The auctioneers were astonished to find this stored in an outbuilding close to the city centre. They believe it to be one of eight trams built by the United Electric Car Company of Preston in 1912. These trams were the second in the city to be numbered 1-8 and were double deckers seating 22 on the lower deck and 28 up top. In 1971 only two Carlisle trams were known to still be in existence, one of which was used for spare parts at the National Tramway Museum, Crich.

The auctioneers are confident that it will attract national attention from both institutional and private collectors looking to restore it to its former glory. Director of Auctioneering Howard Naylor said: “it would be appropriate to see it stay in the county and be restored for public display. However it would also make the most delightful garden summer house.” It is expected to go for £1,000-£3,000.

The auction is part of the Cumbria Classic Car Weekend at Dalemain House by Ullswater.

I can’t find a photo anywhere on the web of a Carlisle tram but if anyone has The Tramways of North Lancashire by WH Bett and JC Gillham and published by the LRTA there is a photo of the type of tram in the centre of page 50. Photos of the tram as it is now can be found on this page.
Source: Cumbria Auction Rooms

FURTHER INFORMATION ON METROLINK REJECTION REVEALED
Sunday 14 August 2005
This week the Manchester Evening News have revealed the truth behind the rejection of Metrolink last year, after they had gained access to important documents under the Freedom of Information Act.

These documents apparently reveal that the DfT were thinking about withdrawing funding for Metrolink some six months before the decision was actually made. Two reports were sent to Alistair Darling, Secretary of State for Transport, from the civil servant in charge of local transport calling into question the future of Metrolink’s “Big Bang”.

The initial report was sent on 7 January 2004 and asked Mr Darling what to do about the extension “in the light of further cost increases since it was approved for funding in December 2002." This was followed just over two months later by a second report asking Mr Darling whether to approve all or part of the extension scheme. In both these reports there is a recommendation from the civil servant but the DfT have censored what these were. However he did write a letter to the then Transport Minister, Tony McNulty on 17 February in which he said: “Our current public position is that we are reconsidering the scheme in the light of the major cost increase.”

The DfT continue to claim that the decision was not made until just before Mr Darling’s announcement in July last year. A spokeswoman said: “Consideration was given to the future of the scheme throughout, in particular whether it could be delivered on budget. When it became clear the costs had spiralled, we had to take the difficult decision to revoke approval. The decision was taken when it was announced in July."

These reports also reveal that the GMPTE were considering axing part of the “Big Bang” to ensure that there was enough funding available to complete at least some of the planned extensions. The version released in March said: “The promoters' current proposals are for the Oldham-Rochdale line, the Ashton line plus the East Didsbury spur.”

The documents obtained by the Manchester Evening News also show the fears of Manchester MPs that there would be a backlash to the decision at the General Election. Ian Stewart, MP for Eccles, wrote a letter to Mr Darling on 8 August on behalf of all Greater Manchester MPs saying the reaction had been "possibly the most hostile reaction to a government decision which we have witnessed during our political careers".

There are also documents that suggest that civil servants within the DfT were going cold on the idea of trams in the UK. A private letter from Manchester City Council leader Richard Leese to local MPs said: “We firmly believe, and senior civil servants have corroborated this, that there is a serious intention to marginalise light rail as a future investment option on the grounds of value for money."

Many documents, requested by the Manchester Evening News, were withheld by the DfT because they claim they could “seriously impact on the decision making process”

In response to the revealing of the plan not to build the Manchester Airport line, the GMPTE admitted that this was one of the options available to them. He said: “The DfT requested that we present them with several options. At the time, the passenger transport authority's preferred option was to proceed with the Oldham and Rochdale, Ashton under Lyne and East Didsbury lines. There were clear affordability issues with the South Manchester line which needed to be addressed - and which now have been. There was never any intention to drop the extension to Manchester Airport. This line was to be included in the Phase 3 contract. We intended to put together a funding package in partnership with third parties, including the airport."

After the report was carried in the Manchester Evening News this week there was outrage amongst people who had been forced to move out of their homes whilst the government wasn’t convinced the “Big Bang” would go ahead. One such person, 62 year old Maureen Consiglio was forced out of the home she shared with her husband. She said: “I think it's disgusting. We were rushed out in the end but as it later turned out there was no need. Even now the land where the flats were is just standing empty, although at least they're saying now that it will come eventually. When, we don't know. When they announced Metrolink wasn't coming it was a big shock for us, all that upheaval for nothing. No one had ever warned us that might happen and nobody has ever said sorry to us."
Source: Manchester Online

TUNNEL TOLL PLAN FOR MERSEYTRAM
Sunday 14 August 2005
The latest plan to cover the funding gap in the Merseytram project is to use the tolls collected from tunnels of Merseyside.

According to an exclusive report in the Liverpool Echo, sources close to the scheme have admitted that they are considering the move but that tolls will not be raised to help meet the target.

However, the move will not be getting support from across the board with Wirral Council saying they would oppose any such move.

Wirral Council leader, Councillor Steve Foulkes said: “Clearly we were not expecting this situation to arise because we expected the tram to be funded by the government. We have attempted to put together a package which all Merseyside councils can support so the government can be sure the money is there. We have made it clear that if using tunnel money was the only way to make the tram happen, it would lose our support. But this is not a case of Wirral trying to stop the tram, because we have been open about our views right from the start."
Source: icLiverpool

CROYDON TRAMLINK NEWS UPDATE
Sunday 14 August 2005
The New Addington trackwork continues at a pace with the majority of the track that had been removed relaid over last weekend, using the track moving machines again. In addition the top ballast has started to be laid on top of the track at the Addington Village end of the work. Following this the section of track between Fieldway and King Henry’s Drive was lifted on Monday (8 August). Part of this work has seen a new drainage trench down the middle of the track as far as the Addington Village crossover and inserted some drainage pipes before the track foundations were relaid.

The work undertaken at Mitcham Junction a couple of weeks ago was rejected by Tramlink’s maintenance contractor Mowlems as being unsatisfactory. It is reported that the tracks were worse than ever the day after the work and the TSR remained in operation. As a result midweek work is required to make it work with a section of around six sleepers to be dug out and reballasted.

For the past four weeks there has been a fault in the TfL Traffic Signals control cabinet at Chepstow Road meaning that trams leaving Sandilands westbound were not being detected. This meant that each tram had to wait on the loop at the junction and wait for the signal to change. Up to two minutes could be taken up by this causing delays to the service and in some cases short running was noted, especially on the Wimbledon line. A new component was manufactured and fitted last Friday (5 August).

For more on these stories and more news from Croydon – including the latest Tramlink statistics visit the Unofficial Croydon Tramlink website.
Source: Unofficial Croydon Tramlink

MERSEYTRAM IN DOUBT AGAIN?
Sunday 7 August 2005
A new row between Merseytravel and local Councils is threatening to derail the Merseytram project once again. Merseytravel are demanding that all five councils in the area give total support for the scheme, or they will pull the plug on it.

Merseytravel Chairman Mark Dowd said in a letter to the councils: “If Merseytravel is to maintain a realistic programme which delivers an operational tram system by Easter 2008, I must receive a positive decision from the metropolitan district authorities by August 5. Failure to achieve a positive decision by this date, whether this is phrased as a 'no' or a 'maybe', will result in Merseytravel aborting the project."

It is believed that this outcome was very unlikely by the deadline of Friday (5 August) and has shocked Transport Minister Derek Twigg. Mr Twigg said: “We will be talking to the transport authority on Merseyside and looking at what alternative schemes might be taken forward."

Council bosses are in support of the scheme but they are still trying to work out whether they can pay for them without hitting taxpayers. A spokesman from Liverpool City Council said: “"The deadline imposed by Merseytravel has not been agreed with the five authorities and is completely arbitrary and unacceptable. The detailed evaluation work is still ongoing and no authority will be able to give their agreement until this essential work has been completed."

The doubts have surfaced amongst the councils following a report on the tram from independent consultants Investec which looked at the financial package. The report says: “Whilst Merseytravel has managed to maintain the prices offered by its key suppliers, suppliers are in no obligation to do so. Given the continued uncertainty surrounding the project timetable and deliverability of a funding package, the ability of suppliers to maintain fixed prices will become increasingly difficult. As such Merseytravel is exposed to ever-increasing project cost escalation risk."

Wirral Council leader Councillor Steve Foulkes said: “I have had a report back from our treasurer and we are seeking clarification on a number of points in the Investec document. I will be trying to steer a course that saves the tram but does not cost taxpayers' money.. Our position from the start was that it must not impact on the levy or council taxpayers."

A source close the consortium who will build the scheme was shocked at the latest developments. He said: “This has come out of the blue. The Government have confirmed the money is there and have agreed to the schedule of payments Merseytravel have asked for. There are risks of course but they are miniscule compared to some projects. If the councils do not accept this level of risk then quite clearly they never wanted the tram to happen in the first place."

If everything does go according to plan Merseytravel want to be signing contracts on 30 September with construction commencing on 2 October.
Source: icLiverpool

THE END FOR THE BIRMINGHAM UNDERGROUND DREAM?
Sunday 7 August 2005
It appears that Birmingham City Council are set to throw their support behind surface Midland Metro extensions through the city centre after the results of the feasibility study into underground running suggested it wasn’t such a good idea.

The £150,000 feasibility study was instigated by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition in the City Council, after they came into power last year. The results of the study are reported to say that initial extensions should be built on the surface and they can at a later date be converted to underground lines, if necessary. The study suggests that the first city centre extensions should be built as originally accepted with the only significant stretch of underground operation being the future Airport/NEC line under Selfridges to Digbeth.

Jerry Blackett, chairman of the West Midlands Business Transport Group and policy director of the Birmingham Chamber of Commerce said: “"It is clear that is the option which would recoup the most value for money and to be honest, it is the only option that Government were going to wear bearing in mind the hurdle of cost-benefit is being set higher and higher all the time.”

However, the council do not seem to be totally convinced the underground option is dead. A city spokesman said: “The section in the LTP containing the reference to on-street running was written by Centro. We are keeping all our options open and a report is being prepared following the feasibility study."

A joint report from Centro and the City Council is expected to be released “in the near future”.
Source: icBirmingham

EDINBURGH TRAM PROJECT LATEST
Sunday 7 August 2005
The Transport Initiatives Edinburgh website set up on the proposed tramway in the Scottish capital has recently been redesigned and with this there has been 8 months worth of news stories added. Here we get back up to date with what is happening there.

In early March, the Scottish Parliament agreed to move both Lines 1 and 2 to the consideration stage. Michael Howell, Chief Executive of tie limited said: “We are pleased that Tram Lines 1 and 2 have now moved to the consideration stage. This is the surest indication we have to date that Tram Lines 1 and 2 will proceed. There are some areas where the Parliament has asked for clarification, this is normal for projects of this scale. Work in these areas will continue as the projects progress. We will keep the Committee fully up to date as new information emerges.”

The following month a Business Liaison Group was set up to answer any questions that small businesses had about the plans to reintroduce trams to Edinburgh. It was set up to work with the Leith Walk and Constitution Street area and will ensure the business community is kept fully in informed of the tram progress and also that tie are well aware of the changing needs of the businesses.

Then during May, tie submitted a proposal to the City of Edinburgh Council Planning Committee to amend the routes of Lines 1 and 2. This was after consultation on the two lines. The majority of the refinements suggested by tie were within the limits of deviation (LOD), this is the corridor identified within the original bills.

On Line One, concern was raised by businesses that the route would have an affect on their premises that could be avoided by altering the line. In the Haymarket Yards area the major change would be moving the line to in front of CA House, as opposed to behind it. This would mean less parking would be lost by local businesses. Elsewhere on Line One, it was proposed that the tramway would be situated to the north of the roadway at Ocean Drive. This would allow the tram to run segregated to the north of the roadway and would make way for proposed road realignment and changes to the road junction.

On Line Two tie want to alter the alignment at the Gyle Shopping Centre, with trams now running around the car park as opposed to straight through the middle. It is hoped that this would enable there to be better opportunities for bus and tram interchange facilities.

Chief Executive, Michael Howell said: “tie has spent the last year listening to and working with objectors to determine if slight changes to the proposed routes would resolve issues, without having a detrimental impact on the project and the benefits it will deliver to the wider population. In a select number of cases we have been able to find solutions to suit all parties by agreeing to propose amendments refining the alignment.”

tie have also set out their commitment to ensure that noise pollution is not an issue with the trams in Edinburgh with their own Noise and Vibration Policy. The policy features several guidelines, including:
- Strict noise emission standards will be defined and applied when procuring all tram vehicles
- That all reasonable measures are used to avoid significant noise impacts through design of the track and track bed
- Where these measures are not sufficient to prevent significant impact, where practicable and appropriate, noise barriers will be provided to reduce noise transmission to occupants of nearby properties
- Where noise may exceed stated levels, tie will offer other noise insulation for residential properties

Michael Howell commented: “Trams are electrically powered, so they are generally quiet and pollution-free at the point of use. Sometimes noise problems can arise from mechanical sources, and therefore a pro-active approach to noise is important. The Noise and Vibration policy will provide reassurance that the tram will not add appreciably to the existing levels of noise within the city of Edinburgh. Where trams replace buses on a given route, they will prove quieter and will be emission free.”

Major discussions held by tie with prospective objectors to the tram scheme have also been successful in recent months with Forth Ports, Royal Mail, Network Rail and Historic Scotland all withdrawing their objections.

Sheenagh Adams, Director of Heritage Policy at Historic Scotland said: “We are pleased that our consultations with tie have been successful and that our concerns will be addressed. We look forward to working closely with tie on the trams project.” Historic Scotland will now be involved in the Design Working Group that tie have committed to set up.

Royal Mail were concerned about not only the delivery and collection of mail throughout the city but also the impact trams may have on postboxes. But after discussions with tie and the city council they have withdrawn any objections with both sides realising what the other needed.

Network Rail’s objections were access to their land during construction and also any impact the trams would have on their infrastructure once operating. tie have agreed to compensate Network Rail for any work required to immunise its signalling and telecommunications systems against any interference from tram operations.

Meanwhile, Forth Ports are amongst many others who have withdrawn their objections to the scheme. Forth Ports are a company involved in the regeneration the communities of Granton, Newhaven and Leith. Charles Hammond, Chief Executive of Forth Ports said: “Providing a vital link for Leith to both of Edinburgh’s main railway stations and to the airport, we believe that the tram is important to the future of public transport in Edinburgh and fully support the plans. Line One will access major developments in the north of the city and allow the capital to expand with a modern, integrated transport system.”

A construction code of practice will be drawn up between the two parties so that work is done to a mutual satisfaction and that there is cohesion and uniformity between the finish of the works and the surrounding areas.
Source: Tramtime: Transport Initiatives Edinburgh

UPDATE FROM THE SOUTH HANTS LRT SCHEME
Sunday 7 August 2005
As previously reported on BRITISH TRAMS ONLINE, the South Hampshire Light Rapid Transit scheme linking Portsmouth with Gosport and Fareham had been expecting a decision from the Department for Transport on funding by the end of July. However, just like everywhere else in the country they were left waiting and on 21 July were told by DfT officials that the earliest a decision would be made would be Autumn 2005.

Councillor Ken Thornber, leader of Hampshire County Council said: “I'm shocked and disappointed at this failure to make a decision. I'm seeking an urgent meeting with the Secretary of State for Transport to ascertain whether or not he wants the SHRT1 promoters to preserve the opportunity for delivering this project within the current planning and land acquisition powers or whether the Government's intention is to terminate the current procurement by making it run out of time. Options have been identified that could be utilised, provided the Government is willing to share the financial risk of doing so."
Source: South Hampshire Light Rapid Transit

PLAN TO ABANDON METROLINK HOSPITAL LOOP APPROVED
Sunday 7 August 2005
The Greater Manchester PTA have approved the plan to ditch the Wythenshawe Hospital loop from the Airport line. It has been decided that the line will be more cost effective if only the eastern side of the loop, serving Benchill, Wythenshawe town centre and Peel Hall was retained.

Councillor Roger Jones, chairman of the GMPTA, said: “We are committed to seeing Metrolink extended to Wythenshawe, Manchester Airport and Didsbury and the only way this will happen is if we meet the government's stringent affordability tests. There have been longstanding concerns over the financial and economic performance of this line that needed to be addressed. This change will not only cut over £40m off the costs, but make this line the best performing of all the proposed tram extensions."

It is now hoped that a programme of how the Metrolink extensions can be delivered will be announced by the end of the year, following discussions with the Department for Transport.
Source: Manchester Online

NOTTINGHAM WANTS DECISION ON LINES 2 AND 3
Sunday 7 August 2005
a final decision on whether they can be constructed as soon as possible. The decision had been hoped for over a year ago and now people are starting to get anxious over whether a positive decision will be forthcoming.

Chris Deas, from the tram promoter, Nottingham Express Transit, said they were working hard with officials from the DfT to ensure that a decision would be forthcoming soon. He said: “We are frustrated that it's taken so long to approve the scheme. We're working as hard as we can with Government to enable them to make a decision as soon as possible. We clearly recognise that from our own point of view, and that of the parties affected by the decision, the delay is an issue."

Derek Twigg, Transport Minsiter, said: “We take decisions about funding very seriously and it's important to get them right. We are considering the information provided on the scheme and will make a decision in due course."

The delay in the decision, however, is being welcomed by the anti tram group, Better Community Transport. Lloyd Wildish from the group said: “We think the delay will get so long that funding won't be available.”

On the pro tram side, Steve Barber from Beeston and Chilwell for Intergrated Transport said that he was frustrated at the continuing delays in a funding decision. Beeston was being affected by the decision as homeowners are left in limbo whether their homes will be compulsory purchased and potential business owners are being put off from entering the town.

It is likely that no decision will be forthcoming until Parliament reconvenes in October, after the summer recess.
Source: This is Nottingham

BLACKPOOL AND FLEETWOOD TRAMWAY NEWS UPDATE
Sunday 7 August 2005
Balloon 712 derailed on 13 July at Starr Gate on the curve just before the reserved track rejoins the Promenade track. 712 was on the Cleveleys service at the time and caused disruption to the rest of the service with single line operation having to be introduced between Starr Gate and Harrowside whilst the tram was rerailed and an investigation carried out. 712 was driven under its own power to depot at around 2000 but the tramway remained disrupted until the close of service with the single line operation. It is believed the derailment was caused by the expansion of a rail joint, this due to the hot weather. The track was repaired the next day and soon after full operation was back in action.

Meanwhile, OMO 8 has now been stripped of all lower panels to enable an assessment to take place of the frame before the full restoration commences. The steel underframe appears to be in a good condition and it is hoped that this can be steam cleaned and painted whilst the tram is without its panelling. Some areas of the teak body frame have been discovered to be rotten and so are to be replaced with new woodwork.

* Don’t forget the only way to receive FULL monthly news on the Blackpool Tramway is by becoming a member of the Fylde Tramway Society? The Fylde Tramway News has just been redesigned with a much more modern look and is just one of the many benefits of being a member. For further details see here and here.
Source: Fylde Tramway News

CROYDON TRAMLINK NEWS UPDATE
Sunday 7 August 2005
The engineering works at New Addington are progressing rapidly with all areas now having had the track and ballast removed. The actual trackbed is now being repacked and constructed and it is presumed that new drainage will be installed at the same time.

In other engineering work, the Wimbledon line was disrupted last Sunday (31 July) when work was carried out at Mitcham Junction. A new trackbed was constructed after the foundations were dug out around the Carshalton Road bridge. During the day the tram service was split into two with a replacement bus service operating between Mitcham Junction and Morden Road. Three trams were moved to Wimbledon on Saturday night (2531, 2538 and 2533) to provide the Wimbledon to Belgrave Walk service. 2531 and 2538 were used on this service whilst 2533 was stabled all day in the “cripple siding” at Wimbledon – this was the first time this had been used except for gauging trials (photos are available at the Unofficial Croydon Tramlink website).

2532 has now received the new seat covers, becoming the second class member to be so treated.

For more on these stories and more news from Croydon visit the Unofficial Croydon Tramlink website.
Source: Unofficial Croydon Tramlink