What hope for light rail expansion in the UK?

[Arkeeos]

What the Americans would term 'transit oriented development' (TOD) - Eg. as included on the Island of Ijburg in Amsterdam - appear to be an extremely rare thing in this country with continuous piecemeal expansion to leafy suburbs near motorway junctions being the default development.

Transit oriented developments don't happen here because we decided our cities were perfect and would never need to grow again in the 1940s and boxed them in with stupid greenbelts. As well as standard short termism, getting funding for development to a project that doesn't exist is basically impossible. Our god awful planning laws don't help either In the US they have zoning so a TOD would be upzoning areas around stations, but here we have manual approval by councils and since no council will allow developments unless being threatened with fines, something like that would never happen.

 

[daodao]

Some fascinating stuff on this thread. I wonder to what extent the absence of trams in dedicated on street lanes in the UK, compared with eg. Amsterdam, Zurich etc reflects continuing vestiges of car centric urban planning in many cities. What the Americans would term 'transit oriented development' (TOD) - Eg. as included on the Island of Ijburg in Amsterdam - appear to be an extremely rare thing in this country with continuous piecemeal expansion to leafy suburbs near motorway junctions being the default development.

The prominence of street running elsewhere is maybe just a sign of greater network size, but I suspect also reflects the 'Buses are good enough' arguments mentioned above, as well as the need for a more 'unique' service to gather political and monetary support when the status quo is so devoid of LRT and Trams (and honestly often public transport at all). I realise that while Tony Young article above is likely predisposed to be optimistic, surely it is overcoming the special nature of LRT development in this country that will allow for an eventual (hopefully...) proliferation of trams as a useful contributor to a region or cities transport.

One key influence on the demise of tramways in the UK was the Royal Commission on Transport which reported in 1931. It roundly condemned trams, describing them as “an obsolete form of transport” which caused “much unnecessary congestion”. The disadvantages of the tram were so serious that “had the motor omnibus been invented at the time … not a single mile of tramway would ever have been laid down”. The commission did not prescribe “any definite period for the extinction of tramways, but … it will be to the advantage of the inhabitants of the towns where they exist to get rid of them by degrees”.

This is exactly what happened, although the 4 largest Scottish cities, Belfast and some large northern English cities/towns including Blackpool, Leeds, Liverpool, Sheffield and Sunderland continued developing their tramways, in particular with reserved track extensions, until the late 1940s when electricity generation was nationalised. All these systems closed over the period 1954-62 apart from the Blackpool coastal tramway, which is mostly reserved track with just 1 mile of street running through Fleetwood town centre. A few isolated tram lines with extensive reservations (Grimsby & Immingham, Llandudno & Colwyn Bay, Swansea & Mumbles) also survived until 1956-61, and the Manx Electric Railway is still open.

The legacy of this Royal Commission remains valid today, which is one of the key reasons why Leeds hasn't reconstructed a tramway - there are no suitable disused rail corridors to form the backbone of the system and minimise street running. It is notable that the sections of the Manchester Metrolink that have significant components of street-running (to Eccles/Ashton/Airport) are the least successful and slowest parts of it. The street track also wears out more quickly and needs extensive repairs requiring lengthy route closures, as on the Eccles line and much of the Sheffield system.

In conclusion, IMO there is only limited hope for light rail expansion in the UK. I don't expect any new systems to open, but there is the potential for some extensions to existing systems, where current/former rail corridors can be used with minimal street running. Possible realistic extensions (excluding those already under construction) include:

• Blackpool - from Starr Gate along the South Fylde railway line towards Lytham
• Edinburgh - from Haymarket along the former Granton rail line (was phase 1b of the original proposal)
• Manchester - from Piccadilly with street running to Ashburys and then along the rail line via Reddish to Marple Rose Hill
• Sheffield - from Midland station via the Sheaf Valley alongside the main railway line towards Dore (it was 4 track and now only has 2 lines).

There is a lot of crayonista thinking by some transport planners, e.g. at TfGM, but in reality few of their suggested lines will ever be built. The Blackpool and Manchester suggestions above have the advantage of replacing subsidised and underused heavy rail services.

 

[WatcherZero]

Currently with the latest Local Government City Region Sustainable Transport Settlements a couple of weeks ago these Light Rail schemes are funded for delivery between now and 2029, I may have missed the odd one:

Manchester:
Three new stops on existing lines Oldham (Cop Road), Bury (Elton Reservoir) and Manchester (Victoria North/Sandhills).
Refurbishment of Bury and Heaton Park stops.
Funding for future rapid transit studies. (These are looking at a seperate longer distance network closer to Crossrail than existing light rail lines)
Greek Street Bridge, Stockport; to refurbish the rail line spanning road viaduct and make passive provision in the tunnel for an additional two track tram-train alignment to the airport.
7 Tram-trains for a trial scheme operating between Bury, Heywood, Oldham and Rochdale and the creation of the 26km line. These would also serve as prototypes for the next rolling stock fleet that would eventually replace the M5000.
Utility diversions for the new Manchester Piccadilly tram station/track realignments.
Design and development work for Metrolink elements of the HS2 Airport and Piccadilly rail stations.
Network renewal programs for 2022-2025 and 2025-2027

Sheffield:
Develop a business case for a combined Rotherham tram-train and rail station.
Depot refurbishment
Track Renewal and improvement of turnback locations,
Power renewal including additional substations,
Fleet renewal.

Birmingham:
11km Wednesbury to Brierley Hill extension
2km Very Light Rail demonstrator line between Coventry rail station and City Centre with possible future extension to Coventry Hospital
Renewal of Line 1 OHLE and tracks incorporating a significant redesign of the OHLE system.

West Yorkshire:
Funding to develop their mass transit plans

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The UK’s National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) has said that work on plans to develop mass transit systems for the country’s biggest cities “needs to start now” if the country is to live up to its climate change and levelling up commitments. The UK has seen limited development of modern LRT, with only six* new systems having been built since 1992. (quoted from "Tramways and Urban Transit" July 4 2022) *seven if the DLR is added. In contrast, France, which, like Britain, closed most of its tramways before 1960, has opened around 25 new systems since 1985.

Given the differences in devolved powers and funding mechanisms and, I suppose, political will, between the two countries, what are the chances of the UK catching up with France, bearing in mind the cancellation of four schemes by the then Labour Government in 2006?

I think that the will to change for climate change will now have to be balanced against the fiscal reality of the utterly vast amount already spent as a direct result of matters appertaining leading from the Governmental spending during the Covid-19 pandemic. The NIC exude a large amount of naivety if they ignore financial reality, considering the interest now payable to service the National Debt.

 

[DanNCL]

The outlook for light rail expansion doesn’t seem to be great for the remainder of this decade, but in the longer term into the 2030s and 2040s I think there’ll be another boom of light rail expansions, both entirely new networks and extensions to existing networks. The Tories won’t be in power forever and as we saw between 1997 and 2010 Labour are much more open to the idea of light rail expansion than the Tories.

I agree and even the few tram systems we do have, only 1 of them doesn't recycle old heavy rail track, which reduces the overall benefit of the projects.
I'm sure the idea of tunneling in cities that arent London is laughed out of the room, god knows how the tyne and wear metro ever got funding, however the problem with cities like Liverpool and Newcastle is that their systems have too high a cost for the stingy treasury to fund extensions, and that's with the proposed extensions being woefully unambitious still.
Extending merseyrail by building on the Liverpool loop line has been ruled out because its been slightly built on... zero ambition to build mass transit here, despite there being more motivation to do so than ever.

If we discount the tram-train extension we’d have two systems that didn’t reuse heavy rail tracks - Edinburgh and Sheffield.

With regard to Newcastle, by far the biggest hurdle to any further Metro expansion isn’t the cost but rather the incompetence of the PTE and the local authorities. After Nexus wasted millions of pounds on the Project Orpheus fantasy the treasury haven’t trusted them with any money for extensions. Even the last Labour government wouldn’t give Nexus additional funding after Project Orpheus, at the same time as they were approving new lines left right and centre in Manchester.
The local geography doesn’t help either. The only way the West end of Newcastle could ever be served by light rail is by tram; a Metro extension is near impossible because of the terrain.
It isn’t implausible to think that in 20-30 years time Newcastle may have both trams and the metro, becoming the first UK city outside London to have both since Glasgow lost its trams in the 1960s.

For Liverpool the one of the biggest hurdles to expansion has been the third rail system, as new third rail electrification is frowned upon these days. The 777s will sort that problem as they’ll be able to run on battery power, and can be retrofitted with pantographs too.

I think that the will to change for climate change will now have to be balanced against the fiscal reality of the utterly vast amount already spent as a direct result of matters appertaining leading from the Governmental spending during the Covid-19 pandemic. The NIC exude a large amount of naivety if they ignore financial reality, considering the interest now payable to service the National Debt.

I think the attitude towards that from many will change in 5-10 years time when the realisation finally hits people that they simply can’t prioritise reducing the national debt over combating the climate emergency if they actually want a habitable planet to be left in 100 years time.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think the attitude towards that from many will change in 5-10 years time when the realisation finally hits people that they simply can’t prioritise reducing the national debt over combating the climate emergency if they actually want a habitable planet to be left in 100 years time.

The interest repayable on the National Debt is reaching proportions that already mean the country has less to spend on essential services. From what you surmise, a stark choice of a habitable planet that whatsoever Britain does in mitigation, the countries such as the USA, China and India could obviate by their negativity.

 

[daodao]

as we saw between 1997 and 2010 Labour are much more open to the idea of light rail expansion than the Tories.

Do you remember Alistair Darling, who as Secretary of State for Transport, was responsible for the cancellation of several major light rail schemes in 2005? Since that date, no new light rail systems have opened in England, or even been developed as serious proposals.

 

[duncanp]

Do you remember Alistair Darling, who as Secretary of State for Transport, was responsible for the cancellation of several major light rail schemes in 2005? Since that date, no new light rail systems have opened in England, or even been developed as serious proposals.

And there have been several extensions to existing systems since the Conservatives came to power, such as in Manchester, Birmingham, Nottingham and the modernisation of the Blackpool system.

 

[DanNCL]

Do you remember Alistair Darling, who as Secretary of State for Transport, was responsible for the cancellation of several major light rail schemes in 2005? Since that date, no new light rail systems have opened in England, or even been developed as serious proposals.

One does have to question how much of that decision in 2005 was linked to Nexus wasting money on Project Orpheus, although one case of incompetence by one PTE shouldn’t have been taken out on everyone else.

And there have been several extensions to existing systems since the Conservatives came to power, such as in Manchester, Birmingham, Nottingham and the modernisation of the Blackpool system.

Apart from the Birmingham extensions and a single extension in Manchester all of those extensions were approved under the last Labour government.

 

[43066]

Assuming “light rail” for the purposes of this thread includes trams that run on old track beds, what of the proposed Croydon Tramlink extensions to Crystal Palace and Bromley town centre??

I think the attitude towards that from many will change in 5-10 years time when the realisation finally hits people that they simply can’t prioritise reducing the national debt over combating the climate emergency if they actually want a habitable planet to be left in 100 years time.

I doubt it. A lot of people probably recognise that whatever we do in this country will make little to no difference to the global picture.

People also tend to act as rational, self interested individuals and put their own interests over ideology. I couldn’t care less what the planet is going to be like in 100 years time and I certainly don’t want (and won’t vote for!) my lifestyle today being unduly compromised for people who haven’t even been born yet. Rightly or wrongly you’ll find that attitude is very widespread!

If we want to something truly useful towards protecting ourselves in the future perhaps we would be better off diverting a lot of the “net zero” budget into building better flood defences.

 

[DanNCL]

I doubt it. A lot of people probably recognise that whatever we do in this country will make little to no difference to the global picture.

People also tend to act as rational, self interested individuals and put their own interests over ideology. I couldn’t care less what the planet is going to be like in 100 years time and I certainly don’t want (and won’t vote for!) my lifestyle today being unduly compromised for people who haven’t even been born yet. Rightly or wrongly you’ll find that attitude is very widespread!

If we want to something truly useful towards protecting ourselves in the future perhaps we would be better off diverting a lot of the “net zero” budget into building better flood defences.

If one country successfully manages to prove that a climate conscious economy can work, many others will follow suit.

The way I look at is that even though I won’t be alive in 100 years, my grandchildren will be and I would want them to have a better life than myself.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have read that the global cost of "net-zero" will be between $3.5-5 trillion dollars a year globally (3.5T by the WEF). The money doesn't exist, so where do the governments expect to get this money from? Sounds like economic suicide, especially in a country such as the UK which even if we stopped existing it would make a very negligible impact on global emissions.

Whilst it is a lot of money, context is important. That amount is the equivalent of 4-6 times the annual US defence budget.

 

[bib]

The VLR concept is quite interesting, if you can avoid re-routing utilities and drop the cost of installation by 50-75% then there might be quite a bit more scope for some sort of light trams being put in in medium-sized cities. Although if you don't want to be stuck in traffic and get as far as putting in dedicated bus/tramways, then I still struggle to see the arguments for rail winning out unless its a very busy route.

 

[Busaholic]

Assuming “light rail” for the purposes of this thread includes trams that run on old track beds, what of the proposed Croydon Tramlink extensions to Crystal Palace and Bromley town centre??

So far as I know, the Crystal Palace extension, rashly promised in two successive mayoral election contests by Boris Johnson, is dead, and I've never heard of Bromley extension plans. Are you thinking of the mooted Bakerloo Line splitting at New Beckenham to termimi at Hayes and Beckenham Junction, with a very speculative suggestion the latter be extended to Bromley. Bromley to Croydon would be better served by a Tramlink extension from New Addington to Hayes, and bus thereafter.

 

[Arkeeos]

I have read that the global cost of "net-zero" will be between $3.5-5 trillion dollars a year globally (3.5T by the WEF). The money doesn't exist, so where do the governments expect to get this money from? Sounds like economic suicide, and even if it was much cheaper; for a country such as the UK - which even if we stopped existing it would make a very negligible impact on global emissions.

There isn't really a choice, its either pay that now or pay god knows how much more later.

 

[stuu]

The interest repayable on the National Debt is reaching proportions that already mean the country has less to spend on essential services. From what you surmise, a stark choice of a habitable planet that whatsoever Britain does in mitigation, the countries such as the USA, China and India could obviate by their negativity.

When worrying about the interest payable on the national debt, it is worth remembering that over half is held by the Bank of England, owned by the government. Does the debt really exist if you owe it to yourself?

 

[43066]

If one country successfully manages to prove that a climate conscious economy can work, many others will follow suit.

I don’t think that necessarily follows, certainly based on past experience up to now.

The way I look at is that even though I won’t be alive in 100 years, my grandchildren will be and I would want them to have a better life than myself.

I hate to say it but, if you really want to save the planet, the best thing to do is not to have any children of your own!

So far as I know, the Crystal Palace extension, rashly promised in two successive mayoral election contests by Boris Johnson, is dead, and I've never heard of Bromley extension plans. Are you thinking of the mooted Bakerloo Line splitting at New Beckenham to termimi at Hayes and Beckenham Junction, with a very speculative suggestion the latter be extended to Bromley. Bromley to Croydon would be better served by a Tramlink extension from New Addington to Hayes, and bus thereafter.

Thanks. The Crystal Palace extension would have been interesting. I think the favoured plan would have converted the heavy rail route from Beckenham Junction and run via South Norwood Country Park? That route does seem to lend itself quite well to a Tramway.

There was a (vague) plan to extend the tram link from Beckenham Junction into Bromley Town Centre. It’s one of those things that has been kicked around for years and never seems to get much traction.

One obvious issue would have been getting it up the hill from Shortlands towards Kentish Way and Bromley North.

There is a diagram in here as to what it might have looked like:

What might have been: how Croydon Trams should have grown

Have you ever wondered what the Croydon Tram network might look like if the Crystal Palace extension, or the much-talked-about Sutton line, had ever been built? Loyal reader Anthony Norris-Watson c…

insidecroydon.com

And a reference in the News Shopper to opposition to it:

TramStop group fighting Beckenham to Bromley Tramlink extension

ANTI-TRAM campaigners have ‘quite a fight’ on their hands to try and stop the proposed Tramlink extension from Beckenham Junction to Bromley town centre.

www.newsshopper.co.uk

ANTI-TRAM campaigners have ‘quite a fight’ on their hands to try and stop the proposed Tramlink extension from Beckenham Junction to Bromley town centre.

This is the view of the lead campaigner Rod Reed after learning Bromley Council would not oppose a scheme, even though it is more in favour of bringing the Docklands Light Railway to the borough.

 

[Busaholic]

I don’t think that necessarily follows, certainly based on past experience up to now.



I hate to say it but, if you really want to save the planet, the best thing to do is not to have any children of your own!



Thanks. The Crystal Palace extension would have been interesting. I think the favoured plan would have converted the heavy rail route from Beckenham Junction and run via South Norwood Country Park? That route does seem to lend itself quite well to a Tramway.

There was a (vague) plan to extend the tram link from Beckenham Junction into Bromley Town Centre. It’s one of those things that has been kicked around for years and never seems to get much traction.

One obvious issue would have been getting it up the hill from Shortlands towards Kentish Way and Bromley North.

There is a diagram in here as to what it might have looked like:

What might have been: how Croydon Trams should have grown

Have you ever wondered what the Croydon Tram network might look like if the Crystal Palace extension, or the much-talked-about Sutton line, had ever been built? Loyal reader Anthony Norris-Watson c…

insidecroydon.com

And a reference in the News Shopper to opposition to it:

TramStop group fighting Beckenham to Bromley Tramlink extension

ANTI-TRAM campaigners have ‘quite a fight’ on their hands to try and stop the proposed Tramlink extension from Beckenham Junction to Bromley town centre.

www.newsshopper.co.uk

Oh, yes, Bromley, such an obvious destination for the DLR! I admit to not ever having heard of 'plans' to extend Tramlink from Beckenham Junction, but I think they can be filed in the 'pie in the highest sky' file, and have never been propagated by anyone with any influence over Tramlink. I worked for Bromley Council on two separate occasions and know how they love to try to take control of any passing kites ripe for the flying, but hot air is not sufficient to keep them afloat.

 

[Cowley]

Can we not go too far down the road of discussing national debt and climate change please. I think if we don’t then there’ll be very little discussion about light rail in this thread.

Thanks

 

[plugwash]

surely it is overcoming the special nature of LRT development in this country that will allow for an eventual (hopefully...) proliferation of trams as a useful contributor to a region or cities transport.

The fundamental question is "Is a tram an expensive and inflexible bus or is it a budget metro"?

The modern tramways in the UK are for the most part budget metros. Their shorter stopping distances and legal classification as road vehicles allow them to mix with vehicles pedestrians etc in city centers avoiding the need for expensive viaducts or tunnnels. But their relatively small number of stops and heavy use of segregated rights of way allow them to achive the speed of metros.

 

[HSTEd]

oh they are, very, very different.

I would be interested in seeing an analysis of a de-facto metro style light rail solution vs something like the automated nominally heavy systems in Milan or Copenhagen. With a dedicated alignment either way, the latter has even less staffing and labour requirements than a tram.

And I know rubber tyre systems are considered to be the spawn of the devil on these forums - but many of them do register surprisingly good operational performance and have done for decades.

 

[Bald Rick]

I would be interested in seeing an analysis of a de-facto metro style light rail solution vs something like the automated nominally heavy systems in Milan or Copenhagen. With a dedicated alignment either way, the latter has even less staffing and labour requirements than a tram.

obviously running costs of a UTO (unattended) system are lower than light rail. At least they are if they don’t have much underground (Running costs ramp up significantly for underground sections due to additional maintenance, ventilation, and other systems costs).

 

[miklcct]

People also tend to act as rational, self interested individuals and put their own interests over ideology.

When no form of greener transport beats a £13 flight from Stansted to Stockholm in terms of both price and time, the rational choice is to emit the CO₂.

The fundamental question is "Is a tram an expensive and inflexible bus or is it a budget metro"?

The modern tramways in the UK are for the most part budget metros. Their shorter stopping distances and legal classification as road vehicles allow them to mix with vehicles pedestrians etc in city centers avoiding the need for expensive viaducts or tunnnels. But their relatively small number of stops and heavy use of segregated rights of way allow them to achive the speed of metros.

TfL is definitely doing the other way round. They are charged as buses and have the same limitation of buses (e.g. no bikes on board, no delay compensation).

obviously running costs of a UTO (unattended) system are lower than light rail. At least they are if they don’t have much underground (Running costs ramp up significantly for underground sections due to additional maintenance, ventilation, and other systems costs).

The capital cost is much higher due to the requirement of fully-segregated.

 

[DerekC]

obviously running costs of a UTO (unattended) system are lower than light rail. At least they are if they don’t have much underground (Running costs ramp up significantly for underground sections due to additional maintenance, ventilation, and other systems costs).

I doubt that a UTO (GoA4) system like Copenhagen saves a lot of money compared with a train-steward-attended-ATO (GoA3) system like DLR. From memory, a similar density of front line operational staff were deployed when Copenhagen opened, it's just that the same people act as station staff and train crew depending on need. The benefit is in making the system more flexible. The underground point is very valid and covers extra staff so that stations are permanently manned as well.

 

[Bald Rick]

I doubt that a UTO (GoA4) system like Copenhagen saves a lot of money compared with a train-steward-attended-ATO (GoA3) system like DLR. From memory, a similar density of front line operational staff were deployed when Copenhagen opened, it's just that the same people act as station staff and train crew depending on need. The benefit is in making the system more flexible. The underground point is very valid and covers extra staff so that stations are permanently manned as well.

I was thinking more like the UTO systems you see at airports, or the VAL, which have literally no one around.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Aug 2022 ==

The capital cost is much higher due to the requirement of fully-segregated.

That depends…

 

[javelin]

That depends…

Generally speaking, i don't think most of the former rail lines that are now light rail - or are proposed to be - would be suitable for such low-level automated systems without significant infrastructure investment.

For example some have things like level crossings that wouldn't be cheap to remove. These lines are light rail precisely because the government doesn't want to spend the money to provide segregated infrastructure, outside the big smoke that is.

 

[stuu]

I doubt that a UTO (GoA4) system like Copenhagen saves a lot of money compared with a train-steward-attended-ATO (GoA3) system like DLR. From memory, a similar density of front line operational staff were deployed when Copenhagen opened, it's just that the same people act as station staff and train crew depending on need. The benefit is in making the system more flexible. The underground point is very valid and covers extra staff so that stations are permanently manned as well.

I used the similar line 5 in Milan a couple of weeks ago. No staff anywhere, visibly anyway. There are plenty of unstaffed underground stations across Europe

 

[Busaholic]

TfL is definitely doing the other way round. They are charged as buses and have the same limitation of buses (e.g. no bikes on board, no delay compensation).

Which makes a journey on them much cheaper and hassle-free than would otherwise be the case! What delay compensation? You haven't bought a ticket in advance!

 

[AzureOtsu]

The Bristol-Bath railway path would make an excellent light rail route to relive the 48-49 buses along fishponds road and serve Lawrence hill to Yate

 

[JohnRegular]

The Bristol-Bath railway path would make an excellent light rail route to relive the 48-49 buses along fishponds road and serve Lawrence hill to Yate

You're not the first to think so, but the railway path is fantastically busy with cyclists and pedestrians.

Replacement with light rail would be a hugely unpopular move, besides which you might not even end up moving that many more people than the cycle path (sit and watch the Bristol end of the path in the morning peak!)

There just isn't enough room to have both, there's arguably too little room for the shared path as-is. Maybe, maybe you could squeeze in a single track tram route with loops, but you would end up with two routes that are unfit for purpose.