StopBRT2 letter to the Post
We wrote to the Bristol Post to follow up their article on the Cumberland Road decision published in Friday's edition (unfortunately the link to the article doesn't work). This is our letter:
With reference to your coverage of the Mayor's BRT2 decision on Friday. Readers may be interested to hear that there were 167 statements submitted on this issue and we believe that the vast majority were against the scheme. They hadn't been made available by the Council and there was little reference to them in the Cabinet debate. It is as if there is a collective Council denial of the level of opposition to BRT2.
We continue to campaign against BRT2 and our reasons include the following:
-the c£50m scheme has a funding gap of £12m which is likely to increase. As your report stated, the capital cost of the original scheme increased by 6% in the last year. The scheme cost does not allow for electric powered buses referred to by the Cabinet and it is difficult to see how this can be implemented for the North Somerset buses using the route as the operator (First) would be obliged to purchase these higher cost buses
-a substantial element of the benefits comes from measures proposed for the city centre loop. Without these, the Benefit Cost Ratio for the Ashton Vale to city centre section would be much lower but this is disguised in the way that 'benefits' are presented
- Our transport consultant finds the traffic assessment for the Hotwell Road option to be 'perverse' because it appears to be designed to fail by use of over-engineering (continuous bus lanes on Brunel Way ) whereas the Cumberland road option has been designed with 'light touch 'bus gates
-there are negative environmental impacts on the riverside setting of Ashton Avenue Bridge and the undisturbed Colliter's Brook and Ashton Vale Fields
-there are negative impacts on walking and cycling
In conclusion, we believe that the project is in conflict with Green Capital status.