(20 Aug 2026, 12:29 pm)deanmachine wrote [ -> ]Yes, straight into Durham City Centre with a new platform at the station. If you're going to do it, do it properly. Open Leamside as well, but there's no point in sending a metro to Belmont Park and Ride. My whole point was to connect Sunderland with Durham by Metro.
Where on the viaduct would you build that new platform?
(02 Sep 2026, 6:59 pm)BusLoverMum wrote [ -> ]Where on the viaduct would you build that new platform?
You’re coming at it from the wrong direction, they’d have to close a car park and reinstate the northbound bay platforms, realistically a station by Belmont P&R would suffice enough
(02 Sep 2026, 6:10 am)Storx wrote [ -> ]Not sure the Northumberland Line is really comparable considering it serves 3 major towns, is only 2 TPH and cost 1/6 of the price (pre actual building).
The Northumberland Line trains would be pretty dead aswell really if they were 3x the frequency and they have a hell of lot more density than these proposed stations and actually serve a town centre on the route (Ashington). Especially if you removed the parking which a lot of people use (these stations also don't have).
Cards on the table. What would you rather the money is spent on? I assume that's where this is going, because I'm really not sure why someone who doesn't live or work in Washington/Sunderland would be so opposed to them having a bite of the cherry for once.
Population density is a lazy metric for transport planning. Its static (high rises don't regularly become houses) and it doesn’t take into account transport demand.
You also have to remember that it's not just Washington. Those living south of Sunderland City Centre will have a much faster option into Newcastle. So you can add South Hylton, Ford and Pennywell into your mix.
Crazy how much we're prepared to talk down infrastructure projects. No wonder we've all gotten used to accepting the crumbs we're being fed.
(02 Sep 2026, 7:32 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Cards on the table. What would you rather the money is spent on? I assume that's where this is going, because I'm really not sure why someone who doesn't live or work in Washington/Sunderland would be so opposed to them having a bite of the cherry for once.
Population density is a lazy metric for transport planning. Its static (high rises don't regularly become houses) and it doesn’t take into account transport demand.
You also have to remember that it's not just Washington. Those living south of Sunderland City Centre will have a much faster option into Newcastle. So you can add South Hylton, Ford and Pennywell into your mix.
Crazy how much we're prepared to talk down infrastructure projects. No wonder we've all gotten used to accepting the crumbs we're being fed.
Honestly, I'd love to see this new line being used more for a hub network, which has the potential to open more links. Something like the below:
[
attachment=11349]
So it'd be extended to Penshaw instead of Sunderland with a major interchange, including parking, with buses from all the local areas connecting to it so people can get to Newcastle and beyond with a quick change. I think omitting Penshaw right now is just a mistake. Maybe you could build a supermarket and other facilities there if there's space?
From there, build a new BRT from the Washington North station doing the 56 route to the East and heading to the Galleries to the West, with improvements potentially being done to cut some of the corners and major bus prioritisation; ie. making Southwick bus only so North Sunderland, a deprived area, get's something. Any remaining money being spent on the green corridors.
Missing out Penshaw is just wrong imo; it's a large area with pretty poor public transport and there's now a new Metro line passing by with no sensible spot to connect to the thing. It's imo just parochial issues and Sunderland City Centre must be linked, rather than actually doing what's best for people. There's a reason why 5 double deckers head to Newcastle from Hetton etc and only 2 single deckers around half the North East to Sunderland; people don't want to go to Sunderland.
The money should be spent in Sunderland (Council area) though; without a doubt. Not building trams in the West End or whatever which I've seen mentioned.
(02 Sep 2026, 9:05 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Honestly, I'd love to see this new line being used more for a hub network, which has the potential to open more links. Something like the below:
So it'd be extended to Penshaw instead of Sunderland with a major interchange, including parking, with buses from all the local areas connecting to it so people can get to Newcastle and beyond with a quick change. I think omitting Penshaw right now is just a mistake. Maybe you could build a supermarket and other facilities there if there's space?
From there, build a new BRT from the Washington North station doing the 56 route to the East and heading to the Galleries to the West, with improvements potentially being done to cut some of the corners and major bus prioritisation; ie. making Southwick bus only so North Sunderland, a deprived area, get's something. Any remaining money being spent on the green corridors.
Missing out Penshaw is just wrong imo; it's a large area with pretty poor public transport and there's now a new Metro line passing by with no sensible spot to connect to the thing. It's imo just parochial issues and Sunderland City Centre must be linked, rather than actually doing what's best for people. There's a reason why there's 5 double deckers heading to Newcastle from Hetton etc and only 2 single deckers around half the North East to Sunderland; people don't want to go to Sunderland.
By the time you've extended it to 'Washington South', and given you're putting it across the planned viaduct anyway, you may as well extend it to South Hylton?
I think we need to stop letting perfect be the enemy of good with things like this. It's taken an absolute age to even get to this stage, and if this gets completed then people can start to make the argument for further extensions - or schemes like the heavy rail reopening of the southern section of the Leamside Line. I would also say that if you don't think there's enough to support a Metro (which is simply an extension to an already very well used system), I would be doubtful that there's anywhere near enough support or demand for a separate BRT system in that area.
Pretending that people don't want to go to Sunderland is disingenuous, there's a huge population there, an annoyingly well-supported football team, and a university. There's also all of the people who live in Sunderland who work in Washington. As well as this opening up new connections, it also makes current journeys significantly easier for some people.
If this gets completed I think the next big scheme in the NE needs to be something in the West End of Newcastle, but given I think it's impossible for the Metro to be extended that way now then I'm not sure what form this would need to take.
Like it or not, our transport authorities are a joke. Project Orpheus, QCS, NESTI, Western Links...to name a few. All failed projects by Nexus/TWPTE, costing millions of pounds.
So, i think they deserve all the extra scrutiny personally. Money shouldn't just be spent on vibes.
(02 Sep 2026, 9:51 pm)PH - BQA wrote [ -> ]By the time you've extended it to 'Washington South', and given you're putting it across the planned viaduct anyway, you may as well extend it to South Hylton?
I think we need to stop letting perfect be the enemy of good with things like this. It's taken an absolute age to even get to this stage, and if this gets completed then people can start to make the argument for further extensions - or schemes like the heavy rail reopening of the southern section of the Leamside Line. I would also say that if you don't think there's enough to support a Metro (which is simply an extension to an already very well used system), I would be doubtful that there's anywhere near enough support or demand for a separate BRT system in that area.
Pretending that people don't want to go to Sunderland is disingenuous, there's a huge population there, an annoyingly well-supported football team, and a university. There's also all of the people who live in Sunderland who work in Washington. As well as this opening up new connections, it also makes current journeys significantly easier for some people.
If this gets completed I think the next big scheme in the NE needs to be something in the West End of Newcastle, but given I think it's impossible for the Metro to be extended that way now then I'm not sure what form this would need to take.
Don't disagree but it's more about the cost for me.
I have a feeling that half the budget is going to be going on that little spur.
The A19 issue isn't going to be cheap, as widening a bridge under one of the busiest roads in the North East (believe it's the 3rd or 4th that part) isn't easy as you can't just shut it. It's seems a right engineering head ache as things usually go over the top which is easier but that definitely can't happen there.
Not to mention 3 other bridges at Cox Green and South Hylton, on top of the land acquisition on the top of all this.
Is this spur worth hypothetically £300/£400m to save a few people on the outskirts of Washington 10 minutes on a bus?
(03 Sep 2026, 6:30 am)Storx wrote [ -> ]Don't disagree but it's more about the cost for me.
I have a feeling that half the budget is going to be going on that little spur.
The A19 issue isn't going to be cheap, as widening a bridge under one of the busiest roads in the North East (believe it's the 3rd or 4th that part) isn't easy as you can't just shut it. It's seems a right engineering head ache as things usually go over the top which is easier but that definitely can't happen there.
Not to mention 3 other bridges at Cox Green and South Hylton, on top of the land acquisition on the top of all this.
Is this spur worth hypothetically £300/£400m to save a few people on the outskirts of Washington 10 minutes on a bus?
Trains and Metros Trump buses . I think I’d rather lose my arm than suffer a bus journey between Sunderland and Washington! I pity those who have to do it daily.
Do you not think there should be a stop at Washington galleries & Concord tbh
(03 Sep 2026, 7:21 pm)Unber43 wrote [ -> ]Do you not think there should be a stop at Washington galleries & Concord tbh
In an ideal world, but that's a huge diversion from the current alignment and would significantly increase costs. Without underground tunnelling it would be infeasible I'd imagine.
(03 Sep 2026, 7:21 pm)Unber43 wrote [ -> ]Do you not think there should be a stop at Washington galleries & Concord tbh
Unless you’re planning on getting rid of the Washington Highway and many houses, it’s a no go. In an ideal fantasy world, Washington and Concord would be connected to Heworth and Sunderland by Tram. However it’s more likely that the Metro gets extended West from St James
(03 Sep 2026, 7:21 pm)Unber43 wrote [ -> ]Do you not think there should be a stop at Washington galleries & Concord tbh
I think you could get to Washington Galleries but it would have to be a raised structure or tunnelling branching off from Pattinson Road Junction/Shepherd Way then run over the top of the C2C Cycle Path along the back of St.Roberts Of Newminister School with a Viaduct at Biddick Lane then continue up towards Princess Anne Park and have the line run almost parallel to the Washington Highway with a proposed Washington Galleries Station at the back of Washington Leisure Centre. I'd imagine it would cost hundreds of millions of pounds to do but it is potentially doable.
[
attachment=11350]
As for Concord you could branch of the Leamside Line off next to the Fire Station and run up Glover Road with a potential station at Northumbria Way/Vermont or have it run all the up through Vermont with a potential Concord Metro where the old Lloyds Bank was and then change the main road layout into Concord from by extending Station Road/Usworth Station Road a new opening slightly further up Northumbria Way and would save tunnelling through at a high cost.
Back in 64 when the line closed to passengers, how much of Washington actually existed, the Metro came along in 80, which back then going through Washington would of been a no go with it only being closed a decade and a half before that, if anything it would of made more sense to lump it in with the Sunderland extension, but the current Washington propsal might of still ended being the same then as it is now