Clyde Metro – my vision for Renfrewshire

It takes a thought process and looking at maps and plans to think through what exactly I’d look to do.

Plan by Chic Gibson

That’s my line drawing version of what I think an eventual Clyde Metro should look like in Renfrewshire.

A mainline tram system going from Govan Subway via the QEUH hospital to Braehead, Renfrew Riverside and Renfrew Bridge to Amids and Glasgow Airport.

A connective chord from Glasgow Airport to Shortroods and both Paisley Gilmour Street and Canal Street

A tram based link using land around Paisley Canal station to Kilmacolm via Bridge of Weir, Linwood and Elderslie and a spur from Elderslie to Johnstone West and Kilbarchan.

These are in Green.

I would envisage a limited full system service from Govan to Kilbarchan/Kilmacolm.

My thoughts are that Govan, Braehead, Glasgow Airport, Paisley Gilmour Street/County Square and Paisley Canal Station are the principal starting points for journeys.

There may be Braehead to Paisley Canal services, Paisley Gilmour Street via Glasgow Airport to Govan services and Kilmacolm to Paisley Canal/Gilmour Street to connect with Scotrail services.

The services on the system can build to give half hour or quarter hour or more frequent services with the busiest points being the connection from Paisley to airport and vice versa with extended services to Braehead and Govan.

There are interchanges with Scotrail and the Glasgow Subway from the initial system and brings public transport penetration back to Bridge of Weir, Kilmacolm and Kilbarchan.

Tram Route at simplest.

Additions and Extensions

In yellow, possible additions and extensions.

An extension to Festival Park/Glasgow Science Museum and Finneston over the Squinty Bridge and into Glasgow.

An extension from Renfrew Bridge to Yoker Railway Station adding connectivity to the North Clyde Line Railway.

A westward extension to Inchinnan, Erskine and perhaps onto Bishopton Railway Station.

A link to the RAH hospital and further south in Paisley and toward Barrhead.

A West Paisley route from Paisley Gilmour Street to St Mirren Park, through Ferguslie Park to the Phoenix commercial area and onto Linwood.

A road based tramway following Glasgow Road Paisley linking Town Centre, Abbey, Whitehaugh, Ralston to Crookston and along Paisley Rd West.

A link from Braehead through Hillington Park, Hillington Industrial Estate and Penilee to Ralston and Paisley Road West.

A route from Paisley Gilmour Street to Renfrew Cross via Renfrew Road and Paisley Road with provisional stops near Gallowhill and Moorpark, Renfrew.

Research

I started by looking at Renfrewshire in terms of railways, roads and rivers

A very basic tracing of a map and outlining existing roads and railways.

A further drawing colouring roads, railways, closed railways and rivers.

Red for roads, blue for Scotrail, green for potential tramway.

A line drawing adding potential new Clyde Metro stops or potential routes.

My attempt to refine as a line diagram.

My final drawing needed annotated.

For clarity it doesn’t exactly follow Renfrewshire’s geography and a kink/bend needed to make the airport to Paisley section work.

In conclusion.

I don’t suppose to be influencing those at work on Clyde Metro. I’m floating what makes sense to me.

Previously in my blog, I have covered developments on the Glasgow Airport access project and Clyde Metro.

I agree with initial conclusions that a riverside line is needed to the Airport via Govan, QUEH Hospital and Braehead. It also needs to link to both Gilmour Street and Canal Street Railway Stations.

The fastway bus infrastructure in Govan would lend to a tram system and has the link to the subway and Partick for the Scotrail lines there.

Festival Park and the Glasgow Science Centre would be an obvious extension to a tramway as would the fast link infrastructure into Glasgow.

Thought is needed as to length of journey by tram from Glasgow City Centre to Airport.

A solution might be limited stop services between city and airport and perhaps also having bypass track at certain stops to facilitate express as well as all stopping services.

I see a wider question in Clyde Metro scheme as to whether a heavy rail solution to the Airport from the Argyle line and via Exhibition Centre to Glasgow Airport is an answer too.

Although, I see that as a bigger transport intervention and it would need tunnelling under River Clyde and under Govan to facilitate a metro line. Possibly with more tunnels at the Airport to achieve a satisfactory terminal for Metro or heavy rail electrified trains.

For now, I’ve stuck to assumption of a mainly Renfrewshire system with the obvious connection onto the subway at Govan.

It’s lighter solution and hopefully would be less costly.

As intermediate stops, Linthouse west of Govan, Braehead at the Retail Park and Braehead at the Leisure Centre end, along with Renfrew Riverside and the AMIDS development area all make sense.

I think the Renfrew Bridge as a tram stop makes sense as it is walkable to Yoker on the north side of the River Clyde.

I have seen proposals to route trams over the current swing bridge but, it has a variable pattern of closures to allow river traffic and for a permanent link.

The chord from Glasgow Airport to Paisley Gilmour Street is what the city deal should have developed as a first phase to the Clyde Metro programme.

We are now at about 17 years since cancellation of GARL and the wrong turns, lack of Transport Scotland involvement with City deal and other factors have dragged any progress.

Personally I think there are pros and cons to looking at connecting Glasgow Airport as part of a wider scheme and as years go on and there’s more consultant reports and evaluations of what is maybe already known. That’s that Glasgow Airport needs a fixed public transport link. We’ve had heavy rail ruled out and tram trains ruled out, so presumably tram is the answer.

If linking to Gilmour Street Lines then also linking to the Canal Line through Paisley makes sense in offering another connection to Glasgow by train.

Canal Street may offer opportunities under Clyde Metro but I’m aware of the areas built upon near the station and I think that heavy rail to where it currently stops with a use of nearby roads and car parking to facilitate a tram interchange and then to look at using part of the road width of Canal Street for a section of track before rejoining the former railway solum.

From there, Paisley West and then to Elderslie figuring out how to go under or over the railway in the most suitable way. It would make a good interchange point with the Ayrshire lines.

The walking and cycling paths from there lead to Linwood and Johnstone and Kilmacolm.

One is the former Kilmacolm line and I’d suggest that Linwood would be a point to find a station site and then use the old Houston Station site before Bridge of Weir and Kilmacolm on the old trackbed.

Another opportunity is the line that used to run Johnstone, Kilbarchan, Lochwinnoch and Kilbirnie. It might be a stretch to go as rural as from Kilbarchan to Kilbirnie but perhaps opportunity is there in future.

Having a terminus at Kilbarchan or connecting to Milliken Park Railway Station adds connectivity and means that the tramway in place of Canal line extension has two terminal points and can allow at least a half hourly service to both places and makes a through Paisley tram system a possibility with opportunity to run from Braehead or Paisley to either Kilbarchan or Kilmalcolm with connections to the Scotrail services from Glasgow at Canal or Gilmour Street.

And Finally..

Costs and practicality.

After Edinburgh Trams I think a limited scheme from Govan to Glasgow Airport and from Paisley Canal to Kilbarchan/Kilmacolm would work and the additional chord into Paisley links to Scotrail and knits a network that would have purpose and destinations.

Further links with on road tramway inroads where the previous Glasgow Corporation Tramway system ran are maybe possible too, but I’ve drawn possibilities in the yellow parts of the plan that would add destination and purpose to the system.

Inchinnan and Erskine from Renfrew makes sense as a later development. Perhaps even linking Erskine to Bishopton Railway Station too.

I looked at the practicality of diverting the North Clyde lines from Bowling to Erskine and unfortunately I don’t think that’s a practical or good value option.

Erskine by its distance from Renfrew and Paisley is a tough proposition for public transport. The Inverclyde Line doesn’t come close enough, there’s no previous trackbeds in the area either.

Best solution is Inchinnan and onto Erskine but question of journey time and suitability of mode of tram versus bus is another question.

I do have to also refer to Bus as I think many of the lines drawn also reflect services to and from Braehead.

The 77 first service from Braehead to Glasgow AirPort is relatively new but offers so many destination opportunities despite being a long route and a slow way into Glasgow.

McGills Clyde Flyers and Express services go to Braehead, Linwood, Bridge of Weir and Kilmacolm.

Abstraction and the forthcoming proposals in 2027 from SPT for bus franchising must be looked at.

If Clyde Metro overlays existing bus routes by train, metro or tram there will be grievances over process and choices made.

However Glasgow has already lost one potential tram system to bus interests in 1994 with Strathclyde Tram and even if Clyde Metro drags on to deal with similar issues, I think it’s worth addressing and that thought is with SPT and those reporting on Clyde Metro.

Strathclyde Tram.

The opportunity is there and I believe for Renfrewshire that much could be done.

SPT and Clyde Metro show plans of nodes, key points and opportunity in their documents but I do think a system through Paisley and Airport to Braehead and Govan would work and make sense.

SPT.

SPT.

SPT.

SPT.

I’ll see in time if SPT and City Deal Group plans for Clyde Metro match mine about Renfrewshire, but there’s at least 2 years to go and a load of reports to come

SPT

Early to mid 2027 according to them and after that political decisions on spending and scope.

Fin/.

Get Glasgow Moving’s Clyde Metro Map

From Glasgow Times

https://www.getglasgowmoving.org has produced a vision of Clyde Metro.

It’s a vision from their perspective with a clean and readable map

It is ambitious and to me an idealised outcome for a Greater Glasgow Rail and Metro scheme.

I like parts of it, I have doubts on some aspects and questions on others.

Nevertheless, in the absence of news from official sources, it’s worth pushing the issue and seeing what comes from the Glasgow City Council led process. As far as I understood, things were at a consultant’s report stage and this would be due around Winter 2025/26 with further decisions afterwards.

My thoughts

Most modern tram systems from a starting point of zero are establishing one or two lines.

Metro as a starting point is a different matter. 

Cities in Europe with some existing tram networks have went Pre-Metro, then Metro from Tram based systems.

Ambition of the Get Glasgow Moving Mqp is one thing, but realisation another.

I think ambition and reality need to meet as a big bang whole network investment is unlikely to happen.

Phased extension of branches seems to be way that systems England in Birmingham and Manchester have expanded.

Edinburgh’s proposals to extend their system are partly based on older proposals that were scaled back and new lines that are now being cautiously scoped and consulted upon.

As for Greater Glasgow.

I think the conversion of existing heavy rail network to Metro is unlikely although there is one part of the Glasgow system that would be a likely better prospect as a tram conversion – the Cathcart Circle lines.

The Argyle line proposal to serve Exhibition Centre and then Partick before new infrastructure to Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Braehead and Glasgow Airport seems problematic to me.

Capacity on the section Partick to Hyndland has been covered in transport reviews with 24 paths per hour seen as maximum.

Therefore any diversion of the Argyle Line westward would, in my view, be better crossing Clyde after Exhibition Centre Station and looking to interchange with the Govan Subway before QEUH and Braehead and would be involving tunnelling to at least the QEUH. 

(That’s a lot of digging and underground works likely requiring tunnel boring machines)

This would be likely to be biggest capital cost commitment in such a metro project and if planned to have a Glasgow Airport to Lanarkshire terminuses spine, then it’s better to be a heavy rail route .

Directing the Argyle Line to Govan allows a subway interchange to Partick, it frees the capacity bottleneck and allows greater frequency on the North Clyde Lines but removes the bottleneck issues at Partick and Hyndland.

West Central section of map.

The proposed Kelvin-Cart line may alleviate some of that by taking the via Singer to Milngavie and Dalmuir services through the tunnel that exist at Botanic Gardens and under Great Western Road from Kelvin Bridge.

Again, I think that is an ambitious solution, although linking to Glasgow Cross, using the City Union Line and linking to Cathcart Circle would avoid movements on Argyle Line and be a creative solution. 

The capacity available via Glasgow Central and Glasgow Cross sections  with both Argyle and Kelvin-Cart at metro interval frequencies might be another question.

Central area of map

The City Union Line is logical to remove Paisley Canal services from Glasgow Central, to link via what was previously called Glasgow Crossrail to Bellgrove utilising the Springburn Branch and getting to Anniesland via the North Commuter line.

I would doubt extension westward. The questions I would have are in terms of fully double tracking the existing Paisley Canal line. 

The issue of the built upon trackbed west of the Canal Street station would make an expensive land acquisition, even before the work needed to clear the cycle and walking path routes beyond Paisley Canal.

I see the potential westward with the former railway infrastructure. Kilmacolm/Bridge of Weir, Linwood, Former Paisley West station all would have merit. 

But there are engineering challenges even with a former railway route. 

I think those paths would better suit a modern tramway and using a short stretch of Canal Street in Paisley and then going onto the old railway formation.

I was disappointed to see that a connection to Johnstone North and Kilbarchan was not considered, it would offer another possibility.

Both would work well as part of a Renfrewshire Tram running from Kilbarchan or Kilmacolm to Paisley Canal, interfacing with Railway there and at Paisley Gilmour Street before connecting with Glasgow Airport and Braehead.

Extending to QEUH and Govan Subway would tie nicely in terms of other destinations and interchanges.

Perhaps that might be necessary if a big infrastructure commitment like a new tunnel from Exhibition Centre to Govan is seen as too costly.

I mention Renfrewshire Tram.

I do, as I think running any tram over the recent Renfrew Bridge is an unlikely prospect. I think the West Tram proposed on the map falls at the use of both new bridges north of Glasgow Airport.

Western area of plan

The section from Duntocher to Dock Street might be better joining the Cross Tram at Scotstoun.

The northern part of the City Union Line running from Paisley Canal to Paisley St James, Glasgow Airport, Renfrew and Braehead, In my opinion, would work better as a tramline through Paisley as outlined above.

A connection westward would serve Linwood, Johnstone, Kilbarchan, Bridge of Weir and Kilmacolm giving a logical mix of destinations that could perhaps be extended to the Royal Alexandra Hospital (known for its all day parking issues) and perhaps even through the southern parts of Paisley toward Barrhead.

Given thicker lines for existing heavy rail and thinner ones for Tram, I have assumed that the Get Glasgow Moving proposal map is set on that basis and I do think has a number of obvious questions.

The extension of heavy rail lines might be possible using old routes that were cut in the  1950’s and 1960’s.

Although, I would be cautious about conditions of former tunnels and former trackbeds, there also will be issues of headway for electrification to consider.

Non-electrified sections of the Glasgow Railway System still exist, notably the City Union Line and Maryhill/North Commuter Line and may require modernisation as well as electrification for frequent services.

I very much agree with potential for Glasgow Cross as an interchange but do wonder about routing back through Glasgow Queen Street Low Level.

Large infrastructure projects aren’t likely to be part of the Clyde Metro plan due to cost.

There’s already been an element of project hesitancy in terms of a tram solution for the link from Paisley to Glasgow Airport being rolled into the thinking for Clyde Metro.

Critics can look at the cancellation of GARL in 2009 and the way the City Deal has handled tram/train and other proposals.

A link that isn’t cleared through Transport Scotland’s processes isn’t likely to happen.

There’s political and other factors at play and the debacle over the first phase of Edinburgh Trams means that commitment to a large scale public transport scheme for Glasgow will always carry doubts.

A Holyrood election in 2026 won’t particularly help and other matters will be presented as more important for public spending.

Getting back to the GGM map,

The route pattern and service frequency from Dalmuir to Springburn, Airdrie and Lanarkshire through the North Clyde and Argyle Line is well established and frequent. 

I think care is needed to establish how to improve on that and I see the logic of the Cross-City line proposals but both existing lines would be radically changed by the Argyle and Kelvin-Cart proposals.

I have always seen the merit in using the City Union line to connect up the Paisley Canal, Springburn and Maryhill/Anniesland lines but do think that such a proposal may be about as big a bang as Scotrail may be happy with on the network.

The Cathcart Circle as I mentioned at the start may be better converting to tram and using run offs to use existing road bridges to access city centre and do a loop up one side of Central Station to Buchanan Bus Station and Queen Street going back down the other side of Central Station.

Trams may allow other run-offs the Cathcart Circle toward Castlemilk or Newton Mearns and I think that will be part of the thinking for Clyde Metro.

I note those are both covered by the Cross Tram routes on GGM map, but the overall routing east, then south of that proposal isn’t as direct as branching off from the Cathcart Circle.

The existing branches of the Cathcart Circle to Newton and Neilston may need thought as to whether Trams or Tram/Train vehicles are better suited for performance and use of the existing infrastructure.

Although tram/train may be advantageous for converted lines like the City Union Line proposal and offer opportunity to run off from existing infrastructure.

Conclusion

I’ve written and blogged in detail before on a proposed Metro for Glasgow.

Issues that I see.

Scotrail are seeking to replace existing suburban train fleets and that’s the existing Class 318 and 320 trains with options that may also include the Class 334 units. These trains cover almost all the lines that the Get Glasgow Moving plan will use. The timescale will be the near future in the next five or so years.

Scotrail website.

Some conversion of existing Heavy Rail and some new tram lines are likely to be the proposal with options to extend in future.

I don’t see a ‘big bang’ at start of the process and think there will be a cautious approach to what can and will be done.

Glasgow’s Railways will have issues in terms of trains per hour, terminal capacity and network congestion that the proposed new suburban train fleet will not solve.

Removing services or service groups from Glasgow Central will be a selling point for Clyde Metro. 

As I said, I see the attraction to a Cathcart Circle conversion to tram with a City Centre loop and the use of the Union City line to connect Paisley Canal and Springburn, Maryhill/Anniesland sections.

I think that is most likely conclusion of Clyde Metro with Tram proposals, most likely Paisley Gilmour Street to Glasgow Airport, Braehead and Govan Subway via the Queen Elizabeth Hospital.

Scotrail and Network Rail are aware of the capacity issue at Partick/Hyndland corridor and the Argyle line might be unpicked to an extent, but I can’t see it being rerouted toward Glasgow Airport unless substantial funds are available and a commitment is made by both Scottish and UK governments to a ‘big scheme’ as part of the Clyde Metro programme.

With HS2 trains running to Glasgow Central in the 2030’s the capacity of the station needs to be expanded and Clyde Metro could help by removing some existing services away. 

That may give the programme some impetus, but changes from Network Rail to GBR structure, a possible change in government at Holyrood and the City Deal programmes might affect what’s available for spending.

Certainly the timescale of HS2 and its longer trains will need thought and it has been mentioned and covered by previous NR documents on delivery periods.

Arguments can be made that Greater Glasgow needs similar transport infrastructure to cities like Manchester or Birmingham, but recent announcements on a delay to the proposed Leeds/West Yorkshire system indicate the thoughts of the UK Treasury toward public transport spending outside of the London Metropolitan area.

Bus interests will obviously be against tram routes and metro system that would abstract from their busiest routes and services.

Timing of Scottish regulation and implementation of SPT’s proposals aren’t likely to dovetail well with the introduction of Clyde Metro and will introduce realpolitik and objections to proposals like GGM’s map.

Realism and deliverable first phases of Clyde Metro might encourage future phases and as I said, there are factors at play that will see a cautious approach to what the City Deal grouping finally propose.

I think it’s likely that the initial offering as Clyde Metro will be underwhelming to those that have followed public transport in Scotland, but it will be down to politics both local for area and at Holyrood.

AMIDS to Paisley (and relevance to Airport Access Project and Clyde Metro)

AMIDS is the advanced manufacturing district created West of Renfrew and North of Paisley.

Source Paisley is. (view is from north to south)

Renfrewshire Council have announced a number of new routes to connect to the area.

Most obvious in the change to Inchinnan Road, it’s been curtailed and replaced with a new road to the junction with the former A8.

The area is created through the City Deal for Greater Glasgow.

Along with AMIDS, there are projects with Renfrew Riverside and Clyde Waterfront. The most significant being a bridge over the Clyde intended to be a fixed link instead of the Renfrew Ferry.

Other things are happening like a pathway being created for walking and cycling between Renfrew and Paisley using the alignment of the old railway. The project is through the Scottish Government’s Clyde Mission initiative and was one of 12 selected with funding of nearly £1 Million.

Source Wikipedia

The routing of the former railway goes behind many of the commercial premises that are on Renfrew Road, Paisley and the solum continues under the M8 and toward Renfrew via Knockhill Park.

As can be seen the line was on the right bank of the White Cart Water.

To link with that pathway, new infrastructure to and from the AMIDS area is proposed.

Source Renfrewshire Council

Above plan shows an area from Paisley Town Centre north via Abercorn Street with a bridge and. New road formation linking to Inchinnan Road.

Abercorn Street – wall at left is the former Railway to Renfrew

Harbour Road

This area is mainly industrial and business premises. There is an existing footbridge that was recently reopened near Paisley Harbour linking to Love Street.

The bridge between Abercorn Street and Carlile Place was out of use for 25 years, it provides a link over the river to Love Street.

Source Renfrewshire Council

A new Road bridge is proposed to cross the river at an angle and connect onto Inchinnan Road, before Glasgow Airport.

Source Renfrewshire Council

Finally, before the bridge over the river another new route has been created to link back to Renfrew Road near the Roundabout where McDonald’s is located.

The thinking behind that is to make the new site for Paisley Grammar School more accessible.

Now, that in itself is a step change as it may direct traffic away from Love Street, which can be busy with traffic between Paisley and Glasgow Airport and may direct non M8 traffic for the airport off the Paisley one-way system roads.

The working of that remains to be seen, but certainly with the bridge and connection from Renfrew Road, it would add to accessibility.

So, what of the Airport Access Project?

It’s subsumed into the wider Clyde Metro proposals although mention made that it could be an initial phase.

The width of Abercorn Street and the former railway together might work as giving road/tramway/footpath/cycle path in the area.

The plan for Abercorn Street shows as far as the viaducts for Paisley Gilmour Street and possibly a connecting section on the wide roadway at Old Sneddon Street might suffice to get to County Square and it’s entrance to the Railway Station.

Possibly a tram could use the proposed angled bridge over the White Cart and the upper section of Inchinnan Road before entering the Glasgow Airport footprint. There may be Roadways that could form a route within the Airport’s one way system to the main car park near the Terminal building.

It’s speculation by me that the Clyde Metro Airport Access Route would use the upgraded roads and bridge and bridge and with a shuttle service, perhaps a single bidirectional track would suffice with passing places if there’s an intermediate stop on route.

We’ll have to wait to see if the AAP is passively provided for within these proposals or not. Certainly running a tramway via Love Street has its issues but there was a former layout that ran up Inchinnan Road in the days of the old Glasgow and District Tramways network and even before that the Paisley and District network.

Source BBC

Source BBC

In 1923, the Paisley and Districts Tramway (in black) was taken over by Glasgow Corporation Tramways (in red)

The point of zooming in is to show that the Abbotsinch section certainly had a tramway, although questionable as to whether GCT operated it after takeover.

The Paisley system did extend out to Johnstone, Renfrew Ferry and Barrhead with the extent of the tramway routes matching Railway connections in some ways.

As for Clyde Metro, it will be a different beast to the former tramway network and it’s very unlikely that any of the former Tramways will be mirrored by Clyde Metro.

Clyde Metro – the challenges.

In my previous post, I set out the opportunity.

Paisley and The Clyde Metro

Link to Paisley & Clyde Metro.

In my opinion, there’s challenges too.

It’s a step change for a city area and I don’t necessarily think it’s a straightforward prospect.

Project Hesitancy.

I don’t know the right shorthand but, for Trams and Metro Systems in the UK, the modern history is complicated. Cities had systems, move to buses and only in last 30 years has a reintroduction of fixed public transport came about.

Some systems from the nineties have expanded and become examples of what the Glasgow City Region wants to achieve and others are examples of what not to do.

Manchester. The Metrolink has seen sustained expansions and improvements for the Greater Manchester area. It has a champion in terms of the Mayor of the region and Manchester is looking at High Speed Rail, further commuter rail improvements and the improvements that a Transport for North agency could make across Northern England including Liverpool, Leeds and Newcastle upon Tyne with ‘Northern Powerhouse Rail’ proposals. These have been tempered by revisions by UK Government as well as with changes to HS2 particularly for an eastern leg to connect to Leeds.

Edinburgh. The Edinburgh Trams Enquiry has rumbled on and the costs incurred on replacing utilities and roads for the projected route became a political football and a spending headache. A single linear route from Airport to City Centre is only now seeing a further expansion toward Leith.

Glasgow – Strathclyde Tram. A mid nineties attempt for Glasgow to route a tram west to east ended with a challenge made by the dominant bus operator and very little in the way of information that I can quote as a panel at House of Lords covered the case. The promoter, Strathclyde Regional Council was wound up in 1996 with Local Government reorganisation and Clyde Metro isn’t a rehash of that scheme.

In general terms, the UK is poor at public transport infrastructure and a different attitude taken towards operation of public transport networks. Bus privatisation and the break up of British Rail, National Bus Company, Scottish Bus Group and sales of municipal undertakings took transport into private hands from the mid-eighties onward, it led to growth of large undertakings like Stagecoach National Express and First as well as seeing those companies enter rail franchises.

We are only now seeing an aftermath with Rail franchises moving back to government hands and the difficulties for many Bus operations in different parts of the UK.

City networks have changed, the competition between companies didn’t in the main materialise with Buses as city networks were lucrative resources to fund expansion and acquisitions, but some of the rail franchises proved more difficult prospects.

Times have changed and the social utility of Bus networks are recognised and legislation introduced to allow Councils and City Mayors in England to create new undertakings or regulate the local markets.

London, of course, was different. The red buses remained regulated and routes are let out to operators on contracts. The system has an overall guiding hand through the Mayor and Transport for London. The underground has seen investment and improvements and the recently opened Elizabeth Line as a cross-rail for the city takes pressure off some of the busiest tube lines. Trams in south London and the Docklands Light Railway have also seen investment. The London Overground has taken investment in what were secondary British Rail lines and created another Metro system from that.

LOCATION

Even in a ‘climate emergency’ Glasgow and the West of Scotland remain rainswept in comparison to much of Western Europe. A temperate but maritime climate means Glasgow sees something like 170 days per year on average with rain.

It doesn’t mean that public transport can’t work, Buses and Trains operate as normal in daily business but it can mean challenges as disparate for the rail network as overheating track points in high summer to frozen components in the worst parts of winter.

In terms of roads, regular use of road salt can see deterioration in road surfaces with potholes and other issues. Roads around the M8 Kingston Bridge use a liquid or glycerin solution to try and avoid further damage to the bridge structure.

Comparisons of tram systems will be limited, Edinburgh, Dublin and Manchester might provide useful examples of information on how to build and operate but, for construction, testing and operation, there will be specific issues for the city and choice of heavy metro will rely on the technical knowledge of the Glasgow City Rail Network and the Light Metro will need to tap into that knowledge whilst learning the city and environment.

Taking example costs from English Cities might help, but not every system will match closely or be adaptable.

Taking worldwide knowledge of new systems may help, but new systems in China or India may not necessarily have answers for the West of Scotland.

Technology

In heavy metro terms, The Scotrail network will lead the thinking for Clyde Metro and existing Train types and stock may be the initial answer for converting the system.

Clyde Metro also meets Scotrail’s stock situation where electric trains running services can date from the mid 1980s. Only the refurbished High Speed Trains are older.

Class 314 trains dating from the late 1970s and introduced with the Argyle line reopening have been retired in the past few years.

Class 318 three car units are similar BREL British Rail Engineering designs from the mid 1980s originally introduced for the ‘Ayrline’ electrification project. There are 21 units.

Class 320 was originally 22 units for North Clyde and Argyle Lines, an updated improved version of the BREL design introduced in 1990.

The class 318 and 320 units can work together and form a common pool, adjustments were made to the 320 units to enable them to work together. Additional 12 units were added to fleet as English Franchises gained replacements for Class 321 units and these were converted from four carriages to three and made into Class 320 units similar to the 1990 fleet.

Class 334 were introduced as replacements for the 1960’s Blue Trains and 40 Units were introduced around 2000. They initially operated Ayrshire and Inverclyde services but now operate on extended Helensburgh and Milngavie to Edinburgh Waverley Services.

Class 380 are modern Siemens Desiro stock with 38 units mixed between 3 and 4 carriage units. Normally operate Ayrshire and Inverclyde services and maximum of seven carriage trains are formed due to platform lengths

Class 385 are Scotrail’s most modern units being Hitachi A Train derived but appearing similar with gangways between units like the Class 380. 70 units with a mix of three and four car units and were introduced with the EGIP Edinburgh Glasgow improvement project and operate the shuttle services between the cities as well as the expanded electrification of services to Alloa and Stirling.

Therefore Scotrail needs to replace the Class 318s as the end of service life approaches. Scotrail have maintained and upgraded all of its older stock to modern standards and only the withdrawn Class 314 units could be viewed as poorer quality.

In Clyde Metro terms, A big bang, new Heavy Metro fleet would bring uniformity, a step change for trains that can serve more distant locations.

Balanced against that is cost. The majority of lines are or will be electrified. Routes to East Kilbride and Barrhead on the Glasgow and South Western are currently being upgraded and electrified.

Units similar to class 318 and 320 have been withdrawn by English operators in recent years and the shelf life for these 70 or so units must be limited.

A decision on their replacement might be deferred until a plan of conversion and operation for the Heavy Metro lines of Clyde Metro is established but their use isn’t necessarily guaranteed for say the Cathcart Circle lines.

London’s Overground made its step change by introducing metro style trains and carriages onto city lines previously operated by regular trains. Whether that is the thinking on the ‘heavy metro’ element remains to be seen, but Transport for London deep cleaned all Overground stations, made a point of tackling vandalism and having staff at stations from start to end of operations daily as well as the new operating stock.

Scotrail will still operate in the Clyde Metro area, lines will be shared in places and whether a Glasgow version of the Oystercard and a Glasgow version of TfL is introduced is another question.

Operation

At present Scotrail are an arms length company owned and operated by the Scottish Government

The Glasgow Subway is operated by SPT, Strathclyde Partnership for Transport. They are also an agency providing services for local authorities in the former Strathclyde area and subsidising some bus services.

The Glasgow City Region is the City Deal area for the west of Scotland including Inverclyde, Renfrewshire, East Renfrewshire, Glasgow and East and West Dunbartonshire and North and South Lanarkshire – it’s similar but not exactly same as the area SPT in it’s earlier Passenger Transport Executive days covered. As yet the City Region has no transport body.

The Scottish Government’s transport agency is Transport Scotland. Dealing with Roads and Ferries as well as public transport and Rail. It is a Scotland wide body.

Edinburgh uses Transport for Edinburgh to run the Trams as well as Lothian Buses. In recent years they have expanded the Bus brands to ones operating in West and Mid Lothian and differently in East Lothian towards the Scottish Borders. As mentions above, expansion of Edinburgh Trams to Leith is ongoing.

It seems a new operator is needed for Clyde Metro. It will share in places with Scotrail on heavy metro. A more enclosed Light Metro network is proposed too, more similar to a tram network although having two forms of rolling stock may be an issue.

In Germany the city transport networks have a ‘Verkersverbund’ as operator of street trams, pre-metro and full metro systems. It can vary with S-Bahn suburban train networks to U-Bahn underground systems.

Typically each city’s transport operator runs the system and in some cases is old infrastructure that is upgraded from street trams toward pre-metro and metro standards.

Pre-Metro systems typically use trams and will have Street and underground sections and may have sections converted from railways.

In and around Karlsruhe, Tram/Train operation sees the vehicles Street run in city centres but also use pre-existing rail lines to operate to towns and villages further distant.

Much of the Clyde Metro as defined in the STPR2 study is urban.

STPR Clyde Metro area

Routes around Renfrewshire, say to Erskine or Barrhead or Neilston may see a transition from City through suburbs to outlying towns.

The proposal is long term and over a 40 year period.

The time frame may go beyond the City Region Deal too.

Therefore, it’s an issue with Scottish Government and Transport Scotland as to the Vehicle that creates the Clyde Metro and the vehicle that manages and operates and sells passes or tickets to the public.

The Vehkersbundverein in Germany are seperate to the local councils and maybe operating over a number of different local authorities but generally within the one state.

So a similar body that’s across the Glasgow City Region, that’s not the City Deal authority and not Transport Scotland is likely and may need legislation to establish. It would seem unlikely SPT would be transformed from its current role and more likely the Glasgow Subway become an element of the Clyde Metro Network.

Local accountability is needed and representation from both national government and local Councils is necessary even if an operator does the day to day work.

Image

The London Underground’s Roundel of a red circle and blue bar is iconic and memorable.

The Glasgow area needs to have a design or logo or shape that makes its mark.

Colours too. The metro vehicles will have to be distinct from the Scotrail blue and saltire dots logos.

Fonts and lettering and signage and user interface will matter and that’s as important for physical signs for stations and stops to how it looks on the internet or app

For me, Glasgow cracked it in the 1970s. It took the traditional Green and Cream coloured buses and made a bright Yellow and Green livery going from the traditional Glasgow City Transport livery to the operation by the new PTE

The GG symbol

1970s PTE1 Yellow/White/Green. Photo Chic Gibson at Glasgow Vintage Vehicle Trust.

To me, that could work on modern tram/Metro Vehicles

First Glasgow bus in PTE1 livery- Photograph Chic Gibson at Glasgow Vintage Vehicle Trust Museum

I think it’s something that could work or be adapted. The GG Greater Glasgow arrow/chevron implies movement and bright immediate colours catch the eye.

In a football country though and a city like Glasgow it would create some issues as Green/White are Celtic’s colours. The green/white/yellow create a tricolour. But we have had orange ‘Strathclyde Red’ trains and buses too.

Whether just the white and yellow whether green changes to green and blue, there are fantastic designers of vehicle liveries out there and something distinct and lively is needed against a grey sky on a rainy day.

Good design is part of the Transport for London experience and you see that when visiting the city and also their transport museum in Covent Garden.

Useage

What is Clyde Metro solving?

Who’s a passenger?

Sometimes you have to start at the beginning and look at the problem.

Congestion. Motorways designed for 70mph travel get to city centres and you have congestion and tail backs and queues.

Car use expands to fit the available road space. Up to a certain point free running stops and the weight of numbers of demand and capacity reach the point where it a problem.

Even public transport can be snarled up by traffic and buses fall victim to other road users at peak hours.

So, a network on its own track, it’s own space, can run differently to roads, at different frequencies from different places to combine to give a very frequent service at the city centre and back out again.

I commuted to Glasgow city centre by train most of my working life. It was a 15 minute journey with walks at either end.

The walking at either end allowed me access to shops and facilities. I latterly sometimes met my daughter went for dinner, browsed bookshops and used the train to get home.

The car journey was only equivalent to the train when the motorway was quiet. I would still have to pay for parking and still have to find a space near where I worked. The parking was usually near £10 a day and then there’s fuel, the car costs, tyres, maintenance, insurance, road tax.

My monthly travel pass was about £5 a day covering both ways, buses if I needed to and flexible travel at weekends too. I used an SPT Zonecard much of the time and it was more expensive than a scotrail weekly/monthly ticket but had more flexibility. It was a rail ticket with a photo card not a modern Oyster card type ticket.

I wasn’t alone in doing that sort of commute in and out to Glasgow. Workers, Students at universities and colleges.

So, points and places that generate journeys. Workplaces, facilities, education, hospitals, restaurants, bars and everything else.

A public transport solution can be mixed mode. Train to Partick, switch to subway and go to the West End of Glasgow or Govan. Buses can feed trains, I’ve certainly used the bus to get to or from the station on a rainy day.

So, your answer is that the Glasgow or Greater Glasgow ‘Verkersbundverein’ is the means to access transport. You have a card or a pass or an app on your phone. Ping it at a reader on your way out and in. Get charged a flat rate daily or for a specific journey or whatever’s the cheapest bearing in mind the overheads and costs of running the network.

But the network doesn’t need to make a profit. It’s there as infrastructure, a shared investment for over 2 milllion people and visitors and tourists.

It’s an opportunity for the first time in decades to modernise how people get around a city. It’s an opportunity to provide a modern, safe, clean service for everyone.

It’s a chance for the public to take pride in knowing they have a fast, frequent, reliable and affordable solution to getting about, that they can mix active travel with a fixed system where they know when they’ll get home.

So, it’s commuters and shopping and having a drink and getting home safely.

It is done elsewhere and can be done for the Greater Glasgow area.

Conclusion

I could advocate for infrastructure and public transport all day long. The benefits are huge, the opportunity is huge. But the UK turned it from a public service to a private good. Having a car was seen as desirable and a bubble for you and your family. Housing estates designed for it. Shopping parks where only car access was made.

High streets die, shopping plazas change. Bigger stores get built.

Somehow we get back to, wasn’t it great when I could walk to the shops and the fifteen minute/twenty minute community becomes desirable.

Parking a car is a headache sometimes. Accessing cities can be too. It’s part of the answer that’s society seeks.

For the Clydeside Conurbation, a place that industrialised. Became busy on commerce and making things, that saw a sad decline and the loss of workplaces and communities and changed with schemes and housing and then again regeneration, the answer must be to again evolve.

To keep our heritage of buildings and places bit make it accessible for all in a common way and a Metro offers that. A chance to change, a chance to step up to an integrated system where you can have an app or a card and your bus connects to your metro to your destination and it’s planned and thought through and made to give everyone access and ability to use that day to day in their lives.

It’s been achieved elsewhere and it’s possible and the vision is needed to see through the initial possibilities and see it as an investment in our future, not a cost or tax or way to punish motorists. More an incentive not to have to drive.

Paisley and The Clyde Metro

As far as I understand, planning for the Airport to Paisley Tram Line is stalled. It was paused at the point the Glasgow City Region introduced the Clyde Metro proposal

From Renfrewshire Council Website

That’s fairly clear, there’s not much on it in terms of searching news and I’ve been through minutes at SPT, looked at Transport Scotland, Renfrewshire Council and the Glasgow City Region websites. The minutes of the City Region meetings are on Glasgow City Council’s site.

It’s a fair bit of looking back and forward but I didn’t particularly see anything that had specific reference to the AAP or within the context of ‘Clyde Metro’ – in itself, there’s not much to delve into.

The STPR2 late last year had content and mention of Clyde Metro as a project that’s approved and being worked upon. I presume that’s via Transport Scotland and obviously SPT and Glasgow City Council have had some input on behalf of the Coty Deal Region

STPR2 Final Technical Report

There’s a fair few documents under STPR2, I have speed read where necessary, more as a check on whether there’s additional information or content. It’s rather unwieldy in places and takes time to be sure that there’s not information.

Clyde Metro indicative plan

That’s the plan that I had a look at, to my mind, there’s a few bits to think about.

First is conversion of existing heavy rail and that seems to be things like the Cathcart Circle with Newton and Neilston Branches. It adds up to quite a few hourly departures to and from Glasgow Central, obviously freeing platform capacity there.

Zoom in around Central Glasgow area

Next is the Paisley Canal line, which makes sense. Now I’ll add a point, the West Street interchange with the Glasgow Subway makes sense and has been called for previously but the orange line continues with the City Union freight only line over the Clyde and presumably either to turn back to Queen Street low level or, the use Bellgrove, as marked as an interchange with a the North Clyde Line.

So, without screaming, Glasgow Crossrail and a potential Paisley Canal routing avoiding Glasgow Central allowing passengers to hop off at West Street for the Subway or Bellgrove for mainline Scotrail services. To me that scores for connectivity and whether or not a turn back into Queen Street Low Level is possible or not, it may mean that the Canal Line element of the Metro becomes cross-city.

I’ll cover Paisley Canal further when discussing Paisley and Renfrewshire.

Metro plan to East

If and I do say, if, you look closely at Central Glasgow, the question that popped up at me was the Argyle Line.

Central Glasgow area again.

I’ll make no apologies for posting the plan again as readers will need to look at the Black Lines on the plan.

Glasgow to Ayrshire and Inverclyde via Glasgow Central – tick.

Glasgow and South Western to Barrhead, Kilmarnock and East Kilbride -tick

North Clyde electrics via Dalmuir, Yoker and Queen Street low level to Bellgrove and onward -tick.

Glasgow to Cumbernauld-tick

Glasgow to Motherwell/Lanarkshire -tick

Presumably these Black Lines are Core Scotrail services to existing City Stations as at present.

But that leaves in orange.

Argyle Line via Glasgow Central Low Level.

North Commuter to Maryhill/Anniesland

Milngavie/Westerton and Singer/Westerton branches to Queen Street Low Level and Glasgow Central Low Level

I am not claiming expertise o these railway lines, but they seem all orange and likely to be Clyde Metro. Whether the idea is a core between these locations using the ‘Crossrail’ section to get to Paisley Canal Line and there’s a dotted connection from West Street to the Cathcart Circle.

Next look for QEUH – Queen Elizabeth University Hospital.

To me, that’s close to my idea of breaking the Argyle Line at Finnieston (Exhibition Centre) and then going to Govan and the QEU Hospital complex (includes what was ‘Yorkhill’ as the Children’s Hospital too.

Bridge?/Tunnel? It solves the frequency conundrum on the Partick to Hyndland section of track.

The orange lines also feed back to Hyndland and it’s noted on the plan, so presumably using the sections of tracks that connect between Westerton and Maryhill and also the more recent infrastructure allowing Anniesland to be the turn back point for the Maryhill/North Commuter services.

Back to QEUH and there’s dashed orange and dashed purple lines.

One orange set of dashed lines go to Renfrew via Braehead and that makes sense.

Another set of dashed Purple Lines lead to Newton Mearns through the South West of Glasgow, I’m presuming that would be Craigton/Pollok/Silverburn Centre/Newton Mearns.

There’s a Purple Dashed Line stub at between Paisley and Glasgow. I presume that’s for Ibrox Stadium?

From Renfrew on our dashed orange line we get to Glasgow Airport.

So to run that back, a orange line as the Argyle line, Glasgow Central Low Level to Exhibition Centre – below or above the Clyde to I assume Govan and then the Hospital complex, Braehead, Renfrew and Glasgow Airport.

Time for the plan to the west.

Renfrewshire, Inverclyde and West Glasgow

So, a line Renfrew to Erskine. If you’re only familiar with Erskine Bridge, fair enough but the town itself is modern, it’s a stealth New Town. It took (with Linwood) population from Paisley and the other Renfrewshire towns and then released phases of housing land. Good motorway connection but Buses in main as public transport.

The dotted lines continue to Glasgow Airport, around part of paisley in what looks to be a loop and then onto what I presume is the former terminus of the Paisley Canal line at Bridge of Weir or Kilmacolm. Potentially linking North Johnstone and Linwood as well as Ferguslie Park/The Phoenix Commercial developments

Now, that means looking at old track beds

Rail Map Online

The Paisley ‘Dummy Railway’.

Or, The Paisley and Barrhead District Railway as built by the Caledonian Railway and never put into public service.

Wikipedia

Theoretically the Dummy Railway would have allowed a journey from Arkleston Junction to Paisley Gilmour Street onto Paisley St James as exists as present, looping west to Ferguslie Park past the Ayrshire lines and connection with Canal Street line and toward the south side of Paisley and onto Barrhead.

The eastern branch leaving Barrhead, into Dykebar at the south east of the town, to Paisley east and connecting back to Arkleston.

Clyde Metro seems to use the section Ferguslie to Phoenix estate (former Rootes/Chrysler car factory used the line) with a connection back toward Paisley Canal Station.

Potentially Glasgow Airport-Ferguslie Park-Phoenix-Elderslie-Paisley West/RAH hospital.

I’m taking care not to say that the trackbed from Paisley Canal Street station to Paisley West would be used as part of that is developed with housing but a cycle path does exist from Station onward.

It may be possible to then say a Metro from Paisley Canal to 1) Bridge of Weir/Kilmacolm via Elderslie/Linwood or 2) Elderslie, Phoenix, Ferguslie Park, Glasgow Airport and onto Renfrew, Braehead, QEUH, Govan, Finnieston and Glasgow Central low level.

Obviously a westbound, Paisley Canal/West Street/Crossrail to either Queen Street low level or Bellgrove is the other way.

It’s a lot to take in. Possibilities and questions abound

Renfrewshire has recently seen this as below.

McGill’s Buses Zero Hero Service 26

McGill’s Buses Zero Hero Route 23

In the past year McGill’s Buses, who are the main operator In Renfrewshire Council area launched three Electric Bus routes from Glasgow to Renfrew and Erskine (23) (26) and Glasgow to Renfrew and Paisley as well as along the Paisley Road West corridor (38).

The obvious question is that these will have been publicly supported and it’s a green method of public transport that covers obvious places that the Clyde Metro might go.

The devil is in the detail and as always, the funding and planning. As I said to start, there’s nothing specific I could see or find, so waiting on announcements will be crucial.

As for funding, there’s something in the Scottish Budget that may be for Clyde Metro amongst other transport projects or Rail Development or Rail Infrastructure.

Scottish Government budget

Scottish Government Budget

Only a detailed project announcement would clarify and there’s also nothing recent on the AAP aspect of the City Deal.

My assumption is an announcement in the new financial year after April for 2023/24 spending and for that to be made at Scottish Government/Transport Scotland level first, followed by Glasgow City Region and SPT/Glasgow City and Renfrewshire Councils.