apologies if this has been discussed recently, but what has happened to the supertram extensions?

i am keen for it to happen but since all the knowledge-less whingers of Ranmoor objected last year theres been no mention...

either line will be good; the areas it wishes to reach in rotherham could do with it on either line and dore and ranmoor have so many people selfishly trundelling their one-occupant car every day into the centre but overcrowded buses (and trains from dore) that it would be good for either to go ahead.

i think it may be in the hands of the DfT to approve funding... anyone know?

e x

Originally posted by empea


i think it may be in the hands of the DfT to approve funding... anyone know?

e x

I think you're right. I know all the consultation was complerted in Feb/march and this was left with the PTE & PTA to make a decision.

I think the consulataion was favourable although the anti-brigade are shouting the loudest.

If you want an official answer e-mail traveline@sypte.co.uk

They were planning to run a line up towards Totley following the railway line for a lot of the way. I went into sainsburys on Archer road to look at the plans over a year ago and chatted to some of the people there to answer questions. They hadn't decided which route it would take when leaving the railway line and coming across to Abbeydale road, I remember one posibility was to bring it across part of Millhouses park. The guy I spoke to though did say it probably wouldn't get off the planning boards for at least ten years.

Originally posted by empea
either line will be good; the areas it wishes to reach in rotherham could do with it on either line and dore and ranmoor have so many people selfishly trundelling their one-occupant car every day into the centre but overcrowded buses (and trains from dore) that it would be good for either to go ahead. it has been said several times, the tram should be built in sheffield before evne thinking of stinkin Rotherham !
Secondly, the thram is needed on the Abbeydale Rd corridor

Originally posted by Captain_Scarlet
Secondly, the thram is needed on the Abbeydale Rd corridor
That'll be a squeeze :suspect:

I'm sure the plans had the tram coming along the railway for most of the way from town and the guy I spoke to said something about putting stations or tramstops at where there are now bridges, so heeley Bottom, and at woodseats road and then one to serve both Tesco and sainsbury's, I'm sure there were others but it's late and the brain is starting to malfunction.
Anyway this solves the problem of overloading Abbeydale road but wait for the complaints from the 'richer' home owners on Abbeydale road south as the tracks did go on that bit.

We have had this discussion before on the forum. I seem to be the only one on this thread (with the exception of Strix?) who is not in favour of extending the supertram in all directions. The assumption that because it works in some parts of Sheffield it will work in all is in my view false.

About two years ago, there were plans drafted to extend the supertram to Dore and Millhouses, with a link to the city to Rotherham, and also to extend it to Ranmoor. This did indeed result in fierce opposition, but it was not the 'nimby' factor - i.e. opposition from Abbeydale Road South and Ranmoor residents - which put these plans into (permanent?) abeyance. Rather it was lack of finance and concern about revenue streams.

The building of a supertram requires enormous sunk costs, which can only be recovered over the very long term. Therefore, it is not a viable commercial proposition and can only be done with large government subsidies. In the case of supertram, these are likely to come from three sources, local government, central government and the European Union. The local authorities are currently strapped for cash. The EU would probably provide part of the funding. But the central government basically said no (as they have with proposals put forward by other cities).

A cost-benefit analysis of the likely implications of extending the supertram to Dore and Ranmoor was commissioned by the proponents of the scheme. I read the parts of this document that were made available to the public and found them to be deeply flawed and unconvincing. For example, it talked of the 'regeneration benefits' to Dore and Millhouses of extending the supertram. These areas don't need regenerating. They have never been industrial areas and never will be. The report also conceded that the environmental benefits to these areas were in fact minimal. The 'plans' displayed for the benefit of local residents in Sainsburys were extremely vague and left many questions unanswered. Indeed, if they were meant to persuade us of the merits of the extensions, they had precisely the opposite effect.

The fact is that the enormous disruption and environmental damage which would caused to established residential areas such as Dore, Millhouses and Ranmoor would far outweigh any potential benefits. For example, Abbeydale Road South is actually quite narrow. Supertram vehicles, weighing 52 tons each, are the largest and heaviest public transport vehicles on British roads. The extension of the supertram to Dore - enabling these 52 ton juggernauts to trundle and judder their way down Abbeydale Road South - would mean widening the road, meaning the loss of housing on at least one side and also the destruction of mature trees on one side of Ecclesall woods.

Construction firms and associated businesses would certainly benefit from these extensions, but not so taxpayers or even local residents (the demand for these extensions is not coming from them). A much better idea would be to make use of existing transport arteries, such as improvements to the road network and also the rail link from Dore. The irony is however that at the present time, it is probably easier to obtain EU funds for tram extensiions than for train extensions.

the bastds down in wickersley/bramley refused our extension, so we're not getting hooked up. yet... (one day, hopefully)

admittedly it would have caused problems, but think of the future. sadly the locals couldnt seem to do that and the majority probably wouldnt be around to see the results anyway. old morbids.

I've been using the tram to commute to work for five years now. My experience is that the tram works well on dedicated track away from other traffic, but can be a painful experience on normal roads.

In 2000 my journey in the morning from Middlewood to Carbrook took less than thirty minutes, - now it is often fifty minutes....sometimes longer. The journey time from the Cathedral to Carbrook is the same as it was in 2000, but the journey from Middlewood to the Cathedral has increased from 15 minutes in 2000 to sometimes longer than 30 minutes now.

The evening return journey is even worse, - thirty five minutes in 2000....rarley less than an hour now; and again it is the conjestion on shared trackway that is the trouble. I never actually timed it but I'm pretty sure that from the Cathedral to Middlewood the tram spends more time staionary than it does actually moving.

It's a great relief to be retired, - I didn't have to retire but just couldn't resist the temptation to be released from the purgatory of that damn tram !

Any idea that the tram could be used along traffic corridors like Abbeydale Road is a non-starter....if you want a taste of what it would be like then try the town to Middlewood/Malin Bridge routes in the rush hour.

Yo! Vini!

I'd be happy for the tram to go near my house and to actually go to decent places in the city.

Give First some competition, but alas, I can't see them bringing one up greystones road.

Ecclesall road could be good though.

Originally posted by LordChaverly
Rather it was lack of finance and concern about revenue streams.

The building of a supertram requires enormous sunk costs, which can only be recovered over the very long term. Therefore, it is not a viable commercial proposition and can only be done with large government subsidies. In the case of supertram, these are likely to come from three sources, local government, central government and the European Union. The local authorities are currently strapped for cash. The EU would probably provide part of the funding. But the central government basically said no (as they have with proposals put forward by other cities).

A cost-benefit analysis of the likely implications of extending the supertram to Dore and Ranmoor was commissioned by the proponents of the scheme. I read the parts of this document that were made available to the public and found them to be deeply flawed and unconvincing. For example, it talked of the 'regeneration benefits' to Dore and Millhouses of extending the supertram. These areas don't need regenerating. They have never been industrial areas and never will be. The report also conceded that the environmental benefits to these areas were in fact minimal. The 'plans' displayed for the benefit of local residents in Sainsburys were extremely vague and left many questions unanswered. Indeed, if they were meant to persuade us of the merits of the extensions, they had precisely the opposite effect.

The fact is that the enormous disruption and environmental damage which would caused to established residential areas such as Dore, Millhouses and Ranmoor would far outweigh any potential benefits. For example, Abbeydale Road South is actually quite narrow. Supertram vehicles, weighing 52 tons each, are the largest and heaviest public transport vehicles on British roads. The extension of the supertram to Dore - enabling these 52 ton juggernauts to trundle and judder their way down Abbeydale Road South - would mean widening the road, meaning the loss of housing on at least one side and also the destruction of mature trees on one side of Ecclesall woods.

Construction firms and associated businesses would certainly benefit from these extensions, but not so taxpayers or even local residents (the demand for these extensions is not coming from them). A much better idea would be to make use of existing transport arteries, such as improvements to the road network and also the rail link from Dore. The irony is however that at the present time, it is probably easier to obtain EU funds for tram extensiions than for train extensions. [/B]


hi lordchaverly

youve misunderstood the section you read about 'regeneration benefits' as this will mean highfields, parts of nether edge and parts on the routes out to rotherham, not dore and millhouses as you state.

youve also misunderstood about the 'environmental benefits' as these are felt where the traffic is queuing - top end of abbeydale/london road and clarkehouse road where all these people are travelling into town in their very polluting cars...

it wouldnt be very good if trees were cut back from the woods, though their effects are minimised from the emissions from the no of cars travelling the route.

the answer would be to ban cars from dore and ranmoor on these routes and make it car/tram/bus/taxi only then!

anyway....

just wondered when central govt said they wouldnt fund this? as i thought it was with DfT at present? i know theres no money for other extensions but has this one been discussed?

thanks

e x

Originally posted by LordChaverly
We have had this discussion before on the forum. I seem to be the only one on this thread (with the exception of Strix?) who is not in favour of extending the supertram in all directions.

A much better idea would be to make use of existing transport arteries, such as improvements to the road network and also the rail link from Dore. The irony is however that at the present time, it is probably easier to obtain EU funds for tram extensiions than for train extensions.

Yup, that about covers it :thumbsup:

I am surprised at how welcoming Sheffield is about having its streets cluttered with the junk necessary to run the supertram. It's ded scary driving down these streets if you are a visitor to the area.

And the idea of getting people out of their cars and onto the tram just doesn't wash. I'd be surprised if most tram users weren't 'bus people'.

And the reason the original trams were removed was because buses are more flexible. The chaos that's caused when a tram breaks down or crashes is ridiculous. I prefer the system in Manchester, where the trams run mainly on 'dry rail beds' (disused railway lines)

Are dogs allowed on the tram?

If the tram went somewhere near where I work, i'd probably use it.
But I think Jct 30 is a bit far

Originally posted by empea
hi lordchaverly

youve misunderstood the section you read about 'regeneration benefits' as this will mean highfields, parts of nether edge and parts on the routes out to rotherham, not dore and millhouses as you state.

youve also misunderstood about the 'environmental benefits' as these are felt where the traffic is queuing - top end of abbeydale/london road and clarkehouse road where all these people are travelling into town in their very polluting cars...

it wouldnt be very good if trees were cut back from the woods, though their effects are minimised from the emissions from the no of cars travelling the route.

the answer would be to ban cars from dore and ranmoor on these routes and make it car/tram/bus/taxi only then!

anyway....

just wondered when central govt said they wouldnt fund this? as i thought it was with DfT at present? i know theres no money for other extensions but has this one been discussed?

thanks

e x

Empea, I don't think you have studied the planned route, otherwise you would know that it goes nowhere near Nether Edge or London Road (i.e. it would go down from Dore along Abbeydale Road South as far as the traffic lights on Archer Road and then round the back of Sainsburys).

I don't think you can be familiar with the commissioned report either, as this acknowledges (in rather coded and circumlocutory language) that on balance the environmental benefits would be minimal. The report also does refer to 'regeneration benefits' for the whole route, including along Abbeydale Road South.

As for funding, I think the possibility of obtaining the necessary part-funding from central government is remote. I believe this has been made clear to its proponents, which is why the proposal has gone quiet for the moment. But if the plans come to life again anytime soon, I am sure that the action groups in Ranmoor, Dore and Rotherham will be ready and waiting to oppose them as vigorously as they did two years ago.

http://www.supertramextensions.com/maps/pdf/Dore_A31308.pdf

so has the route changed considerably then to this then? where can i find the up to date route map please?

youwhatref agreed that the proposals were with central govt so surely thats why its gone quiet? they take a while to decide things of this scale.

strix, im not sure if u can take dogs on. or bikes actually..?

guide dogs only I believe, no bikes.

Personally I think the tram is great, but it doesnt go to enough places. Anythings got to be a better option than First wanting to charge us £10 a mile for our journeys!

Originally posted by Strix
That'll be a squeeze :suspect: 4 lanes are hardly a squeeze, I believe West Street doesnt mind.

Originally posted by LordChaverly
[B]The fact is that the enormous disruption and environmental damage which would caused to established residential areas such as Dore, Millhouses and Ranmoor would far outweigh any potential benefits. For example, Abbeydale Road South is actually quite narrow. Supertram vehicles, weighing 52 tons each, are the largest and heaviest public transport vehicles on British roads. The extension of the supertram to Dore - enabling these 52 ton juggernauts to trundle and judder their way down Abbeydale Road South - would mean widening the road, meaning the loss of housing on at least one side and also the destruction of mature trees on one side of Ecclesall woods.I see no reason for any of these sacrifices, that or I don't live in sheffield, and abbeydale Road has shrunk to the width of 1 lane road... Think for a second of all the different sections, ALL of which are 2 lanes at least, starting at the Cross Sythes and to town. There actually is nowhere on the road where it's less than 2 lanes, so there is no reason why the tram can't fit in... 2 lanes, one either direction...
Add to that the dual carriage way sections in Millhouses and New Totley and there can even be an overtaking lane. Then Ab'dle Rd from Dore & Totley station to Beauchief is 3 lanes wide. 3 lanes wide from Millhouses Centre to Lower Archer Rd etc...Originally posted by empea
http://www.supertramextensions.com/maps/pdf/Dore_A31308.pdf a reet load of crap it stops at the station !! That means that half the bus passengers will continue to use the bus coz the tram doesn't go far enough ! There's only that extra mile and a half to make the most successful line in Sheffield and get rid of buses once and for all !
BRING THE TRAM TO TOTLEY !

Originally posted by xafier
guide dogs only I believe, no bikes.

Well we'll have to carry on taking the car up to totley then

:loopy: Ridiculous state of affairs :loopy:

Originally posted by Strix
Well we'll have to carry on taking the car up to totley then


I imagine the residents of Totley and those living along the proposed route would prefer that, than having supertram imposed on them ;)

I realise anyone hasn't contributed to this thread since June, but I was filled with curiosity this lunchtime when I came across the Leaflet "Extending Supertram" the May 2003 update.

Has nothing happened since then?

Has the extension program been shelved?

Is it on hold?

Originally posted by Greybeard
I imagine the residents of Totley and those living along the proposed route would prefer that, than having supertram imposed on them ;)

I think the residents who have to use the bus would rather have the tram, the car drivers, as usual, think only of themselves, "I don't need it so I will oppose it".

I live in Totley, and i have to say that I think extending the tram up to Totley would be great.....but really unnecessary. The 97 service is perfectly adequate for getting into the city centre. I know the trams are nicer, and maybe a bit quicker if it runs alongside the railway track, but why not spend a lot less money on newer LPG buses ? Why do so many people refuse to get on the bus, but say they will use trams - are they that much different?

Originally posted by Tomataheeed
Why do so many people refuse to get on the bus, but say they will use trams - are they that much different?

Yes - a quantum leap foreward in comfort (no more feeling sick from being bounced about in and out of pot holes whilst breathing in diesel fumes), more regular, more reliable (not stopped by half a millimeter of snow), and (for me anyway) a lot cheaper than the bus.

Well, if you put it like that Nick, perhaps I agree ! They are more comfortable, and maybe a bit quicker, but I can't see them saving more than 5 minuites from Totley to the city centre, and at the moment the 97 goes every 10 minutes and there are stops about every 200 yards. I suppose what gets to me is that there seem to be people that say they would get on a tram, but they never get the bus. Will they actually stand in the rain at a stop for a tram when they won't for a (very good) bus service ? - apart from the rude drivers... My gut reaction is that for this particular route, it isn't worth the money. After cutting through the middle of Millhouses park, the tram would sit in traffic anyway.

Didn't the Millhouses Park issue scupper the plans - people complained about having to dig up the cricket pitch :)

So looks like more road traffic chaos instead...

I'd be more in favour of linking the NGH onto the network - ie to Hillsborough and Meadowhall - just to make the loop, seems bizarre this is not being considered.

Yes, the cricket pitch issue apparently killed it off, although i would have thought there was enough room - the new car park is pretty big, and there is another one the other end, so surely they could have used some of that space. The traffic isn't too bad up to Totley, the main problem is the Twentywell lane junction and the Chrysler garage who seem to think that 8am is the best time to unload vehicles from transporters.

i posted this in another thread a few wks ago -

i sent an email to the PTE asking about extensions and here's the response:

Thank you for your enquiry of 28 June. The position is as follows:

At its meeting on 2 September 2004 the Passenger Transport Authority agreed to submit an application for funding for the Sheffield Royal Hallamshire Hospital to Rotherham Parkgate Extensions - this is still to be resolved.

None of the other Extension proposals that have been the subject of consultation are being progressed at present and there are no plans to do so.

Yours sincerely

Originally posted by empea
At its meeting on 2 September 2004 the Passenger Transport Authority agreed to submit an application for funding for the Sheffield Royal Hallamshire Hospital to Rotherham Parkgate Extensions - this is still to be resolved.


I think it's tragic that nothing has happened about the funding for this new route for over a year. It is obvious that both our major hospitals suffer from a severe lack of parking space and having tram links will be helpful for both patients and staff.

Originally posted by Tomataheeed
I live in Totley, and i have to say that I think extending the tram up to Totley would be great.....but really unnecessary. The 97 service is perfectly adequate for getting into the city centre. I know the trams are nicer, and maybe a bit quicker if it runs alongside the railway track, but why not spend a lot less money on newer LPG buses ? Why do so many people refuse to get on the bus, but say they will use trams - are they that much different? Are we thinking of the same 97 line ? It's one of the worst routes in Sheffield, they don't show up, they have no available seats... Think of when andrews used to run up to the Cross Sythes and you had several buses next to the steps, now: wait.At its meeting on 2 September 2004 the Passenger Transport Authority agreed to submit an application for funding for the Sheffield Royal Hallamshire Hospital to Rotherham Parkgate Extensions - this is still to be resolved.Tragic how Rovrum would get the tram before the largely populated areas of Sheffield... especially when rovvrum is linked to sheffield by rail, when say Woodseats isn't (the joys of the 53 line !)


... Anyway I have a car now so all this argument on public transport i'm not to fussed about, really the best way to travel cheaply, quickly and at desired time is by car... And free car parking in City Centre :D

Originally posted by LordChaverly
The extension of the supertram to Dore - enabling these 52 ton juggernauts to trundle and judder their way down Abbeydale Road South - would mean widening the road

Abbeydale Road South used to have reserved tram tracks running down the side until they were removed in 1960. The road was then widened to occupy the space the tram tracks used to occupy.

It needs to go to Doncaster, be great to get to airport and for when they get the new Ikea store over there. Lets face it, they paid into it as well.