http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4271012.stm

Work on the West London Tram is due to start in 2009

The timetable for building a tram system has been changed following
a public consultation which showed most people are against it.

Transport for London (TfL) was due to submit an application in
December to the government to get permission to start work on the
West London Tram.

That has been delayed to the summer of 2006 after 59% of people
opposed it.

The tram will run from Uxbridge to Shepherds Bush via Acton, Ealing,
Hanwell and Southall town centres.

Concerns raised by some of those in the consultation included loss
of trees, congestion, disruption to shops and displacement of
traffic on to residential streets.

TfL said it will take these concerns into account in order to help
refine and improve the design of the scheme.

The organisation also said it is now planning further local
consultation on some minor changes to the scheme and its design.

London's mayor Ken Livingstone said: "I remain totally committed to
West London Tram.

"TfL and Ealing Council have jointly decided to do this after taking
into account issues raised in the public consultation."

"The population in West London is growing rapidly and improving
public transport is key to preventing virtual gridlock on the
Uxbridge Road in the next decade."

Ealing Council leader Leo Thomson said: "The scheme is critical to
improving public transport, the environment and the local economy,
and we must make sure we get it right."

TfL said it hoped to start work on the system in 2009 and to have
the first trams running in 2013.

Did this area have trams before?

ahh trams running by 2013, why could we not start earlier and have it for 2012.

^ There's no need - there aren't Olympic activities in West London - at least not in this part.

^ There's no need - there aren't Olympic activities in West London - at least not in this part.

Thanks for that Monkey, my point is not that the tram would be a direct link to the venue, rather it would be an improvement of public transport which some people might use to access the Tube to get to the Olympic venue and thus give a better image of London rather than a construction site.

Has anyone got a plan of the route for this West London Tram line. I have to say I would have expected Nick Taylor by now to have posted some graphical details of the scheme ;)

Sorry I can't link for shit. But it basically runs along the entire length of the Uxbridge Road from Shepherds Bush Green to Uxbridge Town Centre, via Ealing, Hanwell, Southhall and Hayes. It recreates what was once one of Londons busiest tram routes. The main bone of contention are at the Eastern end of the route where the road is narrower. I think in Ealing it requires the closures of the road to traffic and the diversion of traffic through the surrounding residential streets. The same problem rears its head in Shepherds Bush, where the Northern part of the green would be closed to traffic. The schemes own predictions would see some residential roads have the double the traffic as people diverted to the A40. Of course the ideal solution would be a few stretches of tram tunnel. But this would add a lot of cost to quite a big tram line with no extra revenue generated. Plus the problem with short tunnels is the roads are narrow there you woudl need to demolish a short stretch of houses/flats to fit a tunnel entrance and the road, not a vote winner. The problem is their attempt to steamroller it through has not worked to well. I suppose they will pretend to consult stick with what they have got as they can't afford the alternatives and hope they can get it through.

http://www.transportforall.com/TFAMAG/Summer%202002/Pix/map02.jpg

A better map can be found here:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/trams/initiatives/wlt/roadshow-pdf/Finalnewroutemap.pdf

Wow, that's pretty extensive!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4996568.stm (http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4996568.stm)

Council rejects west London Tram

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40830000/jpg/_40830340_westlondontram203.jpg

Plans for a tram system in west London have been rejected by one of the three councils affected by the route.
The £650m scheme, which would run from Shepherd's Bush to Uxbridge, was unanimously opposed by the London Borough of Ealing.

Labour members who had previously supported the scheme did a u-turn and called for the West London Tram scheme to be scrapped.

The final decision on its future now lies with Transport for London.

The project has been deeply unpopular with local people who claim it will increase congestion and affect trade.

Last year, a public consolation on the tram scheme showed 59% of people opposed it.

Transport for London (TfL) was due to apply in December for permission to start work on the West London Tram, but has put it back until the summer.

Ealing Council leader Jason Stacey said they will now have to put together a case against the trams in case it goes to a public inquiry.

"There's a lot of people who live just off the Uxbridge Road," he said.

"The trams would create congestion all the way down the Uxbridge Road and push traffic down side streets.

"People are very, very worried at what the impact would be on them."

TfL had said previously it hoped to start work on the system in 2009 and to have the first trams running in 2013.

What the hell? Why the political U-turn? What's changed so much in 6 months?

What the hell? Why the political U-turn? What's changed so much in 6 months?

The council has gone from Labour to Tory.

I'm a tory, but I'm discusted by the partys tram policy. They have now messed things up here and Birmingham where they have talked about an impossible underground system instead of extending the feasable tram system.

Well if the residents of Ealing don't want it then don't give it to them! It's not like a few NIMBYs kicking up a fuss but quite a sizeable majority.

If the plan is completely derailed (though I'm sure Ken will force it through though with his magical mayor powers) they can always invest the money allocated for it toward extensions on the existing tram network from Croydon - perhaps even building up all the way to Brixton in preparation for the Cross River Tram (which as it stands would be an independent system - why not integrate?).

Oh god people like to moan don't they?

But i can bet you once the tram line opens they will be the first people to use it, and the first to complain when its late.

Its like the people who campaign to stop Tesco supermarkets to opening in their towns, yet the second it opens they can't resist the lure of 3p cans of beans and Tesco's own brand lager...........and neglect to use the Local businesses they cared so much about before the Tesco store opened.

I goddamn hate NIMBYS

That's too bad. Would the TfL decide to build this even with the lack of local support?

Bloody tories and nimbys!

Let's hope Ken somehow pushes this through. It's one of TfL's commitments under the five year investment programme.

Wow! didn't take long for Dave C's Tories to have their new green transport credentials washed away. KAPOW! and they're gone. Or should that be 'ker-excuse-me-terribly-sorry-ever-so-quietly-pop' and they're gone. Vote blue, screw the greens.

Why don't they put the tram in cut & cover tunnels in the town centres along the route? This may cost more but at least it would be a real solution. To me it has never been quite clear what the advantage is of turning bus lanes into tram tracks - it does not create any additional capacity.

Although I am sad to see a transport option like this shelved, to be honest it is really the wrong choice anyway. This line is far too long to be a tram link. Trams work best in denser central city locations, feeding the inner suburbs that the metro doesn't go, not a link from the suburban outskirts to suburban central (and then what, change to another mode of transport to continue?)

This should either be an S-bahn type rail link, or an extension to the tube. Whichever way, it should be possible to continue all the way into central London and pass through.

But I doubt that would be built.

Although I am sad to see a transport option like this shelved, to be honest it is really the wrong choice anyway. This line is far too long to be a tram link. Trams work best in denser central city locations, feeding the inner suburbs that the metro doesn't go, not a link from the suburban outskirts to suburban central (and then what, change to another mode of transport to continue?)

This should either be an S-bahn type rail link, or an extension to the tube. Whichever way, it should be possible to continue all the way into central London and pass through.

But I doubt that would be built.
Croydon tramlink has been very successful. These outer suburb systems serve the outer suburbs and these outer suburbs are themselves dense city locations. Not everything should be aligned to bring people to the very centre of London.

Croydon tramlink has been very successful. These outer suburb systems serve the outer suburbs and these outer suburbs are themselves dense city locations. Not everything should be aligned to bring people to the very centre of London.

I agree with Bob. Most of journeys made on the modern new tram systems in Europe are short distance. The Uxbridge-Shepards Bush trip will be made by a small minority of travellers.
This extension will help feeding the existing heavy rail hubs and relieve bus congestion.

the cost of the project looks very high though...the cost benefit ratio should be quite low I imagine.

the cost of the project looks very high though...the cost benefit ratio should be quite low I imagine.

Welcome to UK transport projects Manuel.

Sadly everything seems expensive, bureaucratic and very very slow in bringing about, especially compared to our European cousins who seem to construct whilst we just talk.

Croydon tramlink has been very successful. These outer suburb systems serve the outer suburbs and these outer suburbs are themselves dense city locations. Not everything should be aligned to bring people to the very centre of London.

I dunno, this looks like a long straigh run, from the outer suburbs directly to the inner suburbs. It looks like a commuter route and very different to the Croydon tramlink. Let's be honest. What advantage would this have over a bus?

^^ You have a point. It is different to Croydon in that it only uses existing roads whereas Croydon makes significant use of disused railway lines.

-The plus points are zero emmisions at point of delivery.
-Higher capacity than buses (a 3 car tram carries a lot more people than 3 busses)
-Trams take up less roadspace as they can be exactly guided along a route.
-The public seem much more ready to board a tram than a bus which encourages greater use of public transport. Perhaps it's snobery, perhaps less bouncing around, maybe it's just easier to figure out where it's going!

^^ You have a point. It is different to Croydon in that it only uses existing roads whereas Croydon makes significant use of disused railway lines.

-The plus points are zero emmisions at point of delivery.
-Higher capacity than buses (a 3 car tram carries a lot more people than 3 busses)
-Trams take up less roadspace as they can be exactly guided along a route.
-The public seem much more ready to board a tram than a bus which encourages greater use of public transport. Perhaps it's snobery, perhaps less bouncing around, maybe it's just easier to figure out where it's going!

Some good points Bob.

For some reason, Trams in the UK have a better record at getting car drivers to use public transport than buses. There are some stats on this from the Nottingham system, which I will try and dig up.

Personally I like the look of trams and think they can give a city a great edge in terms of it's image. In addition, Tram stops can often be more reasuring than a bus stop with a centrally controlled "next Tram" LCD screen etc.

^ Although to be fair they are introducing "next bus" LCD screens at many London bus stops now.

Still I'd rather trams over buses any day if not just for the looks.

Good on you TfL

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5031222.stm

West London tram 'still on track'

A west London tram system will still go ahead despite opposition by one of the boroughs affected by the network.

The £650m project, which would run from Shepherd's Bush to Uxbridge, was unanimously rejected by Ealing Council.

Labour admitted its support for the scheme was a major factor in its losing the council to the Conservatives earlier this month.

Transport for London said planning would continue regardless of the support of the councils involved.

Unpopular plan

A TfL spokesman said: "The scheme has not been dropped and in any case we don't actually need the support of Ealing Council nor of the other two councils involved (Hillingdon and Hammersmith and Fulham)."

The spokesman said there was a limit to how many buses can run in the area and a tram service would "greatly enhance public transport".

A public inquiry is expected to be held before any scheme could go ahead, with the final decision resting with the transport secretary.

Ealing's Labour group has now joined the Conservatives in opposing the scheme.

Ealing Council leader Jason Stacey has written to the leaders of the other two councils to persuade them to oppose the scheme.

The project has been unpopular among some residents who fear it will increase congestion and affect trade.

Last year, a public consultation on the tram scheme in the three boroughs concerned showed 59% of people opposed it.

TfL had said previously it hoped to start work on the system in 2009 and to have the first trams running in 2013.

Good on you TfL

Much as I sympathise with you, and appreciate that there will be a transport hole in west London when Crossrail collapses, TfL really need to take a long hard look at a scheme that is not going to be approved by the boroughs in the current council term. The most serious problem with the scheme as it stands is that there is an awful lot of street track; at best, this needs a high amount of goodwill and, although the objectors are not quite as popular as they claim to be (the council change was part of a national swing) the project is unexciting. In Hillingdon, where the road is wider, there is concern about traffic levels, trams from Uxbridge to Southall Broadway (not the station) making marginal sense from the loading point of view.

There are underused railway lines from Acton Town westwards along the Piccadilly Line (with four tracks, but missing Ealing town centre) and between Southall and factories near Brentford (but can you share with freight, or should the bridge over the Great West Road be rebuilt to link them to the Hounslow loop?). To the west, the Uxbridge Road route may just be salvageable if there is a coherent route offering network effects in Ealing. It may be better to run trams over Coldharbour Lane, which is now as good as a dead end to general road traffic, to Hayes, providing construction work does not take too long.

The West London tram scheme is still not the best to get tramway construction back on track, and it may be better to drop trams out of the equation entirely and perhaps extend the Underground over the Brentford branch to Southall.

I have to say, while I'm in favour of expanding Tram usage in London, I dont think West London actually needs a tram and nor it seems do the residents.

Ealing alone has excellent links: 3 tube lines, NR non-stop services to Paddington, Plenty of Buses and if it gets approved, Crossrail.

I can't say I appreciate the mentality of TfL on this one.

Well TfL are insisting that there is a limit to the number of buses running up and down Uxbridge road and therefore it's obvious that something is needed. Either expand the tube or carry out this tram scheme, which I'm sure will be popular once built.

I'm pleased this tram scheme has been blocked. It's piecemeal infrastructure and ill suited to the needs of this part of London. Crossrail or nothing, for me.

All I hear is that it hasn't been blocked and is still going ahead.

I spent some time reading the plans for the West London Tram on TFL's website today (http://www.tfl.gov.uk/trams/initiatives/wlt/index.shtml). They actually have all updated maps online.

I very much like trams, because unlike buses, they tend to have a regular time schedule, they provide more space, you have proper platforms, it is more comfortable and most importantly you avoid traffic bottlenecks. At least that is my European experience...

But then I read the plans for the West London Tram scheme - the way it is designed I think we can forget about the two main advantages: a regular time schedule and avoiding traffic bottlenecks. Between Shepherd's Bush and West Ealing about 80% of the tracks are in a shared traffic lane - I have never seen a tram scheme like that in my life before! On top of that the alignments are extremely complex and the number of crossings are outrageous. In cities like Brussels, Frankfurt or Amsterdam, most of the tracks are fully segregated from normal traffic. In the past it wasn't and it caused a large number of accidents, because when the tram has to share the lane with normal traffic you get a lot of accidents... trams have longer braking distances and unlike buses they cannot steer out of the way. Therefore in Brussels and Frankfurt they have put long sections of tram just under the street surface using the cut-and-cover method - they also call it "pre-metro". It is still cheaper than a normal tube system because it uses cheaper light rail technology (like the DLR); in locations where it is not possible to dig (because of other tunnels), it can still share the same lanes with other traffic; the number of underground stations are limited because for the stops it usually resurfaces.

TFL's scheme has nothing to do with the current European tram schemes, maybe with their tram schemes of the 40s but not with those of today. In cities like Frankfurt or Brussels bettween 0 and 20% of the total track length is shared with other traffic. For the West London Line we are talking 80% between West Ealing and Shepherd's Bush! On top of that the alignments and crossings are amongst the most complex I have ever seen (it changes side of the road every half mile). Finally, because in some town centres there is even not enough space for the shared traffic solution (because at busy crossroads you need to allow for a lane for traffic turning right), there are a number of towns (which actually tend to be quite nice along that route) where the houses on one side of the road need to be demolished. To verify for yourself, just have a look at the messay situation at the alignment problems in Southall ([http://www.tfl.gov.uk/trams/initiatives/wlt/consultation2005.shtml and click on Southall Broadway)

Bottom line, I think we need to let Bikkel as the greatest defender of tram and trolleybus systems have a go at TFL....

^^^ Sorry, but I live in Frankfurt and the vast majority of tram lines are fully shared with traffic. No tram lines in Frankfurt goes underground. What you may have confused this with is part of the U-bahn is a "pre-metro" where it goes underground in the city center, but out in most of the suburbs it still shares the road with traffic.

Otherwise I agree with you. This line looks like a disaster waiting to happen. Take a look at this map and see how many stops there are. This would take forever on a normal tram shared with street traffic.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/trams/initiatives/wlt/wlt-roadshow-images/WLT_SchematicBaseMap.pdf

This should be an underground extension, if only cut and cover. Trams are far better than buses (although I have a real soft spot for your double deckers), but trams are still a poor mans underground metro.

^^^ Sorry, but I live in Frankfurt and the vast majority of tram lines are fully shared with traffic. No tram lines in Frankfurt goes underground. What you may have confused this with is part of the U-bahn is a "pre-metro" where it goes underground in the city center, but out in most of the suburbs it still shares the road with traffic.

Yes I probably mean the "U-bahn" (for instance the track that emerges from a tunnel in front of the Messeturm, do you call that the tram or U-Bahn?). And although I agree a lot of trams share the road with other traffic, the roads in Frankfurt are very wide compared to London. I have never been stuck in cab behind a tram in Frankfurt. Although I am just an occasional visitor I have the impression that even when the tram shares the road, there is always enough space for cars to pass by in both directions? Am I right or wrong?

Yes I probably mean the "U-bahn" (for instance the track that emerges from a tunnel in front of the Messeturm, do you call that the tram or U-Bahn?). And although I agree a lot of trams share the road with other traffic, the roads in Frankfurt are very wide compared to London. I have never been stuck in cab behind a tram in Frankfurt. Although I am just an occasional visitor I have the impression that even when the tram shares the road, there is always enough space for cars to pass by in both directions? Am I right or wrong?

Well, you are sort of wrong. There are three links to the Messeturm.

1) Ubahn. This is fully underground. Line 4 is a fully subterranian line and is not one of the "pre-metro" lines like U5. U4 is a full metro

2) Tram. No. 17 Tram is a new line that is fully above ground. It starts sharing the street with other traffic, but then has it's own lines in the center medium when it passes the messe. There is no underground section on this line or any tram lines in Frankfurt.

3) S-bahn. Several lines stop in the middle of the Messe. The S-bahn is a commuter/suburban rail network, a bit like Thames Link in London.

As for the roads being wider in Frankfurt, this is only partly correct. The far majority of roads in Frankfurt are the same width as in London. But when the built out the city, they did create a few "grander" avenues, with the intentions of tram lines passing seperately down the center. There are not a lot of these, but when travelling on the trams, you do see more than you would normally.

Some of these have no tram lines anymore, as in the 1980's, many of the trams were replaced by the U-bahn.

There are still plenty of places where it is quite tight when trams share the road. Often, the road is wide enough for one lane of traffic to still flow in each direction, but not always.

By the way, the road in front of the Messe is the widest in Frankfurt.

Hope this helps answer your question.

Wow! didn't take long for Dave C's Tories to have their new green transport credentials washed away. KAPOW! and they're gone. Or should that be 'ker-excuse-me-terribly-sorry-ever-so-quietly-pop' and they're gone. Vote blue, screw the greens.

I'm sorry but the residents do not want the system. The roads in the area are so narrow and busy, its simply untennable

Local council elections are about local issues.

I think you mean some local residents don't want it and are making themselves heard. There are many in the area who would benefit from the scheme and many in favour of it. The road may be narrow but it could be made to work by moving the pavement in areas as was suggested. Plus the buses are simply going to get too congested.

I think you mean some local residents don't want it and are making themselves heard. There are many in the area who would benefit from the scheme and many in favour of it. The road may be narrow but it could be made to work by moving the pavement in areas as was suggested. Plus the buses are simply going to get too congested.

In fact they are not just narrowing some of the pavements, they are also demolishing houses in some of the town centres along the route. And yet in all these critical locations the tram will share the normal traffic lanes, even worse, cars and buses will not be able to pass the trams in some of these locations. On top of that alignments are very disruptive, just look at how often the tram changes the side of the road and how often cars driving straight will have to cross the tracks.

The only way to get it really to work is to move certain parts underground (particularly between West Ealing and Shepherd's Bush).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6929064.stm

Controversial tram plan derailed


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40830000/jpg/_40830340_westlondontram203.jpg

Controversial plans for a tram system in west London have been scrapped in favour of buses.

Mayor Ken Livingstone said it would be more practical for buses to run between Uxbridge and Shepherd's Bush once the Crossrail project was up and running.

He said the high-speed rail link across central London, which has yet to be approved, would "significantly increase public transport capacity" in the area.

Opponents feared the tram would increase traffic in residential roads.

Different solutions

Transport for London (TfL) proposed the tram saying it would be a massive investment, boost the economy and make travel much easier in west London.

But Ealing Council turned down the £650m scheme amid concerns of increased congestion and a downturn in trade.

Ken Livingstone said: "A positive decision on Crossrail will mean that substantially improved bus services become a practical alternative to a tram along the Uxbridge Road to meet the need for more public transport, boost the local economy and to deal with rising congestion in the area."

Welcoming the decision councillor Jason Stacey, of Ealing Council, said: "Residents have overwhelmingly expressed the view that the proposed West London Tram was not the answer to the area's transport problems.

"Ealing's traffic problems require different solutions and we will be working constructively with TfL to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion in the borough."

Nimby scumlords, let them have their buses and their polution and their congestion.

I would make sure they get the most stinky polluting buses possible. Lets hope the tram money can go on people in the south of London who would appreciate an impressive tram system.

In all fairness, the concept of this scheme was rather flawed to start with. It is to Livingstone's credit to realize that and not to throw good money after bad money. The budget for the West London tram scheme is better allocated to crossrail, increasing the chances of the latter going ahead.

Better to link the buses into a crossrail network to maximise use for both modes.

Looking at Tubeman's Railway Atlas, I wonder if it is theoretically possible to re-open West Drayton - Uxbridge, and turn it into an extra Crossrail branch.

I agree with Zim Flyer. Spend the money on improving transport in south London. I live in Streatham and we don't have the benefit of turn up and go Tube frequencies that you have in Shepherds Bush, Ealing and Acton. We thought we might get the East London Line extension but that went to Crystal Palace instead. Then the Cross River Tram was talked about but it only goes as far as Brixton, which already has the Victoria Line! Meanwhile the A23 Streatham High Rd is one of the most traffic-clogged and unpleasant in London and nothing is done about it. If TfL proposed a tram along this road there would:
(A) be enough room - it's mostly dual carriageway
(B) be tons of passengers - everyone has to wait ages for a train at the moment
(c) be good for the environment, as there are a lot of car journeys made over local distances due to poor frequency of public transport

Trams are one of the best form of urban transit in terms of moving people short to medium distances along routes where buses are too congested / dirty and Metro is too expensive to build.

You might have to wait for Crossrail 3.

This was completely unnecessary and would have been a waste of money - much better spent elsewhere, like South London (and I'm a north/west Londoner!)

Thank God this stupid idea has finally been scrapped!

I am a supporter of trams and other light rail ideas, but this was a ludicrous plan, The Uxbridge Road is one of the busiest roads in London and already suffers if traffic lights are out or if road works are messing up the lanes.

Its just a shame that £30M has been spent on it when it could have gone to a more suitable transport plan such as Cross Rail, extensions to the DLR/Tramlink (to Streatham possibly- i thought i heard once of a vague idea to take it up that far??) or even an improved bus lane over the route. I would have even accepted more work on CRT but no........TfL fought for something that councils along the route have always fought against.

Great news!

Mind you, I like trams and dislike buses with a passion but this was just a stupid idea. Trams are the wrong solution for the specific problems. Ideal would probably be a tube but using Crossrail as a heavy backbone to align the bus network with seems a good enough idea.

Its just a shame that £30M has been spent on it when it could have gone to a more suitable transport plan such as Cross Rail, extensions to the DLR/Tramlink (to Streatham possibly- i thought i heard once of a vague idea to take it up that far??) or even an improved bus lane over the route. I would have even accepted more work on CRT but no........TfL fought for something that councils along the route have always fought against.

Yes it is a shame £30 mio has been spent on it, which could have bought another little extension to the DLR, but I have to admire Ken for being brave enough to admit the mistake and thereby saving us £800 mio which it would have cost to build the thing. This £800 mio will go quite a while in solving the funding gap on Crossrail.

In a certain way, this announcement about the West London Tram makes me very optimistic about Crossrail, because both are interrelated. I assume Crossrail going ahead is increasingly a "fait accompli".

Please can anyone show me a city, somewhere in this vast world of ours, where a tramline has resulted in a "downturn in trade" as Ealing Council has suggested.

I have lived in many a city with trams, and I live in one now. And nowhere have I ever heard of such nonsense.

Please can anyone show me a city, somewhere in this vast world of ours, where a tramline has resulted in a "downturn in trade" as Ealing Council has suggested.

I have lived in many a city with trams, and I live in one now. And nowhere have I ever heard of such nonsense.

The Nimbies won...as usual with false arguments.
But anyway, as JGG mentioned, this project is competing too much with Xrail on too many modelised journeys.

meh, what does it matter really, west london didnt want the investment but south london was desperate for it, the cancellation of west london tram has apparantly made the south london leg of cross river more secure with the councils there making sure that the southorn route gets built even if their north london counterparts aren't keen, it is very likely that only building it to waterloo will mean it is constructed much sooner

Please can anyone show me a city, somewhere in this vast world of ours, where a tramline has resulted in a "downturn in trade" as Ealing Council has suggested.

I have lived in many a city with trams, and I live in one now. And nowhere have I ever heard of such nonsense.

I can't remember where I read it but I could swear I heard that trade in the Hillsborough area of Sheffield went down quite a lot when the Tram line was being constructed due to all the disruption being caused and how difficult it actually became to get there. I seem to recall it saying that it is only now recovering though I might be making that up and this was several years ago.

The Nimbies won...as usual with false arguments.
But anyway, as JGG mentioned, this project is competing too much with Xrail on too many modelised journeys.

No I disagree about some of the arguments being fake. The problem was that the Uxbridge Road is the only East West distributer road between the A40 and the M4. The problem was while the Western end of the road only began to see substanial development in the interwar period, and therefore the road is generally wide enough. Large chunks of it are four lanes wide along this stretch. The Eastern stretch is entirely different matter. The stretch from West Ealing through to Shepherds Bush is only two lanes wide, and some sections are a fairly narrow two lanes for such a busy road. The propsal required the closure of sections of this road in Ealing and Shepherds Bush. Now if these towns had light industrial sites next to their town centres instead of housing then it would of been relatively easy to route a small bypass through with relatively little controversy. But that was not possible here. People understandblt objected to through traffic being diverted through their formally quiet residential streets and being told they were no longer going to be allowed to park outside their own house. Back in the 90's they did a study over potential new tram routes abd they chose the Uxbridge road route as it was once one of London's busiest tram routes. But that was before mass car ownership. If this had been another country the Western half would have been built above ground and the Eastern half underground.

A scheme that blight's the area and people that it is meant to relieve is flawed and I argued this point at the time. Good ridiance to a crap Idea, shame about the £30m up the swanny.
Why would a south london tram stop at Brixton that already has the tube, Surely such a scheme would be bettter off running through Streatham, Norbury and connecting with the existing Tram network in Croydon?
Is this not logical or am I just being thick?

Please can anyone show me a city, somewhere in this vast world of ours, where a tramline has resulted in a "downturn in trade" as Ealing Council has suggested.

I have lived in many a city with trams, and I live in one now. And nowhere have I ever heard of such nonsense.

Sheffield!

The Nimbies won...as usual with false arguments.
But anyway, as JGG mentioned, this project is competing too much with Xrail on too many modelised journeys.

I can't remember where I read it but I could swear I heard that trade in the Hillsborough area of Sheffield went down quite a lot when the Tram line was being constructed due to all the disruption being caused and how difficult it actually became to get there. I seem to recall it saying that it is only now recovering though I might be making that up and this was several years ago.

As Starslight correctly said there was a huge downturn in business across the routes of the trams when it was first constructed especially in Hillsborough as the line is constructed on the high street. Many did go out of business for the length of time you couldn't get into the shops or get passing traffic.
Also many business in the City centre also suffered as traditional routes to them were cut.

It took 10 years for many of the business' to recover and for new ones to enter the area, and still 15 years later the areas are finally the thriving shopping areas they were before the trams.

since Sheffield many lessons have been learnt. For example, how many businesses in Nottingham went under whilst the tram system was built. Despite it's problems, there are many people who want Sheffield's system to be extended.

In the construction of the Edinburgh tram system they are doing it in small phases so as to not close down entire streets and keep things fluid.

Like I've said before, it's hard enough to get Light Rail as it is in this country, so let the people of West London have buses and Light Rail can go to the people who will appreciate it, ie the people of South London or Manchester etc.

I agree with Zim Flyer. Spend the money on improving transport in south London. I live in Streatham and we don't have the benefit of turn up and go Tube frequencies that you have in Shepherds Bush, Ealing and Acton. We thought we might get the East London Line extension but that went to Crystal Palace instead. Then the Cross River Tram was talked about but it only goes as far as Brixton, which already has the Victoria Line! Meanwhile the A23 Streatham High Rd is one of the most traffic-clogged and unpleasant in London and nothing is done about it. If TfL proposed a tram along this road there would:
(A) be enough room - it's mostly dual carriageway
(B) be tons of passengers - everyone has to wait ages for a train at the moment
(c) be good for the environment, as there are a lot of car journeys made over local distances due to poor frequency of public transport

Trams are one of the best form of urban transit in terms of moving people short to medium distances along routes where buses are too congested / dirty and Metro is too expensive to build.

I agree, we need much improved links between Croydon and Brixton along the A23 through Thornton Heath, Norbury & Streatham. All we have is busses and thats it. South London is always the poor neighbour when it comes to transport in London. Just look at the tube map and the lack of it in South London esp. South East and South Central.

West london is richer so more have cars so thats probably why they don't want a tram, it would disrupt their precious car journeys. In S London less people have cars and rely totally on the bus.

'Spend tram cash on East London Line'
By Dan Menhinnitt

Money saved from scrapping West London tram plans should be used to pay for the second phase of the East London Line according to Wandsworth Council.

London's Mayor Ken Livingstone announced last week the £650 million scheme had been dropped due to opposition from west London councils.

Wandsworth Council hope the Mayor will instead divert the cash to build a new rail link connecting Clapham Junction to Surrey Quays and Canary Wharf.

The first phase of the East London Line, which will link West Croydon and Crystal Palace, is scheduled to open in 2010, in time of the 2012 Olympics.

But there is currently no cash for the second section to Clapham Junction.

Wandsworth Council's transport spokesman Guy Senior said: "Transport for London had already set aside the money for the tram. Now this is not going ahead what better way for the Mayor to show his support for south London than to earmark a small part of the cash for the East London Line extension?

"Instead of relying on the Government, the Mayor would be able to take control and ensure the extension was completed by 2012.

"The tram was hugely unpopular among west Londoners while there is universal agreement on the need to improve connections from Clapham Junction. By giving an early go ahead the Mayor will begin the task of reversing years of under-investment in the south London rail network."

The council believe the new service would help cope with a predicted population growth of 118,000 over the next ten years in the four south London boroughs served by the line.

In the same period the number passenger at Clapham Junction are set to rise by around 30 per cent.

The second phase of the East London Line would mean the completion of a new London orbital route and mean a fast connection to East London with services every fifteen minutes and a single change for Canary Wharf.

Among the council supporting the East London Line campaign are Croydon. Merton and Wandsworth.

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/topstories/display.var.1600434.0.spend_tram_cash_on_east_london_line.php


Not bad, although I wouldn't be surprised if this tram scheme was scrapped to increase the chances of Crossrail. Probably by transfering the funds from tram to Crossrail as well.

It's a train scheme.

Trams are best used to link out-lying neighbourhoods with town centres like Richmond, Ilford, Croydon, Lewisham creating a ring of alternative transport that can act as feeders to the tube but also provide alternative public transport for the town centres and for journeys that don't follow the normal suburb to central london to suburb pattern.

A tram is the wrong solution for parts of central london.

A tram is the wrong solution for parts of central london.

They worked once and if they had multiple lines and were connected to rail links via out line areas or park and rides in others they could be a success.

If not trams then perhaps trolley buses could be considered, anything which reduces fuel ommissions in our cities can only be good.

since Sheffield many lessons have been learnt. For example, how many businesses in Nottingham went under whilst the tram system was built. Despite it's problems, there are many people who want Sheffield's system to be extended.

In the construction of the Edinburgh tram system they are doing it in small phases so as to not close down entire streets and keep things fluid.

Like I've said before, it's hard enough to get Light Rail as it is in this country, so let the people of West London have buses and Light Rail can go to the people who will appreciate it, ie the people of South London or Manchester etc.

Yeah they may want to extend the system in Sheffield but no-one is willing to put the cash up because the government certainly won't.
The only issue with trams in Sheffield is the hills the city is built on. the majority of people live in the hilly areas and all the industry and facilities like the town centre, universites and the majority of big companies are in the valleys, to enable the system to grow as in other cities they would need more powerful trams capable of going up some of the inclines that exist in Sheffield, it's a known fact that in bad weather even some buses have difficulties making up the steeper hills. Many extensions have been proposed but none seem to have come to fruition because of the two issues.

The idea behind the Cross River Tram is to alleviate overcrowding on the central sections of the Northern and Victoria lines that is why the current terminal is in Brixton and is currently located in area where it could be expanded from, further into south west London, but currently they want to build an initial system.

If it gets given the go ahead then i can see southern extensions to from Brixton to Streatham (thru tulse hill), connecting in with a possible future extension of Croydon Tramlink (after traffic issues have been sorted) and from peckham thru to crystal palace.

Admittedly they would probably take another 20 years. since CRT isn't planned for completion till 2015

The tram will be overloaded from day 1, using the predicted traffic and an even load throughout the day (which isn't the case), so extension might be a bit hard, though City Tram will at least provide a higher frequency to Brixton, allowing for that to be extended (and more trams for Peckham corridor, which has less alternatives).

Of course, extending the Bakerloo line and the Charing Cross branch of the Northern line (and splitting the northern in two, allowing a 50% capacity increase, and better reliability) southwards would be far better at doing the job.

The tram will be overloaded from day 1, using the predicted traffic and an even load throughout the day (which isn't the case), so extension might be a bit hard, though City Tram will at least provide a higher frequency to Brixton, allowing for that to be extended (and more trams for Peckham corridor, which has less alternatives).

Hence why the want to construct the central sections because the know it will have a huge patronage and with a 2 minute headway i think it'll work. It is hoped that CRT 60-70,000 people in the central area during the peak working period (8am -6pm)

Of course, extending the Bakerloo line and the Charing Cross branch of the Northern line (and splitting the northern in two, allowing a 50% capacity increase, and better reliability) southwards would be far better at doing the job.

Agreed. But without those plans in the pipeline what else are we gonna look at for space on our cities overcrowded transport system??

Regarding Tube extensions in South London, Bakerloo is the most probable (http://icsouthlondon.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0300southwark/tm_objectid=16685898&method=full&siteid=50100&headline=tube-line--may-extend-south-within-20-years--name_page.html) in the short term. Perhaps splitting the southern part of the Northern Line to give it a second terminus. Extending the Victoria Line is not going to happen due to crowding issues, perhaps somewhere after Crossrail 2.

Hence why the want to construct the central sections because the know it will have a huge patronage and with a 2 minute headway i think it'll work. It is hoped that CRT 60-70,000 people in the central area during the peak working period (8am - 6pm)wow, looks like they have changed their predictions (which were roughly 220k per 18 hour weekday) so that they aren't as stupid as before. Still very likely that peak trams will be crush loaded from day 1, especially am peak northbound over Waterloo Bridge.Agreed. But without those plans in the pipeline what else are we gonna look at for space on our cities overcrowded transport system??moving some of those people onto a different overcrowded transport route so that very crowded can become a little bit less crowded for a couple of years, until the number of passengers reach the same levels again?

Double-decker bendy-buses might work :P

Yeah they may want to extend the system in Sheffield but no-one is willing to put the cash up because the government certainly won't.
The only issue with trams in Sheffield is the hills the city is built on. the majority of people live in the hilly areas and all the industry and facilities like the town centre, universites and the majority of big companies are in the valleys, to enable the system to grow as in other cities they would need more powerful trams capable of going up some of the inclines that exist in Sheffield, it's a known fact that in bad weather even some buses have difficulties making up the steeper hills. Many extensions have been proposed but none seem to have come to fruition because of the two issues.

The hills are one of the few technical issues that aren't a problem in sheffield! In fact, Sheffield trams are much heavier and more powerful than in other cities to cope with the hills. When the snow comes down, everyone switches to the trams while the buses are stuck in the valleys.

The two main reasons why extensions haven't happended is because of a lack of political will (both central government in terms of funding and local council in not promoting transport effectively) and because people are still worried about parking/business impacts due to the horrible mismanagement of the original network installation.

A tram is the wrong solution for parts of central london.


Didnt London have trams in the past?
And Ive heard something about closing Oxford street to traffic and to have a tram instead.
Now that would make sense imo.
Right now the street is just blocked all day by all those busses which go through.


Or it would be great if theyd relive the Kingsway tram tunnel:

http://www.urban75.org/photos/london/images/lon451.jpg
http://www.pendar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Tube/Kingsway/6_Kingsway01.jpg
http://www.derelictlondon.com/160f150a0.jpg
http://www.pendar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Tube/Kingsway/6_Kingsway06.jpg
http://photos.ltmcollection.org/images/max/x5/i00005x5.jpg

Why did they close it off in the first place? :ohno:

Or it would be great if theyd relive the Kingsway tram tunnel:

Why did they close it off in the first place? :ohno:

Some of the tunnel is still in place you can even see the old hoardings on the walls as well as the names of the stops, but the southern end was cut when they constructed the strand underpass tunnel. TfL have said that if trams are reintroduced to the streets of central London that this route would not be used as it doesn't meet curent safety requirements or be suitable for the tram lengths that we wuould need, anyway in the autumn of 2006, work began to convert part of the abandoned tunnel between the Embankment and the Strand Underpass into a new commercial space. This involved the demolition of the existing pedestrian subways under Waterloo Bridge, and extensive construction in the bridge's undercroft. So it won't be used as a means of transport again.

^^ What a shame really.
They should have kept it.
Anyways, heres a great site btw with pics of that line, the Kingsway tunnel and loads of other stuff:

http://www.derelictlondon.com

There's also a road tunnel now in the old Kingsway tunnel from Waterloo Bridge to Kingsway anyway.

Those double decker trams were amazing, especially the photos in the underground station! What a loss to London this was. Hong Kong was so smart to keep their double decker trams! But they never had a tunnel like this.