ONLY DAYS TO SAVE THE HORSE TRAMS
Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater...
Next week Tynwald will vote on a series of recommendations contained in “Proposals for the Future Operation Of Douglas Horse Tramway.”
For the avoidance of any doubt - the Manx Electric Railway Society is fully supportive of the retention of the Horse Tramway and asks that Tynwald Members do just that.
The problem with what is set out elsewhere in the proposals is this: precisely what, if anything, of the horse tramway is Mr. Gawne seeking to retain?
What follows on these pages is a considered response by the MER Society to Mr. Gawne’s proposals which we argue are flawed, and ask Tynwald to support the retention of the tramway but at the same time ask the Department to think again and to return to the House with a fresh set of plans which represent value for money and a secure future for the Horse Tramway going forward.
SUMMARY
- The MERS submits that in fact the Horse Tramway is being set up to fail. The inevitable severe drop off in passengers/revenue when the line is cut back, may well be used as a reason to scrap the line altogether.
- The report includes some alarming contradictions - especially as it tries to justify what are clearly the preferred options of the Department.
- By replacing the original depot and stables with a modern pastiche on a different site, changing the route, scrapping trams - the unique appeal, indeed the very raison d'être of the Horse line is irretrievably compromised.
- This comes at a time when the inevitable consequence of the UK's decision to withdraw from the European union - amounts to a threat to nothing less than the very survival of the Isle of Man. In an uncertain future, Tynwald must support tourism. It can start by doing the right thing for the Horse Tramway.
We call on the public to join the thousands that signed our online petition in support of the tramway, and exercise their democratic right and email their MHK prior to next week’s sitting, requesting they put on hold the Loch Promenade ‘regeneration’, to encourage a more realistic and modest road resurfacing scheme, and one which sees the retention of the Horse Tramway in full.
ONLY DAYS TO SAVE THE HORSE TRAMS
Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater...
Press Statement
Next week Tynwald will vote on a series of recommendations contained in “Proposals for the Future Operation Of Douglas Horse Tramway.”
In fact the proposals look only two years into the future; beyond that the existence of the ‘iconic’ tramway is not guaranteed. As is set out in the introduction:
“This document considers various options for the future retention and operation of the horse trams, accepting that significant investment would be required to ensure its long-term viability as a transport system and visitor attraction.”
“Subject to Tynwald approval, the Department seeks to extend its operating license for a further two years, maximizing income through its heritage railways’ marketing expertise, while providing the opportunity to evaluate the business case for its continuation.”
The Minister hopes that
“Tynwald Members will support the recommendations in this report to ensure that we are able to make a fully informed and considered decision, based upon an analysis of three years of operational data, as to whether we should save our heritage horse trams for the future benefit of the Island.”
For the avoidance of any doubt - the Manx Electric Railway Society is fully supportive of the retention of the Horse Tramway and asks that Tynwald Members do just that.
The problem with what is set out elsewhere in the proposals is this: precisely what, if anything, of the horse tramway is Mr. Gawne seeking to retain?
The report includes some alarming contradictions - especially as it tries to justify what are clearly the preferred options of the Department:
- Disposing of the existing tramway stables and depot.
- Disposing of almost half the remaining fleet of tramcars.
- Reducing the length of the line and eliminating the crucial link with the Sea Terminal.
- The creation of a new tramway depot and stables in the staff car park of the MER Depot at Derby Castle.
Alarming and contradictory because elsewhere the report notes:
“An iconic aspect of the Douglas waterfront, and the last original horse tramway to have operated continuously since 1876, (barring the 2nd World War), the Tramway is a unique aspect of our heritage railways. For many visiting transport enthusiasts the Tramway is one of the most important aspects of the Island’s heritage railways, ranking amongst one of the most historically important transport systems to be found anywhere in the world.”
It is difficult to see how disposal of the Tramway Terrace stables, the 1895 depot, almost half the remaining trams, relocation and reduction of the route is compatible with the above statement.
By replacing the original depot and stables with a modern pastiche on a different site, changing the route, scrapping trams - the unique appeal, indeed the very raison d'être of the Horse line is irretrievably compromised.
As the 18-pages of notes accompanying the Tynwald proposals seek to steer and influence the vote, it paints a picture of what the authors regard as the many, many ‘good’ reasons chosen to persuade the politicians to support the Department’s “vision”.
Retention of the existing tram depot at Derby Castle is dismissed:
“The option to provide combined stables and tram depot within a fully refurbished Strathallan building was considered but rejected. The structural assessment obtained by Douglas Borough Council identified that some of the main structural elements of the building had sustained irreparable damage, and the majority of the fabric of the building was in a dilapidated condition. In engineering terms, the practicality of restoring the building was not considered viable.”
What is not stated is that the existing structure has two very distinct parts. There is the 110ft masonry building with its iconic frontage with which most people are familiar, behind which is a rearward section which is an ill-maintained, ramshackle wooden shed which is, as stated, probably ‘irreparable’ but not irreplaceable.
It will doubtlessly be argued by supporters of demolition that the depot may not be “original”. Nonetheless it dates from 1895-6, evolving over about forty years, the last major change being the addition of an upper storey in 1935. Photographs taken at the beginning of the last century show a building that is clearly identifiable today, and to all intents and purposes has, by the passage of time, earned the right to become a significant piece of transport heritage. A similar argument could be made for the retention of the Tramway Terrace Stables complex. As the report states “The current tram depot is within a conservation area and is currently awaiting consideration for Registered Building status.”
Demolition of the structure (cynics might argue before Registered Building status is granted) will rob the Horse Tramway of its heart - potentially one of its biggest assets - and simultaneously present a storage crisis resolved only by the scrapping of up to half the remaining fleet.
Of course ‘cost’ is used as justification for demolition. Based on Douglas Corporation’s remarkably specific figure:
“The projected building works for the new combined facility were estimated in December 2015 to be a total capital cost of £2,921,093.”
The plans for the site included stables, storage for 20 trams, a car lift [!] a smithy, a tack room, staff welfare and visitor viewing facilities.”
So about the same as:
“the cost of a new build visitor attraction on the Government owned land next to the Manx Electric Railway site has been estimated to be between £2.3m and £2.9m.”
The difference is one is a proper “world class” attraction - the other a modern pastiche of no historical significance. The Corporation’s ambitious scheme featuring as it did an expensive ‘car lift’ did at least offer accommodation for most of the remaining trams. What is on offer today does not.
As the authors of the report look around for further justification for the Department’s preferred scheme, it is stated that:
“Tramway [sic] would be able to use the existing Manx Electric Railway tram track.”
Really? The operation of the Horse Tramway is dependent on the fact that the entire 1.6mile route is to all intents and purposes totally flat. There is a shallow gradient as the trams leave Derby Castle, but nothing like the steep inclines of the approach to Derby Castle MER Depot, or those even steeper gradients (and sharp curves) within the depot itself.
Whilst it is possible that the trams may be mechanically hauled to and from the new premises - and the horses walked down to the existing terminus before being harnessed to the tram, maybe a scheme exists to somehow re-route the MER/horse tram line though the site of the old Summerland. If so, we should be told.
The report states:
“The Tramway provides an excellent opportunity to develop a new visitor experience comprising the historic trams, stables and a ride on the Tramway, which would increase revenues by developing an all-weather visitor attraction where the dwell time is longer.”
“The proposed attraction would combine the essential infrastructure facilities to deliver the Tramway including stabling, undercover storage for 13 trams, and key public attraction components.”
“The public attraction components would include a horse viewing gallery, tram viewing zone, exhibition, shop, café, outdoor demonstration area and car park.”
Enhancing the use of Derby Castle MER sheds by encouraging visitors and promoting the technological significance of the MER has long been advocated by this Society; the recent development of an ‘MER Museum’ at least initially operated by volunteers has been a step towards this.
However, rather than develop an all-new facility which involves the complete destruction of the historical appeal of what currently exists, we would urge Tynwald Members to recommend the Department re-visits its plans, and return to the House with proposals that build on and enhance the existing heritage - rather than satisfy what some might see as yet another example of ill-judged unnecessary expenditure.
As the open day held at the Tramway Terrace Stables last September proved, opening the doors of a working horse stable - a real one not a modern copy - could itself provide yet another ‘unique’ visitor ‘experience’. In fact one that could attract a whole different type of ‘volunteer’ and source of charitable donations. That said - thanks to the Corporation and the DoI it would appear that the stables are now a lost cause. Shame.
Which brings us to another serious flaw in what is proposed - one that has already been the subject of much adverse public comment but something the Department appears DETERMINED to follow through whatever the cost; that of truncating the line by eliminating the crucial Loch Promenade section.
As reported in the current edition of the Manx Independent 7/7/16:
“More than £1m has been spent on rejected schemes for redevelopment of Douglas Promenades. Some £182,290 had previously been spent on a phase two project which was designed but never built and £914,000 went on a redesign which was thrown out following a public inquiry, of which £381,937 was for the tramway and walkway elements which the inspector did not support.”
It is clear Mr. Gawne and his Department will stop at nothing to see realisation of his multi-million pound nightmare of ‘shared space’, traffic calming, granite block paving and wall-to-wall car parking, at the expense of the trams - when all that is needed is for the roadway to be repaired and resurfaced:
“It has been identified that there is little commercial value to be gained from running the service the full length of the promenade to the Sea Terminal. A more economical option would be to lay the Tramways track from Strathallan/Derby Castle to the War Memorial.”
Really? How, by whom and by how much?
Experience has shown when in the past the railway to Port Erin was cut back and when the MER was cut back from Ramsey there were no cost savings but increased losses). The MERS believes that cutting back the Horse Tramway in this way will significantly impact on the number of passengers carried by cutting it off from its main source of passengers - not least arriving ‘cruise passengers’ cited as a source of “growth” elsewhere in the report.
According to the proposals:
“...the current season, [has seen] significantly increased passenger figures (up 60% so far), targeted marketing including highlighting the line’s 140th anniversary of the Tramway in August.”
Good news. However, as Mr. Gawne’s Department suggests:
“This [operation of the tramway for a further two years] would enable evaluation of the business case for continuation of the Tramway prior to the need to commence replacing the Tramway track from the War Memorial to Strathallan.”
The MERS submits that in fact the Horse Tramway is being set up to fail. The inevitable severe drop off in passengers when the line is cut back, may well be used as a reason to scrap the line altogether.
Of course the real reasons to eliminate the Loch Promenade section of the line owes more to the discredited (and largely rejected) regeneration scheme (referred to above) and pressure to further increase car parking at the end of town, despite evidence presented at the planning inquiry suggesting this can be provided (assuming it is even needed) without the removal of the horse tramway. Had the planning inquiry gone the other way, the Horse Tramway would have continued down the promenade walkway all the way to the Sea Terminal. One suspects a case of post-facto rationalisation has gone on here.
CONCLUSION
Taken all in all, with the exception of the plan to continue operation for two more years, what is being proposed is an expensive scheme to permanently damage both the heritage and historical potential of the Horse Tramway, its earning capacity, increase expenditure to provide increased losses, and alienate the enthusiasts they seek to attract and the general public. It is a flawed set of proposals that deserve a fundamental rethink.
At stake is nothing less than a Manx icon. It is the last remaining horse tramway in the world. Under threat are the Queen’s Promenade stables, Strathallan tram sheds and at least eight ‘surplus’ trams, which will likely be broken up.
This comes at a time when the inevitable consequence of the UK's decision to withdraw from the European union - amounts to a threat to nothing less than the very survival of the Isle of Man. The consequence of ‘Brexit’ to the offshore finance sector of the Manx economy, predicated as it is upon the Island being an attractive place to introduce business from outside the EU into the EU, could be collapse because, amongst other things the Island will likely cease to be part of the EU VAT scheme.
In light of the gravest threat to the Island’s prosperity since WWII, the MER Society calls on Tynwald Members to think carefully before voting to undermine forever this part of the Island’s tourist infrastructure. As part of the Island’s “Heritage Railways” the horse tramway helps to benefit the Island’s economy by over £11 million income a year. Let’s keep it that way. Tynwald should be seeking to make the Island’s railways, including the Horse Tramway, part of a ‘World Heritage Site’.
The MERS calls upon Tynwald Members to:
- Back the continued operation of the Tramway, but to do so in a way which minimises unnecessary expenditure and going forward retains the essence of what makes the Horse Tramway special in the first place.
- We call on Islanders to join the thousands that signed our online petition in support of the tramway, and exercise their democratic right and email their MHK prior to next week’s sitting, requesting they put on hold the Loch Promenade ‘regeneration’, to encourage a more realistic and modest road resurfacing scheme, and one which sees the retention of the Horse Tramway in full.
The vote facing Tynwald is irreversible. Once the tramway has lost its primary function of linking the Sea Terminal with the MER, tramcars scrapped, historic sheds and stables lost - there will be no second chance.
The consequence will be that the Douglas Bay Horse Tramway will be reduced to the Half Douglas Bay Horse Tramway, a line from “Nowhere to Nowhere”, the connection to the MER from the Sea Terminal will be lost. Worse still the line of the tramway will become historically meaningless, nothing will be left of its unique infrastructure; depot and stables demolished. It will lose its unique status as a Manx National Icon and will be replaced by a novelty ride. Not only do these proposals threaten to smash the trams, they threaten to do no less than destroy the Douglas Bay Horse Tramway, to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
ENDS
Notes to Editors:
Douglas Corporation are responsible for scrapping the following ancient horse trams since World War 2.
No.2 (1876), No.3 (1876), No.4 (1882), No.5 (1883), No.6 (1883), No.8 (1884), No.9 (1885), No.10 (1885), No.15 (1883), No.19 (1889), No.20 (1889), No.23 (1891), No.24 (1891), No.25 (1891) No.26 (1891), No.30 (1894), No.31 (1894), No.41 (1905), No.48* (1935) and No.50* (1935 the last horse tram built in Britain).
*Sold to IoM Railways and subsequently scrapped by them.
Douglas Corporation allowed No.46 (1909) to be transferred Noble’s Park, thence to what should have been the safety of a Museum in Birkenhead with the consequence it was scrapped.
In addition cars No.11 (1886, the oldest tram in existence built for the Isle of Man) No.35 (1896) No. 47 (1911), are on display or stored in the open elsewhere on the Island, plus No 14 (ii) (1883) is on display at the Manx Museum, and No 22 (1890) at the Jurby Transport Museum, whilst No.49 (1935) was sold to IoM Railways, thence to a Midlands-based group and is now stored in the open in Ramsey.
All this comes at the end of a week where government spending is front-page news (“The Top 10 examples of badly-spent taxpayer’ cash” - Manx Independent 7/7/16).
The newspaper article lists projects that it believes are “the biggest wastes of [taxpayers] cash”…
- The custom-made diesel locomotive bought at a cost of £400,000 which has been out of service awaiting repair for a whole year - and during its short service on the steam railway it only pulled 34 trains.
- £125,000 spent on a car park for the Home of Rest for Old horses, with enough spaces for 102 cars and five coaches, for an attraction which is only open for part of the year an not on Saturdays.
- Some £473,000 spent this year on resurfacing The Sloc which the Infrastructure Minister Phil Gawne MHK telling a Tynwald committee that the ‘money had to be spent on something’.
- A giant mini-roundabout at Ballakillowey, a far from busy road junction, cost £276,337 in 2011. It was dubbed Gawne’s folly.’
- More than £1m has ben spent on rejected schemes for redevelopment of Douglas Promenades. Some £182,290 had previously been spent on a phase two project which was designed but never built and £914,000 went on a redesign which was thrown out following a public inquiry, of which £381,937 was for the tramway and walkway elements which the inspector did not support.
- The project to construct the promontory runway extension at the airport cost £37m. It was designed to meet international guidelines for a 240metre runway and safety area that were supposed to become mandatory. They are still not mandatory six years after the project’s completion.”
The article also lists £1m spent on an abandoned plan for a 24-hour drug rehabilitation unit, £300,000 on a ‘feasibility study’ into a TT World Series (for the idea was shelved as ‘the time was not right’) - was it ever? - and £1.1m on the Lord Street police station, opened in 2002 but for the first six months the public reception desk had to stay closed as there was no staff to man it - the building now closed and up for sale, with £2.2m of loan charges still outstanding. For those who haven’t been keeping count, that comes to over £44 million pounds.
Some, such as the ‘cabbage’, were criticised at the time. In the case of the ill-fated diesel, the business case for which cited promised ‘cost savings’, suggestions that the railway’s existing diesel should have its engine ‘repaired’ were rejected.
With regard to the Recommendations 7 and 8 it is worth noting here that this scenario was first suggested to Mr. Gawne and his Department by the Manx Electric Society (working with the Steam Railway Supporters’ Association) back in October 2014. That of the creation of “a legal body be established to provide a suitable vehicle to receive charitable donations” and that “further investigation be undertaken regarding the governance of the Douglas Bay Horse Tramway by a new arm’s length governance vehicle.”
As an aside it is perhaps worth noting that whilst the operational costs of the Horse Tramway are under microscopic scrutiny (losses for 2016 estimated at significantly less than £100,000) such worthy amenities as the Laxey Wheel, two castles and modern confections such as the iMuseum and ‘House of Manannan’ continue to receive both staffing and support which almost certainly dwarfs that of the Horse Tramway. Demolishing Castle Rushen and replacing it with a modern replica of ‘sympathetic’ design, appears (thankfully) not to be on the agenda...
Details of current members of the Department of Infrastructure can be found HERE.
|
Isle of Man Newpapers Publishing House Peel Road Douglas Isle of Man IM1 5PZ [email protected] |
Manx Radio News Desk: (01624) 682630 [email protected] |
| Members of the House of Keys | |
|
Ayre Hon Eddie TEARE MHK Ballanahowe The Lhen Kirk Andreas IM7 3EH Castletown Richard RONAN Esq MHK 85 Malew Street Castletown IM9 1LX |
Douglas East Hon Chris ROBERTSHAW MHK Bawshen Farm Ballavitchel ROad Crosby IM4 2DN Jon Joughin MHK 60 Victoria Road Douglas IM2 4HQ |
|
Douglas North John HOUGHTON Esq MHK 3 Willow Close Birch Hill Onchan IM3 3HA Ralph Peake MHK |
Douglas South Mrs Kate BEECROFT MHK Troutbeck Strang Road Union Mills IM4 4NP Bill Malarkey MHK |
|
Douglas West Chris THOMAS MHK Dolls House Old Castletown ROad Douglas IM2 1QB John SHIMMIN BEd (Hons) MHK 15 Deveonshire Crescent Douglas IM2 3RD |
Garff The Hon Stephen RODAN BSc MR Pharm S SHKSpeaker of the House of Keys Orry's Mount Ballaragh Road Laxey IM4 7PE |
|
Glenfaba David ANDERSON MHK Ballamoar Patrick IM5 3AW |
Malew and Santon Graham CREGEEN MHK 38 Silverburn Drive Ballasalla IM9 2EF |
|
Michael Alfred CANNAN Esq MHK Staward Farmhouse Claddagh Road Sulby IM7 2BA |
Middle Hon Howard QUAYLE Esq MHK Ballavitchel Lodge Ballavitchel Farm Crosby IM4 2DL |
|
Onchan David QUIRK Esq MHK 27 Birch Hill Avenue Onchan IM3 4ES Peter KARRAN Esq MHK White Cott Groudle Onchan IM3 2JY Zac HALL Esq MHK Leglislative Buildings Douglas IM1 3PW |
Peel Hon Tim CROOKALL MHK Stanley House 3 Marine Parade Peel IM5 1PB |
|
Ramsey Leonard SINGER Esq MHK Deputy Speaker of the House of Keys 20 Cooyrt Balleigh King's Reach Ramsey IM8 3NU Hon Allan BELL MHK Ballabeg Bride IM7 4BG |
Rushen Hon Juan WATTERSON BA ACA MHK Sefton Villa Four Roads Port St.Mary IM9 5LH Hon Laurence SKELLY Esq MHK Glenlea House Truggan Road Rushen IM9 5LD Hon Phil GAWNE Esq BSc MHK Lamode Ballakillowey Road Rushen IM9 4BP |
| Members of the Legislative Council | |
| David CRETNEY MHK |
Bill HENDERSON Esq MHK Leglislative Buildings Douglas IM1 3PW |
|
Hon Clare CHRISTIAN BSc President of Tynwald Leglislative Buildings Douglas IM1 3PW |
Michael COLEMAN LLB (Hons)(Open) CEng. FBCS CITP MLC 41 The Cherry Walk Douglas IM2 5NW |
|
Geoff CORKISH MBE MLC Pitcairn 8 Glencrutchery Road Douglas IM2 5NW |
Edward Alan CROWE FCIS ACIB MLC 14 Christian Avenue Reayrt Ny Cronk Peel IM5 1GU |
|
Rt Rev Robert Mar Erskine PATERSON MA MLC The Lord Bishop of Sodor and Man Thie yn Aspic 4 The Falls Douglas IM4 4PZ |
|
|
Juan TURNER MLC 22 Park Close Glen Vine IM4 4HB |
Tony WILD ACIB, MLC Moaney Quill Lodge Fairy Cottage Lonan IM4 7JN |
|
The Railway Magazine – heritage, historic and modern: |
Steam Railway – heritage: |
|
Heritage Railway – |
Modern Railways – modern: |
|
Railway Herald – heritage and modern: |
Rail – modern: |
|
Rail Express – modern and modelling: |
Tramways & Urban Transit, |