Accrington on Rails - The Tramways: A Complete History - Robert Kenyon

Cars numbered 29 and 32 which were renumbered 2 and 5 respectively went to the Llandudno & Colwyn Bay system as complete cars, with Brush bodies on Brush Type C bogies. They also were complete with two Dick Kerr 31B motors under each car, at 40 horse power each. Cars numbered 28 , 30 & 31 which were renumbered to 1, 3 & 4 respectively, came minus bogies and they received bogies from cars which had been withdrawn in 1932/33. All the five cars entered service in the red and cream of Accrington Corporation Tramways, and were given the green and cream livery over a period of time with car number 3 (Accrington 30 ) being the last one painted out of the Accrington colours during 1936. It is said that one of the cars ran in service for a time still bearing the Accrington coat of arms. Every car continued in service right up until the closure of the L&CBER in 1956. 2004 On Thursday, January 8 th , I was invited to attend a presentation given at the East Lancashire Partnership’s suite of offices located within the Globe Centre in Accrington. This was to members of the Institute of Transport, and was made on behalf of the Partnership by their Director of Transport, Mr Nick Briggs. The subject of this talk was the Partnership’s vision for the future of transport in East Lancashire, and I was invited along because of my specific interest in the implications for Hyndburn. Founded in 1999 the background of the Partnership was explained, and also its objectives. It had concluded that all the social, economic, health, housing, and employment issues can be positively influenced by improvements to the transport system. This is a well-known and universally accepted theory, which is usually put forward as an incentive to attract inward investment. Mr Briggs stated he wished he had a pound for every occasion that someone has misinterpreted the phrase ‘Rapid Transit’ to mean a Light Rapid Transit system. Well he would have had a quid off me, for I along with apparently many others took this to mean a system similar to Metrolink in Manchester! In order to compound this theory Mr Briggs described how four systems had been examined. These included Docklands Light Railway, ( which by definition is not a true LRT ), but also South Yorkshire Supertram, and two continental systems, all of which were definitely Light Rapid Transit systems. As if to verify this, he then showed a slide of what was clearly a modern articulated tram that could not be mistaken for anything else other than a Light Rapid Transit vehicle! He himself had insisted that this depiction was included in his presentation, against the advice of his colleague, who just happened to be in attendance. It appears that to the East Lancashire Partnership ‘Rapid Transit’ means no more than increasing frequencies over the existing railway timetables, more effective ticketing, and improving infrastructure. It would also seem that funding for future developments will be coming from Public - Private Partnerships (PPP’s), and certain of the interested parties have already been consulted with regard to holding stakes in those projects. March will see the commencement of a regeneration plan, when two more studies will be launched, the East Lancashire Railway Feasibility Study and the Street Transit Feasibility Study. One concept that has been seen to have major advantages is that of prepaid and automatic ticketing. This can be advanced to another level through the introduction of integrated ticketing, i.e. buying one ticket that is valid on all forms of transport within a given area, and allows the holder to travel on any operators vehicles from the start of a journey to its end. This of course works admirably well in the various zones of London, where one can access surface trains, trams, buses and the underground. Could this work in east Lancashire? A satisfactory explanation of the so-called Tram-Bus put forward several months ago as part of the solution to the area’s transport demands was alas not forthcoming. The term suggested a vehicle capable of operating on both road and rail, and capable of interchanging from one to the other whilst out in service. It appears that this proposition is now dead in the water and up to date types of conventional vehicles are now seen as part of the solution. My own conclusion is even more damning than the rest. I am convinced that originally it was the aim of the East Lancashire Partnership to secure enough funding to enable a Light Rapid Transit system to be constructed through their area. For whatever reason, possibly the inability to attract enough finance or political interference from on high, this objective has now been abandoned. The plans now put forward are nothing more than a watered-down and unambitious damage limitation exercise. I cannot disagree that

356