*UPDATED* Idea Greater Bristol area redraw

[freetoview33]

As i say if there's some untapped market Bristol CC will just extend the 515 and/or 57 to Keynsham. There certainly won't be enough demand, even with all the developments for what you suggest.

Also stating that it will be only 39/40 compared to 43 mins isn't going to help your justification.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


It didn't start very long ago and it goes to places where you don't go very often. When you go out to Wells next week, you might see it in Whitchurch. it's run by Wessex usually with a solo.

Bristol City Council would not pay to extend it to Keynsham because it is outside of Bristol.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Current 57: 36 mins
Current 636: 8 mins

Total: 44 mins (This checks out on google maps)

My 32: (Also according to google maps) 33 mins!
38: 30/32 mins. (Google maps agrees too)

Not any longer ........

Yes I do see Stockwood lane currently being an issue for the type of bus I suggested (being a metrocity) But it will get widened at some point .... (This is a plan to be implemented by 2020, So I can see the situation changing by then.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So now baring in mind time isn't an issue anymore. It would be a viable service!

 

[THarris123]

Bristol City Council would not pay to extend it to Keynsham because it is outside of Bristol.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Current 57: 36 mins
Current 636: 8 mins

Total: 44 mins (This checks out on google maps)

My 32: (Also according to google maps) 33 mins!
38: 30/32 mins. (Google maps agrees too)

Not any longer ........

Yes I do see Stockwood lane currently being an issue for the type of bus I suggested (being a metrocity) But it will get widened at some point .... (This is a plan to be implemented by 2020, So I can see the situation changing by then.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So now baring in mind time isn't an issue anymore. It would be a viable service!

We really are going in circles here.

Your 32 would still be a long shortcut and I don't think the timings are justified. Bristol City Council have funded services to Keynsham before and I believe they still do. They could also work with Banes for funding. It's not a big issue. How do you explain the funding of 636 - thatgoes into the Bristol area too.

 

[freetoview33]

We really are going in circles here.

Your 32 would still be a long shortcut and I don't think the timings are justified. Bristol City Council have funded services to Keynsham before and I believe they still do. They could also work with Banes for funding. It's not a big issue. How do you explain the funding of 636 - thatgoes into the Bristol area too.

3 mins longer ..... The timings are right I cant help if you don't believe it.

"The service 636 is operated by Somerbus with financial support from Bath & North East Somerset Council" So is the 39.

The 17 is a hard one as it does have funding but I'm not sure who from! (BCC, SGC or BANES)

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Bristol City Council would not pay to extend it to Keynsham because it is outside of Bristol.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Current 57: 36 mins
Current 636: 8 mins

Total: 44 mins (This checks out on google maps)

My 32: (Also according to google maps) 33 mins!
38: 30/32 mins. (Google maps agrees too)

Not any longer ........

Yes I do see Stockwood lane currently being an issue for the type of bus I suggested (being a metrocity) But it will get widened at some point .... (This is a plan to be implemented by 2020, So I can see the situation changing by then.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So now baring in mind time isn't an issue anymore. It would be a viable service!

How is your route 12 minutes quicker than the current 57/636 timings? Your timings are incorrect.

Also, you think Stockwood Hill is going to be widened any time soon? Any proof for that or are you just making that up? Given that you didn't know about the issue till you Streetviewed it earlier today. Seeing as the southern ring road was being mooted ten years ago and we're no closer now than then and only 200 houses are in the frame and that the access will be to the A37, your plans and assumptions are incorrect.

Your plans don't hold water, I'm afraid

 

[freetoview33]

How is your route 12 minutes quicker than the current 57/636 timings?

Also, you think Stockwood Hill is going to be widened any time soon? Any proof for that or are you just making that up? Given that you didn't know about the issue till you Streetviewed it earlier today?

Given that only 200 houses are in the frame and that the access will be to the A37, your plans and assumptions are incorrect.

Starts from Union Street (SI)
Baldwin Street
Temple Meads
Bath Road
West Town Lane
Sturminster Road
Craydon Road
Stockwood Road
Lacey Road
Stockwood Lane
Keynsham Temple Street

That worked out at 33 mins. (I also did put in the 57/636 route which did add up to 44 mins, which matches the timetable and I tried the 38 which also matched the timetable of 30 mins) So I have no reason to believe 33 mins is not correct.

I know what Stockwood Lane/Scotland Lane is like, I used to have Rugby/Football up there at school, so went down there on a coach! Narrow but it worked ....

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Starts from Union Street (SI)
Baldwin Street
Temple Meads
Bath Road
West Town Lane
Sturminster Road
Craydon Road
Stockwood Road
Lacey Road
Stockwood Lane
Keynsham Temple Street

That worked out at 33 mins. (I also did put in the 57/636 route which did add up to 44 mins, which matches the timetable and I tried the 38 which also matched the timetable of 30 mins) So I have no reason to believe 33 mins is not correct.

I know what Stockwood Lane/Scotland Lane is like, I used to have Rugby/Football up there at school, so went down there on a coach! Narrow but it worked ....

There are times when you read something and instinctively know that it's incorrect....and you are.

Firstly, I checked Google Maps (choosing to map from Temple Meads to remove any confusion in city centre routeing.

• TM to Keynsham Ashton Way via Bath Road and Hicks Gate - 4.9 miles and 15 mins (21 mins with traffic)
• TM to Keynsham Ashton Way via Bath Road, Stockwood (Craydon Road, Coots, Stockwood Lane but omitting Callington Road Tesco) - 7.8 miles and 23 mins (28 mins with traffic)

The idea that you can perform the route in 33 minutes is piffle - an extra nearly 3 miles and it adds only 4 minutes onto the running time?

Of course, why bother looking at Google Maps when the 57 and 636 already provide running times? What makes you think that the current timings (c.39 mins run time if you miss out Callington Road) can be improved to 33 minutes.

As for "I know what Stockwood Lane/Scotland Lane is like, I used to have Rugby/Football up there at school, so went down there on a coach! Narrow but it worked ..." - I can tell you that I commuted for about 6 months from Hanham to the Somerfield HQ at Whitchurch and initially I used that route. It is very narrow and if anything other than a car meets car, then it's a right ballache - hence I found a different route. The occasional school bus or Timbo on his 636 is fine but a bus every 10 minutes.... Ridiculous.

Indeed, and this is the nub of things...

You seem to ignore the actual facts in this...

• The 636 is a thrice weekly service
• The hourly 637 takes minimal passengers
• Stockwood Lane cannot accommodate 6 scheduled buses an hour
• The 57 only justifies a two hourly service
• The end to end timings using the existing 57/636 times are 43 mins or 39 mins if you omit Callington Road

Instead, you go with beliefs that have no logic or evidence to support them...

• There's some massive untapped market that will justify a service that represents a huge uplift on current service provision - the 637 illustrates that isn't correct
• There's a load of new housing that will create some sort of market - no there isn't and if you read this https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa..._3-in-1_Stockwood_Lane_Whitchurch_2199958.pdf then you'll see that the local plan allows for just 200 new houses and that Keynsham and the local villages and hamlets will be protected (e.g. they won't bleed into each other
• That the timings will somehow allow a broadly similar journey time - this is despite a route via Stockwood being 50% longer in distance
• That Stockwood Lane will be widened - there is no evidence at all for this supposition - none whatsoever

Sorry if I seem very blunt (I've had a hard week), but I'm a little tired of your either ignoring facts, sidestepping questions or seemingly deliberately misconstruing information to support stuff that is patently incorrect.

 

[THarris123]

There are times when you read something and instinctively know that it's incorrect....and you are.

Firstly, I checked Google Maps (choosing to map from Temple Meads to remove any confusion in city centre routeing.

• TM to Keynsham Ashton Way via Bath Road and Hicks Gate - 4.9 miles and 15 mins (21 mins with traffic)
• TM to Keynsham Ashton Way via Bath Road, Stockwood (Craydon Road, Coots, Stockwood Lane but omitting Callington Road Tesco) - 7.8 miles and 23 mins (28 mins with traffic)

The idea that you can perform the route in 33 minutes is piffle - an extra nearly 3 miles and it adds only 4 minutes onto the running time?

Of course, why bother looking at Google Maps when the 57 and 636 already provide running times? What makes you think that the current timings (c.39 mins run time if you miss out Callington Road) can be improved to 33 minutes.

As for "I know what Stockwood Lane/Scotland Lane is like, I used to have Rugby/Football up there at school, so went down there on a coach! Narrow but it worked ..." - I can tell you that I commuted for about 6 months from Hanham to the Somerfield HQ at Whitchurch and initially I used that route. It is very narrow and if anything other than a car meets car, then it's a right ballache - hence I found a different route. The occasional school bus or Timbo on his 636 is fine but a bus every 10 minutes.... Ridiculous.

Indeed, and this is the nub of things...

You seem to ignore the actual facts in this...

• The 636 is a thrice weekly service
• The hourly 637 takes minimal passengers
• Stockwood Lane cannot accommodate 6 scheduled buses an hour
• The 57 only justifies a two hourly service
• The end to end timings using the existing 57/636 times are 43 mins or 39 mins if you omit Callington Road

Instead, you go with beliefs that have no logic or evidence to support them...

• There's some massive untapped market that will justify a service that represents a huge uplift on current service provision - the 637 illustrates that isn't correct
• There's a load of new housing that will create some sort of market - no there isn't and if you read this https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa..._3-in-1_Stockwood_Lane_Whitchurch_2199958.pdf then you'll see that the local plan allows for just 200 new houses and that Keynsham and the local villages and hamlets will be protected (e.g. they won't bleed into each other
• That the timings will somehow allow a broadly similar journey time - this is despite a route via Stockwood being 50% longer in distance
• That Stockwood Lane will be widened - there is no evidence at all for this supposition - none whatsoever

Sorry if I seem very blunt (I've had a hard week), but I'm a little tired of your either ignoring facts, sidestepping questions or seemingly deliberately misconstruing information to support stuff that is patently incorrect.

Well said.

 

[freetoview33]

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/dir/5...0x48718f278f037147:0xf2c53b9418137686!1m0!3e0

Currentlty it is 41 mins due to rush hour traffic. Without traffic is 27 mins .... 8.5 miles

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/dir/5...0x48718ef0bbb7a4c1:0xbd1816efa9bfceb2!1m0!3e0

38 route currently 36 mins, 23 without traffic. 6.6 miles. (Before you complain and say the 38 goes direct outside the bay horse, correct but this small section will be pedestrianised as part of metrobus shortly, so buses will have to loop back around to the haymarket)

I make that 5 mins ... and there is your proof!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Time is saved by routing in the Centre, Brislington and Stockwood by taking a simpler route

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/dir/5...0x48718f278f037147:0xf2c53b9418137686!1m0!3e0

Currentlty it is 41 mins due to rush hour traffic. Without traffic is 27 mins .... 8.5 miles

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/dir/5...0x48718ef0bbb7a4c1:0xbd1816efa9bfceb2!1m0!3e0

38 route currently 36 mins, 23 without traffic. 6.6 miles. (Before you complain and say the 38 goes direct outside the bay horse, correct but this small section will be pedestrianised as part of metrobus shortly, so buses will have to loop back around to the haymarket)

I make that 5 mins ... and there is your proof!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Time is saved by routing in the Centre, Brislington and Stockwood by taking a simpler route

Look, get this clear. I compared YOUR route from TM to Keynsham vs the main direct route. No city centre irrelevancies - it's 3 miles difference Like for Like!

FACT.

 

[freetoview33]

Look, get this clear. I compared YOUR route from TM to Keynsham vs the main direct route. No city centre irrelevancies - it's 3 miles difference Like for Like!

FACT.

But the route isn't from Temple Meads! Routing around the centre is a key point. Agreed that particular section is longer. But end to end it is only 5 mins!

 

[johnnychips]

Just a cheeky off topic quick one while I'm surrounded by experts. I'm on holiday in Bristol in February. Is an Avon rider ticket valid at all times (not just off peak) and can I buy it on the bus. Website suggests so, but I thought I'd check. Do Pm me if you don't want to spoil the thread.

 

[ooo]

Yes and yes

 

[carlberry]

Just a cheeky off topic quick one while I'm surrounded by experts. I'm on holiday in Bristol in February. Is an Avon rider ticket valid at all times (not just off peak) and can I buy it on the bus. Website suggests so, but I thought I'd check. Do Pm me if you don't want to spoil the thread.

As previously answered yes and yes. It's worth taking a print of the website and making sure that the driver understands what you want (and is going to charge you the correct price). Some try to sell you single operator versions that are cheaper, but not much use if you're using different operators. There are seperate multi-operator tickers for Bath, bristol and Weston if you're not moving around as much as well.

 

[johnnychips]

Thanks, will do!

 

[matt_splat]

now just a idea but if you really want to save council money and create a service of use how about a service that runs from Bristol - Keynsham via the A37 and then from whitchurch via the 637 route but maybe finding a way for it to serve the estate in keynsham as you could boost the Town - Whitchurch section of the route and then create a link with places along the A37 to Keynsham and vice versa, i again don't see as much demand but maybe more use to people compared to the 57 / 636 idea.

if you really want a crazy idea how about this......

Busses between Bath and Yate run hourly

Route 1 - Busses running as the current 620 but serving the service 2 terminus point every 2 hours on arrival at Yate Bus Station the bus would change number to say service 621

Route 2 - Service 621 - Bus departs Yate Bus Station heads to Chipping Sodbury then onto Old Sodbury after Old Sodbury the bus would continue towards Acton Turville but take a detore via Badmington Village before serving Acton Turville the Bus would carry onto Tormarton Village and then onto Marshfield after Marshfield the bus would run down the A420 it would then head towards wick before heading towards Bath calling again at the service 2 terminus point at Engsleigh this would double up as a almost hourly service into town from Landsdown.

The service could be ran with two busses so basicly as current but providing better coverage and new journeys for people, the loss would be the current 41 no longer running to yate but connections could be made with a service that runs from Malmesbury to Badmington and Acton in a circle before returning into Malmesbury.....

 

[THarris123]

now just a idea but if you really want to save council money and create a service of use how about a service that runs from Bristol - Keynsham via the A37 and then from whitchurch via the 637 route but maybe finding a way for it to serve the estate in keynsham as you could boost the Town - Whitchurch section of the route and then create a link with places along the A37 to Keynsham and vice versa, i again don't see as much demand but maybe more use to people compared to the 57 / 636 idea.

if you really want a crazy idea how about this......

Busses between Bath and Yate run hourly

Route 1 - Busses running as the current 620 but serving the service 2 terminus point every 2 hours on arrival at Yate Bus Station the bus would change number to say service 621

Route 2 - Service 621 - Bus departs Yate Bus Station heads to Chipping Sodbury then onto Old Sodbury after Old Sodbury the bus would continue towards Acton Turville but take a detore via Badmington Village before serving Acton Turville the Bus would carry onto Tormarton Village and then onto Marshfield after Marshfield the bus would run down the A420 it would then head towards wick before heading towards Bath calling again at the service 2 terminus point at Engsleigh this would double up as a almost hourly service into town from Landsdown.

The service could be ran with two busses so basicly as current but providing better coverage and new journeys for people, the loss would be the current 41 no longer running to yate but connections could be made with a service that runs from Malmesbury to Badmington and Acton in a circle before returning into Malmesbury.....

I think that's making ftv33's ideas more justifiable!

I think we'll see the withdrawal of 636 soon as it's competing against 637. I also think we could see the withdrawal of 668 (Bristol one, not the Street one!) and i think that's as far as it will go.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I think that's making ftv33's ideas more justifiable!

I think we'll see the withdrawal of 636 soon as it's competing against 637. I also think we could see the withdrawal of 668 (Bristol one, not the Street one!) and i think that's as far as it will go.

I tend to agree with you. The 636 is just a duplication and, to be honest, the 637 must have a shocking cost per passenger ratio. Similarly, the 668 is provides nothing unique other than it serves Camerton and the east end of Timsbury.

When the next round of cuts come in, you'd expect that BaNES will have to look such expenditure; to be fair, they've done very well to protect services so far.

 

[Marcus Fryer]

I tend to agree with you. The 636 is just a duplication and, to be honest, the 637 must have a shocking cost per passenger ratio. Similarly, the 668 is provides nothing unique other than it serves Camerton and the east end of Timsbury.

When the next round of cuts come in, you'd expect that BaNES will have to look such expenditure; to be fair, they've done very well to protect services so far.

I assume the 637's purpose is to provide a link from Keynsham and Whitchurch to South Bristol Hospital? This makes its potential withdrawal a contentious issue, even if the number of people using it doesn't justify its continued subsidy.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I assume the 637's purpose is to provide a link from Keynsham and Whitchurch to South Bristol Hospital? This makes its potential withdrawal a contentious issue, even if the number of people using it doesn't justify its continued subsidy.

You assume correctly but when the 25% cuts in LA budgets come in, expect a lot of tough and contentious decisions.

 

[freetoview33]

The 637 is to provide a link to new housing so I think there was some funding fromthe developer

 

[THarris123]

The 637 is to provide a link to new housing so I think there was some funding fromthe developer

Think you're right. So why would the council fund service 636 anymore? 636 is practically a duplicate of 637 anyway.

 

[freetoview33]

Think you're right. So why would the council fund service 636 anymore? 636 is practically a duplicate of 637 anyway.

Because the 636 links Stockwood to Keynsham. I agree the 636 isn't viable at the moment

BUT

With future development it WILL be.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Because the 636 links Stockwood to Keynsham. I agree the 636 isn't viable at the moment

BUT

With future development it WILL be.

No it won't be - it carries two tenths of naff all so even if that doubled, it would be negligible

 

[THarris123]

Because the 636 links Stockwood to Keynsham. I agree the 636 isn't viable at the moment

BUT

With future development it WILL be.

I highly recommend emailing Somerbus to ask whether as the provider of the service they see future potential.

I think he'll be a bit more blunt than me or GW.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I highly recommend emailing Somerbus to ask whether as the provider of the service they see future potential.

I think he'll be a bit more blunt than me or GW.

Indeed!

The 636 might well disappear as would the 668; both broadly duped by other services.

Given the parlous take up on the 637, you wonder if there's really that much requirement; I predict it won't last after s106 funding runs out. Certainly no justification for some 20 min frequency pipe dream

 

[freetoview33]

Right changes are being made!

 

[THarris123]

Thought of something the other day:
Why not interwork 178 and 37 and have 379 working by itself? The timing needs to be improved on all 3 services and although it would increase the PVR by 1, the allocation would be much better - 7 Streetlites for 178/37 and 4 B7s for 379.

 

[freetoview33]

Just saw there were plans submitted back in 1999 for a Henbury Park & Ride site, any idea why it never happened?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
http://developments.southglos.gov.u...839FB092AA06690B/pdf/PT99_0416_O--2310194.pdf

 

[carlberry]

Just saw there were plans submitted back in 1999 for a Henbury Park & Ride site, any idea why it never happened?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
http://developments.southglos.gov.u...839FB092AA06690B/pdf/PT99_0416_O--2310194.pdf

The link dosent appear to work. I'd assume it was something to do with the proposal to open the old rail line as a park and ride there dosent make any sense (Portway is just one motorway junction away and has a much easier journey into Bristol).

 

[freetoview33]

Search for PT99/0416/O

South glos planning
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And yes it was to be linked to railway station but still with buses