2025 could be an important year for the hopes of creating a tram museum in Blackpool with funding bids currently being prepared to help the “vision” to be achieved. Local Councillor, and Tramtown volunteer, Paul Galley released a New Year video in which he said that they were working behind the scenes on preparing bids which it is hoped will help go towards bringing Tramtown to life.
The overall vision for Tramtown has long been that a major visitor attraction will be created on the site of the historic Rigby Road Depot with workshop facilities also being provided to help to maintain and restore the trams for the future. The main tram depot is currently off limits with fears over the condition of the roof and a large part of the cash would be needed to make that good before any consideration is given towards creating a museum.
Planning permission is already in place to create Tramtown and there have previously been artist impressions of what the attraction could look like. These plans had all workshop facilities moved into the main tram depot but more recent plans for the wider Rigby Road site have seen the current Fitting Shop (which was originally due to be demolished) set to be retained so its not known if that part of it has now changed.
Bids are set to be made to the Heritage Lottery Fund to help go towards work on the creation of Tramtown.
Bryan Lindop, Head of Heritage at Blackpool Transport, told the Blackpool Gazette: “To all those who have contributed to the Tramtown funds over the years, either directly by donation, or indirectly by visiting the workshop tours or purchasing Tramtown merchandise, you have made a significant difference and an invaluable contribution in underpinning our plans and enabling them to move forward. Those funds have always been and will go on being invested in the building and the furtherance of the business case, and all Tramtown funds are in a ring-fenced account and cannot be spent on anything else.
“All that we have achieved to date, from emergency repairs to the tram shed itself, the architects’ drawings, to the successful planning application for the full scheme, these are all thanks to our faithful supporters and our incredible volunteers.”
It has also bee confirmed that there are plans for Tramtown tours to resume later in 2025. These would, again, be centred on the Fitting Shop as there would still be no access to the main depot, although trams can be viewed from the outside. Details of when these tours may resume are expected to follow.
This news is separate to the operation of heritage trams. As has been widely reported, these were suspended in December 2024 for a number of reasons but Blackpool Transport Managing Director, Jane Cole, has previously said they remain committed to returning them to the tracks in 2025. There are no further updates on what this may look like, if indeed it comes to fruition.
It is not seperate to running the Heritage Trams, it is one and the same. I would love to be a fly on the wall at some of the Blackpool Transport meetings, I bet there are some VERY interesting “discussions”!
Come on Jane. Pull your finger out.
A couple of interesting things to note here…
1. Rigby Road Depot (I hate the name ‘Tramtown’ as it sounds like a kids attraction) was actually built to be both a tram depot AND a public exhibition venue originally. That’s why, as built, the pits only ran half the length of the building, which caused regular maintenance issues for the trams for many years afterwards. I don’t think they every actually used it as an exhibition space though. I’d be very interested to know if they did.
2. Brian has stated donations to the project go into a ring-fenced ‘Tramtown’ account, as does money from merchandise. But my question is where do the fares taken on the heritage trams go? I’ve been asking this for years and never got a straight answer. I’ve always suspected they don’t have separate heritage and LRV accounts because, if they did, they could well show the heritage service is much more cost effective than the LRVs and the so-called ‘upgrade’ would have it’s necessity called into question. After 10 years I’m not expecting to suddenly get the answer here though!
With reference to your second point, I also have often thought I’d like to see some background financial information separating the core BTS operation from the heritage operations. Unlike you I doubt that it would show the heritage operations in a better light than the core service. Your comment about the upgrade is seriously flawed I’m afraid. If the system hadn’t been upgraded it would not have survived in any form, either LRT or Heritage as it did not comply with the then current standards. Those who believe that the Blackpool Tramway could have continued operating in the condition it was in 2008 are mistaken.
The fares go into Heritage, which for the most part over the last 12 years has been subsidised by BTS as its loss making.
How many times do people have to be told the upgrade was needed because the whole system, including the vehicles, was getting no longer fit for purpose and would be illegal. The upgrade started as far back as the double deck ban!!!
So how come the trams in San Francisco, Lisbon, Melbourne and the Isle of Mann also aren’t illegal?
If the tramway in Blackpool really did have to go, then there is no way it should have been replaced. It would have been far more cost effective just to run a fleet of buses on the route.
None of those systems have to comply with UK laws though – even the Isle of Man has its own Government. Besides, are all of those are actually classed as public transport systems or are they tourist lines?
Because the cities you mention are not in the UK and have to abide by the UK Accessibility regulations? You do realise that different countries have their own laws and regulations? We are not yet in the Star Trek era of a united world with one set of laws!
Be thankful that Blackpool does not have the same accessibility regulations as San Francisco, as all heritage trams except the Western Train would be unable to run! The two Boat trams currently running in San Francisco had to have some major modifications to make them conform to California’s Public Transit ADA regulations, including raising the floor in the platform area to give a flat floor from one end to the other and removal of one internal bulkhead to allow access by wheelchairs. These modifications also made the trams basically single-ended as one entrance door has been permanently sealed up. The PCC cars are also conform to the ADA regulations, only a very few of the trams running in SF are exempt, and these can only run on a handful of days per year and not in full service.
I don’t see how the heritage trams can be loss-making when they are generally staffed by unpaid volunteers. I also don’t see how the old tramway was illegal given that there are plenty of heritage tramways all over the world, including the nearby Manx Electric, which continue to operate successfully.
I’d be interested to know what you think has changed that makes something that could be maintained for over 130 years suddenly need complete replacement? There’s an old saying… “If it ain’t broke, don’t mend it!”
The Blackpool tramway is not a heritage tramway, it is a public transport system which operates a few heritage trams as a sideline. As such it must comply with all the current accessibility regulations and ORR safety regulations. From a financial point of view the heritage operations may well be staffed mainly by volunteers but there are other costs associated with the operation. How do you think that the maintenance of the heritage trams is covered and the costs of the restoration/refurbishment of those trams must be funded. The costs associated with the Rigby Road site will no doubt rightly be allocated to the heritage business. All this no doubt adds up to a significant sum and I somehow doubt that the revenue taken covers those costs.
The workshop staff at Rigby Road are paid though, and Bryan Lindop too. There is also the cost of parts to keep the heritage trams running, things like repaints etc. I do think a well-run heritage operation could turn a profit, but its not hard to see how it could lose money.
As for trams being no longer fit for purpose; just look at the amount of work that Crich are doing on Brush car 298 to restore it, or the work BTS carried out on Balloon 717 before the upgrade. Realistically ALL of the 1930s fleet which haven’t already received that level of workshop attention need it to continue in service – and you’re easily looking at a six-figure sum for each tram. That’s before we get into the fact that modern legislation, quite rightly, demands that passengers who are unable to access vehicles with high steps be catered for.
The Heritage operation also had to cover the costs of several full time paid BTS employees (Heritage Manager, admin, maintenance) plus other internal costs allocated to the department.
With regards to the laws and regulations concerning public transport, I suggest that you research the various regulations that came into effect and caused the traditional tram operation to become non-conform. The subject has been covered in depth both on this great webpage and many other webpages related to the Blackpool tramway. You cannot compare other heritage tramways around the world which have to abide by their local laws and regulations to those of the UK.
And regarding your last statement, the traditional tramway could have been considered “broke”, it was certainly living on life support in the last years. Talk to the regular users of the tramway in Blackpool (i.e. those whose year-round patronage contribute significantly to the revenue of BTS, and not the enthusiasts who popped in one or twice a year) and they will tell you the big difference between then and now, and I can guarantee which version of the tramway they prefer!
It’s important to remember that the electricity to power the heritage trams and the maintenance work has to be costed as part and parcel of the overall running expenses of the entire system including the LRV service. Therefore, it would not seem unreasonable for the fares from the heritage operation to contribute towards this cost. Importantly, the statement would appear to guarantee that any donations are not being syphoned away to support the LRV finances.
The main positive aspect that is indicated here now is the application for lottery funding, which it is hoped will prove successful given the historic importance of the trams not only to Blackpool itself but also in terms of electric tramways in general, given it was the first commercial street tramway in Great Britain to run on electricity. It may happen that tram rides will be experienced in the vicinity of Rigby Road, along part of Blundell Street and Hopton Road, allowing it to become a working museum, albeit with limited running as with many other similar orgainisations, as was originally the case with EATM – just to provide a taste of tram riding experience for visitors. This I feel would not be unreasonable and should prolong the life of the historic tramcars.
One issue which may disconnect the Rigby Road site from the promenade, is the state of the track in Lytham road, which by all accounts has become badly worn and extremely rough riding. It could be that when the council has to juggle spending priorities, there would simply be insufficient funds to replace this section of track. Otherwise it might be at the expense of essential maintenance elsewhere which is key to providing a safe passenger service on the main route.
Anyone who thinks a council owned company will get funding for a council owned building is deluded beyond belief!
Just out of interest Kev. Why, exactly, are those people “deluded”?