Tram train and transport in Marple and Stockport

[JohnBates]

Would that mean the loss of the Middlewood Way from Rose Hill to High Lane? Personally I wouldn't see that as a positive!

The GMSF also states that Middlewood way must be maintained. I presume it may be moved alongside re instated tracks.

"Ensuring the integrity and continued use-ability of the Middlewood Way as a walking, cycling and
bridle route is of paramount importance to the development’s delivery."

No one would want to lose it now

[admin]

One of the few good things to come out of the potential massive development in High Lane is the guarantee that TfGM will be engaged to provide the trainsport infrastructure.  However any tram/train/tram-train build will be likely to be at least 10 years from inception to completion.

This could be in the form of a line from Rose Hill to High Lane and a possible link to the Buxton line or the Hazel Grove Chord line into Hazel Grove.  Maybe even a rail link from Marple to Stockport!  Speculation on my part.  But it certainly won't cost the billions that Crossrail and Thameslink have.  At least planners see rail for urban transport as a development prospect now.

But officers have been approached.  And tram-train technology is out there.  It's been in the Netherlands and Germany for decades now.  And dual wattage trams can be employed so Romiley/Marple could still be electrified at 25kV for main line services.  However anything new does take extra time, as Sheffield are finding out.  And no, 3rd rail electrification (as suggested below) is not a viable option.

Would that mean the loss of the Middlewood Way from Rose Hill to High Lane? Personally I wouldn't see that as a positive!

[alstan]

That means then that it will be at least 10 years before the High lane development can start?

[CllrGeoffAbell]

One of the few good things to come out of the potential massive development in High Lane is the guarantee that TfGM will be engaged to provide the trainsport infrastructure.  However any tram/train/tram-train build will be likely to be at least 10 years from inception to completion.

This could be in the form of a line from Rose Hill to High Lane and a possible link to the Buxton line or the Hazel Grove Chord line into Hazel Grove.  Maybe even a rail link from Marple to Stockport!  Speculation on my part.  But it certainly won't cost the billions that Crossrail and Thameslink have.  At least planners see rail for urban transport as a development prospect now.

But officers have been approached.  And tram-train technology is out there.  It's been in the Netherlands and Germany for decades now.  And dual wattage trams can be employed so Romiley/Marple could still be electrified at 25kV for main line services.  However anything new does take extra time, as Sheffield are finding out.  And no, 3rd rail electrification (as suggested below) is not a viable option.

[Dave]

The tram trains will provide  greater capacity because there will be one every 12 minutes throughout the day.

[lindavee]

I don't know if the trains hold more people than a regular train but having additional trains running certainly increases the overall capacity. 
And I'm not sure what you mean Ringi. They certainly aren't slower trains than the old diesel trains so having additional services could only mean getting to your destination sooner as if you miss your train the next one is only a few minutes later?
I'm not sure what it is about forums that generate alot of negativity. Surely additional services which can connect with the metrolink network could only mean good things for both transport and the local economy?

   

Faster service? I assume by that you mean better braking and acceleration by trams than clapped out old diesel trains. Fair enough. But I remain to be convinced tram-trains would carry greater capacity. And if they did a lot more people would be standing up than is the case now. Progress? You decide.

assuming overhead electrification is too expensive, surely third rail electrification could be considered? People in the south east would speak up for it I am sure.

[ringi]

Faster service?

If a train runs every half hour, I have to get to the station at least 5 minutes before it is due to leave, or I have to leave when I am ready to leave and add on average 15 minutes to my travel time.

If a tram runs every 10 minutes, leaving when I am ready to leave adds on average 5 minutes to my travel time.  However Marple being on the end of the line gets the least benefit from this, as we have the highest travel time. 

[Melancholyflower]

Faster service? I assume by that you mean better braking and acceleration by trams than clapped out old diesel trains. Fair enough. But I remain to be convinced tram-trains would carry greater capacity. And if they did a lot more people would be standing up than is the case now. Progress? You decide.

assuming overhead electrification is too expensive, surely third rail electrification could be considered? People in the south east would speak up for it I am sure.

[ringi]

If the tram from Rose Hill was timed so you could change to the express (none stop) train at Romiley as for a lot of jobs it is quicker to walk from Manchester station then mess about with slow trams…..

[Dave]

Dave, I'm open to be convinced by you re train/tram but I have three fears I'd need y ou to address.
1. Would this result in longer journey times?
2. Would there be toilets?
3. Would cycles be carried?

So convince me Dave.

1 - No. Journey times will be faster.
2 - No. There are no toilets on trams, and probably not on tram-trains
3 - No. Bikes are not carried

So tram-train is not without its drawbacks. However, as anyone will know who travels by bus or on the London tube or any other urban rail or tram system around the world, most people can cope with a short journey on public transport without using the loo. And offsetting the drawback of not carrying bikes, there are major plus factors: a faster more frequent service using modern environmentally-friendly electric vehicles with greater capacity, and direct services to where people are actually going in the city centre, all of which should attract more people to use the service rather than clogging up the roads in their cars.

Lindavee writes:

Tram services on a tram-train line would be in addition to existing trains, not instead of, which is why our marple line was so favorable- they estimated they could run enough additional services around the existing trains to make it economically viable.

The plans are far from finalised at present, but AFAIK the current thinking envisages Rose Hill as the tram-train terminus, with its route to Piccadilly being via Bredbury. It seems that Marple station may still be served by conventional trains from New Mills and Sheffield, which will be routed to Piccadilly via Hyde. So wheels will still be able to take his bike on a train to Manchester!  But anyone catching a train from Marple would of course have the option of getting off at Romiley and taking the next tram-train in to town from the same platform.

[lindavee]

Like Dave I think the Marple -Manchester via Bredbury is a much more better option as I don't think many people from Stockport have Didsbury as their destination.

Wheels- Tram services on a tram-train line would be in addition to existing trains, not instead of, which is why our marple line was so favorable- they estimated they could run enough additional services around the existing trains to make it economically viable.
The additional trams would likely be just like the existing metro trams - i.e. not have toilets or cycle storage facilities but you would still have the option of waiting for the regular train. However for those who can hold their bladder for half an hour, don't have a bike and just want to get into Manchester, having additional trams running every few minutes would mean getting into town faster, and when orbital routes are later put in, getting across Manchester more directly too.

Dave, I'm open to be convinced by you re train/tram but I have three fears I'd need y ou to address.
1. Would this result in longer journey times?
2. Would there be toilets?
3. Would cycles be carried?

If you give me a no for 2 and 3 then that seems to me to be a reduction in the quality of service for very little benefit.

As I'm sure you're aware the people of Shaw hate the tram service they now have and are calling for the return of the rail service.

So convince me Dave.

[wheels]

Agreed. Metrolink from Stockport to Manchester city centre via East Didsbury would be agonisingly slow!

However, tram-train from Marple or Rose Hill to Piccadilly via Bredbury is an entirely different route different and should work very well.
Not in Marple there hasn't!

Dave, I'm open to be convinced by you re train/tram but I have three fears I'd need y ou to address.
1. Would this result in longer journey times?
2. Would there be toilets?
3. Would cycles be carried?

If you give me a no for 2 and 3 then that seems to me to be a reduction in the quality of service for very little benefit.

As I'm sure you're aware the people of Shaw hate the tram service they now have and are calling for the return of the rail service.

So convince me Dave.

[Dave]

Agreed. Metrolink from Stockport to Manchester city centre via East Didsbury would be agonisingly slow!

However, tram-train from Marple or Rose Hill to Piccadilly via Bredbury is an entirely different route different and should work very well.

There has as the letter states been massive support for transport developments in Stockport already

Not in Marple there hasn't!

[wheels]

A tram link to the metro at East Didsbury appears to me to have very few if any attractions.  A line wandering out to Parrs Wood and then taking a further 30 mins to the city seems to me the sort of pup that the people of Shaw were sold.

There has as the letter states been massive support for transport developments in Stockport already but the metro should be a very low priority.

[lindavee]

Thanks for contacting the TfGM Dave, without feedback to the TfGM I feel that these projects are very unlikely to happen.
I wrote to the TfGM about the lack of mention of tram provision to Stockport in the transport strategy and I received the reply I've attached below.
Though they maintain that they're very committed to Stockports transport needs, they made it clear that they felt that, due to costs, Stockport tram provision should be a longer term project.
I found this a rather frustrating response given the millions of pounds being sunk into a number of projects around the region - the smart motorway, the second city crossing and, as recently announced, the trafford line. These projects all represent a huge investment and as they wrote in an earlier report, tram train is significantly cheaper than a new metrolink line as lines do not need to be built from scratch.
Clearly Stockport remains a low priority for them and a Stockport metrolink line just something to consider if they have the budget after all the other projects are completed. We are one of the few boroughs without metrolink access and when the population booms and car travel becomes impossible its our area that's really going to feel it- it already takes about an hour to reach the M60 and I waste so much of my life stuck in traffic. If rail services were every few minutes and you were connected to multiple lines across Manchester I think a lot of people in our area would switch to public transport.
It would be great if everyone could feed back their views to TfGM- its about time Stockport received the same transport access as the rest of Greater Manchester.

[attachment deleted by admin]