• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Why Temple Meads?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fawkes Cat

Established Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
3,013
Famously, Temple Meads station is not particularly central to Bristol.

Given that the station was built for the GWR, and the GWR was an initiative by Bristol people, why is this? Surely a Bristol railway would have wanted the station as near to the then commercial centre of Bristol as possible?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

simonw

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2009
Messages
805
Famously, Temple Meads station is not particularly central to Bristol.

Given that the station was built for the GWR, and the GWR was an initiative by Bristol people, why is this? Surely a Bristol railway would have wanted the station as near to the then commercial centre of Bristol as possible?
I believe the original plan/hope was to build it the station in Queens Square, but this was rejected by the city authorities.


A fair number of stations were built away from city centres (Paddington as an example) as the landowners objected.

Given the time savings of, say, a Bristol to London train journey v a stage coach, the additional time to get to Temple Leads was insignificant.
 

Fawkes Cat

Established Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
3,013
believe the original plan/hope was to build it the station in Queens Square, but this was rejected by the city authorities.
But surely these were the same city authorities who wanted the railway?
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,302
Location
West Wiltshire
The history is due to the orientation of river Avon, the intransigence of the Bristol Dock company (which ultimately led to its being overtaken by Liverpool) blocking some areas

Back in 1830s when line was proposed, the City planning was effectively controlled (or very heavily influenced by, depending on which book you read) by the big merchants who generally had their offices around Queens Square.

Redcliffe was already developed due to docks, Clifton was full of people with influence (and up a hill), no one was going to allow the area around the castle to be demolished. Temple Meads area became a default choice

For a while there was a chance the London and Southampton railway would open branch to Bristol, that is why their line runs fairly straight to near Basingstoke then turns and runs fairly straight to Southampton, in end GWR line was built instead
 

simonw

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2009
Messages
805
But surely these were the same city authorities who wanted the railway?
Those that wanted the railway and those that owned or occupied the land, were not necessarily the same people. Nimbys are not new.

Ironically, Queens Square went into decline following the reform act riots as Clifton became a more attractive option, being well away from 'the great unwashed'.
 

randyrippley

Established Member
Joined
21 Feb 2016
Messages
5,151
Strikes me that building at Temple Meads meant that any westbound extension would mean the harbour and New Cut would be bridged as far upstream as reasonably possible, shortening the bridges and minimising problems with shipping.
Also it gave a gentler curve to the line as it cut south around the hills to the west
 

SteveM70

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2018
Messages
3,887
A lot of the wealth in Bristol back then (and backers of the railway) lived up in Clifton, so using their horse and carriage to travel slightly further to get to the station really made no odds to them
 

Fawkes Cat

Established Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
3,013
A lot of the wealth in Bristol back then (and backers of the railway) lived up in Clifton, so using their horse and carriage to travel slightly further to get to the station really made no odds to them
At the risk of hijacking my own thread, does this make Temple Meads the original Parkway station?
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,121
Same as at Paddington, designed to go to the edge of the built up area.

Plus it terminated in the "old station", from where you dropped down stairs direct into Victoria Street. The current main entrance way up the long uphill drag of the station approach is the result of the later linking to the Bristol & Exeter line, which used to terminate at right-angles on the other side of the site.

In the other direction, the centre of Bristol was not where it is now, but just at the other end of Victoria Street and across Bristol Bridge, at Corn Street/Broad Street. The Centre built up from tramway development, the western half actually having been docks until tram times. WW2 bombing finally decimated the Corn Street area, shopping moved away to Broadmead etc, and offices scattered around. The station is far less convenient for the city now than when it was first built.
 

simonw

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2009
Messages
805
Same as at Paddington, designed to go to the edge of the built up area.

Plus it terminated in the "old station", from where you dropped down stairs direct into Victoria Street. The current main entrance way up the long uphill drag of the station approach is the result of the later linking to the Bristol & Exeter line, which used to terminate at right-angles on the other side of the site.

In the other direction, the centre of Bristol was not where it is now, but just at the other end of Victoria Street and across Bristol Bridge, at Corn Street/Broad Street. The Centre built up from tramway development, the western half actually having been docks until tram times. WW2 bombing finally decimated the Corn Street area, shopping moved away to Broadmead etc, and offices scattered around. The station is far less convenient for the city now than when it was first built.
Actually, given the redevelopment around Temple Meads in recent years, it serves a much more built up area in terms of offices.

Famously, Temple Meads station is not particularly central to Bristol.

Given that the station was built for the GWR, and the GWR was an initiative by Bristol people, why is this? Surely a Bristol railway would have wanted the station as near to the then commercial centre of Bristol as possible?
It must also be remembered that the main purpose for the railways being built was the shipment of goods, not people. The railway was built to get goods from Bristol docks to the London market.
 

Gloster

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
8,481
Location
Up the creek
Many of the very earliest railways (and their promoters) just saw themselves as connecting A to B: they did not see themselves as part of a joined-up system. The idea of extending further west from Bristol was a later idea that had to be put forward by an essentially different company. There were some who did have a vision of a national system, although probably not one as comprehensive as it became, but they were in a minority. Whether Brunel had such a vision, but failed to get it past the money men, or whether he didn’t have the vision, I am not sure.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,948
Location
Nottingham
Actually, given the redevelopment around Temple Meads in recent years, it serves a much more built up area in terms of offices.
Although the wide busy road and fencing off of the two derelict buildings the other side of it (listed and dangerous I assume) seems to be specifically designed to cut off the station from walking routes to the rest of the city.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,105
It must also be remembered that the main purpose for the railways being built was the shipment of goods, not people. The railway was built to get goods from Bristol docks to the London market.

and the National Library of Scotland OS map https://maps.nls.uk/view/102347323 shows the lines from Temple Meads going straight over Victoria St., almost under St Mary Redcliffe and on into the docks.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,948
Location
Nottingham
and the National Library of Scotland OS map https://maps.nls.uk/view/102347323 shows the lines from Temple Meads going straight over Victoria St., almost under St Mary Redcliffe and on into the docks.
Looking at that map it's evident that prior to the bridging of the floating harbour by Redcliffe Way, a station around St Mary Redcliffe wouldn't actually have been much closer by road to the Queen Square area and Clifton than Temple Meads was. The only crossings were Bristol Bridge, Prince Street bridge (indirect access and opened when shipping was passing) and two ferries.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,105
Looking at that map a bit more, the lines N of the floating harbour are marked "GWR Bristol lines" and on the S side "GWR Harbour Branch."​
Did the LMS have any harbour access of its own?

p.s. maybe the answer is "Yes - at Garston!"
 
Last edited:

Magdalia

Established Member
Joined
1 Jan 2022
Messages
3,047
Location
The Fens
Back in 1830s when line was proposed, the City planning was effectively controlled (or very heavily influenced by, depending on which book you read) by the big merchants who generally had their offices around Queens Square.
The Society of Merchant Venturers had a very significant involvement in the development of Bristol both as a port and as a city.
 

Rescars

Member
Joined
25 May 2021
Messages
1,177
Location
Surrey
Same as at Paddington, designed to go to the edge of the built up area.

Wasn't the original plan for the GWR to terminate at Euston, but the London terminus was amended to Paddington, partly out of concern that the link with the London and Birmingham would have given an advantage to Liverpool?
 

Gloster

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
8,481
Location
Up the creek
Looking at that map a bit more, the lines N of the floating harbour are marked "GWR Bristol lines" and on the S side "GWR Harbour Branch."​
Did the LMS have any harbour access of its own?

p.s. maybe the answer is "Yes - at Garston!"

The Midland does seem to have had sidings down by the Floating Harbour, roughly where the GWR crosses it at the east end of Temple Meads. The line into Temple Meads was joint GWR and MR, including the first 14 chains of the Wapping Wharf line, so it is possible that the MR had running powers to give access to this part of the docks.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,105
The Midland does seem to have had sidings down by the Floating Harbour, roughly where the GWR crosses it at the east end of Temple Meads. The line into Temple Meads was joint GWR and MR, including the first 14 chains of the Wapping Wharf line, so it is possible that the MR had running powers to give access to this part of the docks.
Thanks for the reminder, the map says Avon sidings, it was a cement depot when I was in the area. I suppose I overlooked them because they were so far up the floating harbour that I didn't imagine coastal shipping there. I suppose stuff could have been moved by lighter, but that double handling would have been an additional cost.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,948
Location
Nottingham
The Midland does seem to have had sidings down by the Floating Harbour, roughly where the GWR crosses it at the east end of Temple Meads. The line into Temple Meads was joint GWR and MR, including the first 14 chains of the Wapping Wharf line, so it is possible that the MR had running powers to give access to this part of the docks.
From Wikipedia, the Midland line had a station at St Philips until 1953, roughly north of Temple Meads. The straightness of the line from Lawrence Hill to this area suggests this was the original intended route of the Bristol and Gloucester Railway, but apparently it decided before opening to run its passenger services into Temple Meads and St Philips was added later to handle extra traffic.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,105
I love these old maps... The 6" map shows no boundary between the (Midland?) railway branch to the harbourside along Princess St. I wonder whether there was? And nearby is Folly Lane - as in the Railway location at Runcorn. I wonder what the history or derivation of that is?

A direct ancestor of mine (great great grandfather?) lived in the nest of terraced houses just N of St Phillips Marsh in the early 1880s. He wasn't on the railway but lodged in a house owned by an engine driver, and most of the other owners and tenant neighbours were railwaymen.
 

Gloster

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
8,481
Location
Up the creek
I love these old maps... The 6" map shows no boundary between the (Midland?) railway branch to the harbourside along Princess St. I wonder whether there was? And nearby is Folly Lane - as in the Railway location at Runcorn. I wonder what the history or derivation of that is?

The 25” map suggests that there was a fence or similar between Princess Street and the Midland’s Avonside Wharf Branch, which I think would be a legal requirement. Perhaps Folly Lane was once a lane leading to a folly.
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,121
The Midland does seem to have had sidings down by the Floating Harbour, roughly where the GWR crosses it at the east end of Temple Meads.
These survived into the early 1960s. One of the key spotters' locations then was at the east end of the Up Main platform, which is almost out on a bridge over the river. Down below on the opposite side were various goods wagons, which a Class 03 shunter very occasionally worked in and out of, number too far away to read. It had apparently taken over a year or two before from old 0-4-0T 51218, long at Bristol and now preserved various tracks fanned out along the river, and across open streets, including right under the Temple Meads approach. The old Avonside loco works used to be here long before, who built various smaller tank engines, but they moved out to Fishponds, also on the Midland line, around WW1 time.

If spotting boredom set in a walk was in order right down to the end of the old Brunel station, wooden-boarded platforms, dim light, round the buffers at the end, and up the far platform, all was a near-ghostly fascination. Trains still used the eastern parts nearest the river, some Severn Beach trains, S&D trains to Bath Green Park with green Southern stock, and occasional Jubilee or Peak main line services to Birmingham. But the far end was never reached by these, and the offices there also seemed abandoned.

The "Floating Harbour" under that bridge was the old river, which had acquired various bankside industries and wharves over the centuries, and in about 1800 had been cut off by a river diversion which went under the other end of Temple Meads. Locks kept the old river, right through Bristol, at high tide for ships to access, but seagoing ships couldn't get above Bristol Bridge to these wharves.
 

initiation

Member
Joined
10 Nov 2014
Messages
432
Can't believe no one has posted this interesting video in Victorian schemes to replace temple meads.


Video title: Why there's no Bristol central station
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,948
Location
Nottingham
Can't believe no one has posted this interesting video in Victorian schemes to replace temple meads.


Video title: Why there's no Bristol central station
I was going to, then I noticed he had posted a later video correcting some errors in the first one.
 

Russel

Member
Joined
30 Jun 2022
Messages
1,181
Location
Lichfield
It's certainly a good walk into the city center, I usually do it in about 15 minutes from the harbour area.
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,302
Location
West Wiltshire
Wasn't the original plan for the GWR to terminate at Euston, but the London terminus was amended to Paddington, partly out of concern that the link with the London and Birmingham would have given an advantage to Liverpool?

No, the original plan in 1835 Act of Parliament was for line to end near Vauxhall Bridge, Brunel when survey the line wanted to be able to access the Thames.

It was the 1836 Act (after previous years one had been defeated) that considered joining with London and Birmingham at Euston, but they rejected it and first temporary terminus became Bishops Bridge. The 1836 Act was initially to a terminus in Brompton area, but they dropped that section of line because of objections to get rest of the Act through.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top