Bristol: Plans for new A4 to A3029 route (including bridge)

[gepree68]

In Bristol in October 2017 there were proposals from the mayor to build a new road, pretty much along the red route on the above map.

Here's the Bristol Post talking about it: Marvin Rees plans to knock down Cumberland Basin and rename it ‘Western Harbour’

It was not clear whether any existing roads (for example the A3029 bridge) would be closed, and if so what alternate route would be provided.

There were definitely comments about building more flats / houses in the area.

Has anyone heard anything about this plan, and if so are there any further details, and perhaps a map?

[Truvelo]

The existing road is freeflowing, something I doubt the new road will be. The A4 regularly backs up between this junction and Portway so introducing any form of at-grade conflict will only make things worse.

[ANiceEnglishman]

In Bristol in October 2017 there were proposals from the mayor to build a new road, pretty much along the red route on the above map.

Here's the Bristol Post talking about it: Marvin Rees plans to knock down Cumberland Basin and rename it ‘Western Harbour’

It was not clear whether any existing roads (for example the A3029 bridge) would be closed, and if so what alternate route would be provided.

There were definitely comments about building more flats / houses in the area.

Has anyone heard anything about this plan, and if so are there any further details, and perhaps a map?

The 'A3029 bridge' and the 'Plimsoll Swing Bridge' apparently slated for demolition are one and the same as far as I can see. 30 years ago I used to commute from what is now North Somerset and remember the utter chaos when the bridge was closed to road traffic. A permanent closure is a complete non-starter imho.

[Beardy5632]

I don't think it'll come to anything to be honest regardless of how ambitious his plans are. By the looks of your map the red line seems to join the A4 roughly where the canopy tunnel is.

[Andy P]

I agree that it is unlikely to happen.

Bearing in mind that ite needs to take all traffic from the A370 (including that from the A38 via the new connecting road) into the city centre, I think the new bridge would have to be more perpendicular to the river than shown. It would need a major junction with the Portway, and there is absolutely no space for a GSJ due to the cliff face and historical buildings.

Furthermore, although the Floating Harbour is no longer a working port, there are still many ships and tall boats entering the harbour, which are culturally and economically important for Bristol. The new bridge would have to be a swing bridge, as I don't think there is space for a high bridge at that location. This would require an alternative route, as at present.

Given the proposal is to demolish the "ugly road network", I think this may include the part further south. I wonder if the idea is to build the new bridge approach from the A369 somewhere at the foot of Rownham Hill. Even so, I don't think it would work.

Incidentally, I don't find the network at all ugly, with the exception of the thicket of ramps at the end of Spike Island.

The A4 regularly backs up between this junction and Portway so introducing any form of at-grade conflict will only make things worse.

Actually, the backing up is normally from the traffic light junction between the Portway and Bridge Valley Road. It normally flows well after these lights. I agree that a major at-grade junction in this area would make things much worse.

I fantasise about a free-flowing solution taking traffic from the Cumberland Basin into Bridge Valley Road on a ramp firstly on stilts over part of the river then across the Portway to join Bridge Valley Road higher up. I think it would look good.

[boliston]

the existing road system does look quite ugly - i would not want to live in one of these houses https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.44987 ... 312!8i6656
it would be better if the bits on stilts could be replaced with a more traditional (less ugly) type of road on the other bank of the river

[gepree68]

Bristol Council have posted 3 alternatives for the area, all of which involve getting rid of the A3029 bridge:

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bris ... ay-3209740

Option 1 looks the best to me, moving the A3029 over to the west of the river, then crossing to A4 on a dual carriageway bridge over the river.

Option 2 is weird because it looks like "Let's just go back to what we had before 1960"

Option 3 is a mixture of options 1 and 2.

[jackal]

All those options would be a complete disaster from a traffic perspective - which is perhaps the intention.

[Jeni]

All those options would be a complete disaster from a traffic perspective - which is perhaps the intention.

Luckily Bristol is becoming quite a forward thinking city and is realising that there is more to life than the car

[Bryn666]

The western option looks most deliverable to me, the other options will require years of works to keep existing movements going whilst the new is built.

Bristol city centre is not designed for motorised traffic, the attempts at a ring road did more damage than the Luftwaffe did, and now people want something else. In mainland Europe a city the size of Bristol would have a tram system and much better alternatives to driving.

Shows the lack of ambition we really have.

[WHBM]

Bristol city centre is not designed for motorised traffic

It's not designed for public transport either. It's long had the lowest bus passenger usage of any major urban area (uniquely, it never had a council-run bus operation), and the rail station is also the furthest away from the central area of any major city in the country, well beyond walking distance.

You are not going to overcome that by demolishing perfectly serviceable 1960s roads and replacing them with an expensive but closely parallel route with less capacity.

[Johnathan404]

All those options would be a complete disaster from a traffic perspective - which is perhaps the intention.

Luckily Bristol is becoming quite a forward thinking city and is realising that there is more to life than the car

The other night I drove from Frenchay to Cribbs Causeway at 3am. Every single traffic light was either on green or turned green as I approached - even when I turned right at the roundabouts or turned off/on at a side street. That is excellent car provision and very few cities can say their roads are that well designed.

Despite this the council's preference for public transport can still be seen and that is no bad thing. It is the public's preference too: bus usage in Bristol is much more intensive than any other city I can think of in the south west/south central.

[Jeni]

Bristol city centre is not designed for motorised traffic

It's not designed for public transport either. It's long had the lowest bus passenger usage of any major urban area (uniquely, it never had a council-run bus operation), and the rail station is also the furthest away from the central area of any major city in the country, well beyond walking distance.

You are not going to overcome that by demolishing perfectly serviceable 1960s roads and replacing them with an expensive but closely parallel route with less capacity.

So, do we solve the problem or just plod along with the existing system which isn't working?

[Herned]

.... and the rail station is also the furthest away from the central area of any major city in the country, well beyond walking distance.

While Temple Meads is not very central, it is absolutely untrue that is is beyond walking distance (I say from my central Bristol office that I walk to from the station every day). It's a 10-15 minute walk to pretty much all of the centre

As to the road bridge proposals, I'm not really sure what problem it is supposed to solve

[WHBM]

Well knocking down the last administration's investment and replacing it with something closely parallel that doesn't have as much capacity is just a squandering of funds.

Incidentally, the map above just cuts off on the right hand side a second 1960s bridge route over the river, which is linked by a further series of slip roads. When the main bridge is to be opened the traffic can be seamlessly diverted to use the alternate. I don't know of another comparable alternate road system anywhere. I remember being diverted when it was all new and the docks were much busier.

[Bryn666]

The intent is obvious. The existing road system takes up acres of space in a prime adjacent to city centre area that could be better served by commercial and residential premises. This generates money for the authority.

1960s viaducts are merely a cost and will become more expensive as repairs grow larger in scope as they age more.

[Herned]

The intent is obvious. The existing road system takes up acres of space in a prime adjacent to city centre area that could be better served by commercial and residential premises. This generates money for the authority.

1960s viaducts are merely a cost and will become more expensive as repairs grow larger in scope as they age more.

I would take issue with near the city centre. It is on the edge of the city, there is nothing but fields to the west (due to the unusual geography of Bristol). It's also not a very obvious development site, there are plenty of spaces which could be redeveloped nearer the centre. Also putting a bridge further down the Avon gorge makes no sense either, either from a visual perspective or a traffic one.

I'm all for removing cars and inappropriate roads from city centres, but I don't believe this comes into that category at all

[SteveA30]

The route is part of a southern ring road from the A4 to the.....A4. The scheme is just an ego trip legacy project, so that the Mayor will have left something behind that can have a plaque with his name on it.
Plenty of 50's/60's/70's structures that need major work on them. Hammersmith, Chiswick, HE bridges over motorways, like the recent M27 job at Rownhams. If they are all going to be knocked down, the network will eventually unravel. Westway, Thelwall, Spaghetti, A27/A283, A19/A66.
Cumberland Basin is very unobtrusive even from ground level, as it is as low as possible, and works beautifully, even with recent signals on the southbound side.

Consultation starts on Monday..........

[Marzo]

Neither Option 1 nor Option 2 will help traffic flows at times of heavy river traffic, such as around the Harbour Festival. Dozens of vessels come into the Floating Harbour for this event and, a few days later, leave again. At present they can pass through the opened Plimsoll Bridge and wait in the Cumberland Basin while the bridge is closed again (and opened to road traffic) and the Merchants Road bridge opened to allow them to progress through to the harbour itself. Because there are two separate bridges, this can happen with a relative minimum of disconvenience to road traffic - alright, there are queues but the road stays open. Option 1 shows two new bridges side by side downriver, which will both have to open at the same time for vessels to pass through. At this point the road crossing will be cut completely causing long queues on the A4 Portway in both directions and on the A3029 inbound. Option 2 envisages a new bridge to replace the existing Merchants Road bridge, but that will also have to open at times - oh, yes, cutting the road crossing completely. I am well aware that the Plimsoll Bridge would need a lot of money spending on it for it to remain in use, but what would the cost be for either of these options, both in construction and disruption?

Incidentally, plans for development of the area between A and B Bond and the Basin were in hand at least as far back as 2013, but they only involved the demolition of the existing ramp alonside the car park.

[WHBM]

The intent is obvious. The existing road system takes up acres of space in a prime adjacent to city centre area that could be better served by commercial and residential premises. This generates money for the authority.

That's the approach that an economist's study (supposedly seriously) showed in the 1970s, that the land value of all the railway termini in London was wasted on them being stations, they should all be closed and the railway should build commercial developments there instead for a better return on investment …

Now this may be a joke, but when the public bus services were sold off in the 1980s it really happened; these only really just broke even, so were sold for not much. Whereupon they rapidly got into the hands of property developers whose only interest was the town centre bus station land value, which was considerable, and some fairly central garages as well. Bus station closed, buses put out on the street to everyone's inconvenience, but then the bus operation sold off, minus all the premises of course.

This should be something that planning permission deals with, but they were presented with a fait accompli they had no control over. Either accept bus stops on street, or no bus service. Old bus station just closed and fenced off. Do you want an eyesore there or a commercial/residential development ?