway. The houses are on the old Malvern Road station site:

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.900...4!1sKrdIGzNx1MuhBMFtDmvWbw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

[jayah]

The old Malvern Road site is now a housing estate and the old St James's site is a supermarket, flats and offices so no space at either of those. There probably is space for a basic station in the cutting between Malvern Road and St George's Road but it's less than half a mile from the existing station and not that much closer to the town centre. Not sure the residents of the new housing along the route would be happy about diesel trains trundling past at 5am, plus it would mean the loss of a popular public park that's well used by walkers, cyclists, runners, dogs, children etc.

Edit: the wall visible at the end of this road (through the houses) is the retaining wall at the other side of the former railway. The houses are on the old Malvern Road station site:

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.900...4!1sKrdIGzNx1MuhBMFtDmvWbw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It is called strategic development. HS2 can demolish housing estates, trading estates and tower blocks. A supermarket (in this case) is a large tin shed and an even larger car park. Ample room.

We would not have any strategic infrastructure in this country including power stations and airports if this mentality that nothing must be disturbed actually prevailed.

 

[6Gman]

It is called strategic development. HS2 can demolish housing estates, trading estates and tower blocks. A supermarket (in this case) is a large tin shed and an even larger car park. Ample room.

We would not have any strategic infrastructure in this country including power stations and airports if this mentality that nothing must be disturbed actually prevailed.

HS2 is a strategic project of national significance linking several major cities.

What is being proposed here, as I understand it, is a railway to serve Bishops Cleeve and to allow some trains to serve a Cheltenham town centre station in addition to Lansdown.

Have I understood that correctly?

By the way, how would this co-ordinate with the heritage railway?

 

[Llanigraham]

I am afraid you come across as fixated on where people don't work and use that as a justification to not build something that would bring great benefit.

Cheltenham is not unique in having out of town employment but certainly would be if you are suggesting it doesn't have a lot of employment in the centre, or that railways are not about connecting where people live and where they work.

And you are "fixated" about your improbable railway, and do not seem able to accept that many of us here have a different view, often founded on practicality, economy, and probability.