Scr South Yorkshire Bus Review

[Planner1 428]

2 hours ago, busdriver1 said:

The way I see it is there are 3 possible outcomes to this.

1, SYPTE buys the new trams and then SRC takes over the PTE and has factored in the cost of the new trams. (Fantasy stuff I know).

 

2 SRC takes over the PTE and gets the trams refurbished to get more life out of them. ( even less likely but would make sense, TWPTE is only now looking at renewing its fleet of Metro trains that are 40 years old and work much harder than Sheffields Trams). Far too sensible.

 

3, SYPTE buys new trams and SRC then takes over the PTE claiming the massive debt (for new trams) as their justification and applies to government to have the debt written off. (most likely).

 

Perhaps you should try a google search or two before embarking on ill-informed speculation? And its SCR , not SRC.

 

Have a look at this article, which explains the current situation as I understand it.

 

There's a link within the article to a previous article about the original bid for government funding for supertram capital renewals.

 

All the transport funding that comes into this region comes via SCR.

 

SYPTE are just an operational body to administer public transport for them, funded by them. Have a look at this page on the PTE's website which explains their role. Extract:

 

"South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) is responsible for delivering the operational public transport elements of the region’s public transport strategy, as directed by Sheffield City Region Combined Authority (SCRCA) and within the budget set by the SCRCA."

Edited June 28, 2020 by Planner1

[BigAl1 143]

10 hours ago, Planner1 said:

It takes a long time to plan and deliver new tram routes. Generally 10 years to do the planning and development work and another five or so to build it.

 

I know that the city region are currently doing a study looking at potential routes for tram train, so they are at the earliest stage.

 

No the council aren’t looking to buy a bunch of trams. The council don’t own or run the tram system. It’s run by SYPTE and they are looking to refurbish the infrastructure and replace the fleet.

yes I am fully aware of this and although one might take issue with the slowness of the process you have missed the point as I was highlighting the fact that the first in the list of challenges was completely meaningless as it could not be solved as proposed and that were it even possible then all the decisions would have need to be taken within the period of the current term of office of the Mayor

1 minute ago, Planner1 said:

Perhaps you should try a google search or two before embarking on ill-informed speculation? And its SCR , not SRC.

 

Have a look at this article, which explains the current situation as I understand it.

 

There's a link within the article to a previous article about the original bid for government funding for supertram capital renewals.

 

All the transport funding that comes into this region comes via SCR.

 

SYPTE are just an operational body to administer public transport for them, funded by them. Have a look at this page on the PTE's website which explains their role. Extract:

 

"South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) is responsible for delivering the operational public transport elements of the region’s public transport strategy, as directed by Sheffield City Region Combined Authority (SCRCA) and within the budget set by the SCRCA."

the simple fact is that the current set up is seriously deficient and needs reform

[Planner1 428]

4 minutes ago, Bigal1 said:

yes I am fully aware of this and although one might take issue with the slowness of the process you have missed the point as I was highlighting the fact that the first in the list of challenges was completely meaningless as it could not be solved as proposed and that were it even possible then all the decisions would have need to be taken within the period of the current term of office of the Mayor

Where did he say he was going to solve the problem?

 

He says what the problem is and lists what he will invest in to address it.

 

"Investing in" includes doing feasibility and business case development work on longer term projects, like the tram system.

 

These "visioning" documents are by nature very high level and don't get into the detail of exactly how things will be done, they just set the general direction of travel. The "vision" gets translated down into  strategies and policies and eventually into a delivery plan, which sets out what exactly will be done and when.  

[BigAl1 143]

2 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Where did he say he was going to solve the problem?

 

He says what the problem is and lists what he will invest in to address it.

 

"Investing in" includes doing feasibility and business case development work on longer term projects, like the tram system.

 

These "visioning" documents are by nature very high level and don't get into the detail of exactly how things will be done, they just set the general direction of travel. The "vision" gets translated down into  strategies and policies and eventually into a delivery plan, which sets out what exactly will be done and when.  

yes basically a lot of hot air

[sheffbag 227]

36 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Perhaps you should try a google search or two before embarking on ill-informed speculation? And its SCR , not SRC.

 

Have a look at this article, which explains the current situation as I understand it.

 

There's a link within the article to a previous article about the original bid for government funding for supertram capital renewals.

 

All the transport funding that comes into this region comes via SCR.

 

SYPTE are just an operational body to administer public transport for them, funded by them. Have a look at this page on the PTE's website which explains their role. Extract:

 

"South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) is responsible for delivering the operational public transport elements of the region’s public transport strategy, as directed by Sheffield City Region Combined Authority (SCRCA) and within the budget set by the SCRCA."

Not strictly true

The tax levy from the councils is set by "The Mayoral Authority of Sheffield City Region" (realllllllllllllllllllly?) which is a primary source of funding.

Direct capital projects are normally funded by DfT grants which the PTE applies for (as it did prior to SCR formation)

BSOG grants from the DfT cover a lot of the tendered schemes.   

[Guest busdriver1]

2 hours ago, sheffbag said:

Not strictly true

The tax levy from the councils is set by "The Mayoral Authority of Sheffield City Region" (realllllllllllllllllllly?) which is a primary source of funding.

Direct capital projects are normally funded by DfT grants which the PTE applies for (as it did prior to SCR formation)

BSOG grants from the DfT cover a lot of the tendered schemes.   

Just more political waffle to disguise what really happening. Sadly I am fluent in "local council" and am able to see the truth behind it.  A source of great frustration to the users of it whose only response is to issue more "local council". 

 

To cut short and de-"local council" the statement, the PTE are unable to fund the tram correctly and as its running at a loss have had to go to government to get a " grant" aka bail out to renew the infrastructure that should have been paid for out of income ( if there was enough) . So instead of coming out of local taxes, it will come out of national taxes. A bail out by any other name. We are just disagreeing about the name of the tax authority that is providing this bail out.

The route cause is that the tram system is flawed as it does not serve the areas needed so income does not meet expenditure, this is as a result of flaws in the conception and planning of the system where the PTE paid "professionals" to advise them on where to run it. 

The fact this was done proves there was no great demand for it and it was just done as a vanity project otherwise it would have been put in places where there was a clear demand on no "experts" would have been needed and it would not be failing as it currently is.

But hey, these are facts, so lets just wait for the predictable "local council" response. After all they dont make good comedies like they used too and this is the nearest we can get.

[Planner1 428]

1 hour ago, busdriver1 said:

 So instead of coming out of local taxes, it will come out of national taxes. A bail out by any other name. We are just disagreeing about the name of the tax authority that is providing this bail out.

 

There aren't many mass transit systems in the world that operate without a subsidy of some form.

[Planner1 428]

1 hour ago, busdriver1 said:

The fact this was done proves there was no great demand for it and it was just done as a vanity project otherwise it would have been put in places where there was a clear demand on no "experts" would have been needed and it would not be failing as it currently is.

 

No demand for it? Why are trams normally completely rammed at peak times then?

 

So, you clearly don't think the tram system has been well designed or justified, so  could you explain to us:

• how the routes should have been selected
• how the tram system should have been designed and by whom (as you don't think much to the "experts")
• how it should have been financed

Or is your point that we don't need a tram system at all and we'd have been fine sticking with just buses?

[sheffbag 227]

1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

No demand for it? Why are trams normally completely rammed at peak times then?

 

So, you clearly don't think the tram system has been well designed or justified, so  could you explain to us:

• how the routes should have been selected
• how the tram system should have been designed and by whom (as you don't think much to the "experts")
• how it should have been financed

Or is your point that we don't need a tram system at all and we'd have been fine sticking with just buses?

Busy trams at peak times does not equal a full demand for the service. once you get out past manor top the trams tend to empty out.

The routes were changed from the original proposal due to pressure from SCC. 

 

 

[ricgem2002 11]

On 20/06/2020 at 11:49, Resident said:

 

 

I have been told in conversation that a bus, over the course of a year, costs around £30,000 to operate. That's including tax,  op licence, fuel, personell (drivers, office staff) & maintainence (parts, 

 

 

When drivers are on between 20-23 grand a year  I think someone being telling you porkies 

[BigAl1 143]

15 hours ago, sheffbag said:

Busy trams at peak times does not equal a full demand for the service. once you get out past manor top the trams tend to empty out.

The routes were changed from the original proposal due to pressure from SCC. 

 

 

I am not sure what you are trying to suggest of course trams are likely to be less full towards the beginning/end of their journey (and indeed during the off peak) just as commuter trains and most buses are at the "country end". if the system was designed to be full for the entire length of the journey then the there would not be the capacity to carry the vast majority of commuters. All transport networks face similar issues.  If you were to reduce the frequency of the Blue trams past Manor Top (assuming they can be reversed there)  to say every 30 minutes so that they were likely to be nearly full sounds logical until you realise that the service would be far less attractive and demand would fall and they would still be traveling with a lot of air

 

Could the system have been better designed? probably yes, could the system have been better managed? probably yes do we have the benefit of hindsight? probably yes

 

 

[Planner1 428]

17 hours ago, sheffbag said:

Busy trams at peak times does not equal a full demand for the service. once you get out past manor top the trams tend to empty out.

The routes were changed from the original proposal due to pressure from SCC. 

 

 

As Bigal1 says, vehicles emptying out halfway out from the centre is something you’d see on any route with any type of vehicle. Similarly, optimistic forecasts of passenger numbers are often a feature of mass transit scheme development wherever you look. I recall seeing reports that Manchester’s recent new lines weren’t attracting the forecast numbers. See: https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/news/metrolink-demand-must-double-to-hit-target-says-tfgm/

 

The process of developing the business case for any mass transit system will involve prioritisation and refinement of route options. Cost, patronage and deliverability will be major considerations, but political aspirations will inevitably come into it.  The government doesn’t give you over two hundred million quid without checking your business case, so the funders  were happy with the eventual proposals.

 

Extensions to serve other areas were proposed, but the government refused to fund them.

Edited June 29, 2020 by Planner1