North East Buses

Kim and Nexus are pushing the Metro to Washington project again over the last couple of days. The Nexus website has a new and updated project page for it: https://nexus.org.uk/who-we-are/projects...ashington/

It has a timeline of what has been taking place up until now, but the key take is that a second round of engagement sessions across Washington and Sunderland will take place during September, which will also coincide with the public announcement of where the proposed station locations and route will be.

Date Time Venue
Tuesday 1 September 4pm – 6pm Washington Millennium Centre, Concord
Saturday 5 September 1.30pm – 4pm Washington Arts Centre, Biddick Lane
Monday 7 September 12.30pm – 4.30pm Fitzgeralds Wardley
Wednesday 9 September 1.30pm – 4pm Tansy Centre, South Hylton
Friday 11 September 12.30pm – 4.30pm Teal Farm Pub, Washington
Saturday 12 September 11am – 2pm North East Land, Sea, Air Museum, Washington
Tuesday 15 September 5.30pm – 7pm Sunderland College, City Campus
Wednesday 16 September 10am – 1pm Washington Arts Centre, Biddick Lane
Saturday 19 September 10.30am – 1.30pm The Galleries, Washington
Tuesday 22 September 5.30pm – 7pm Columbia Village Community Centre, Washington
Wednesday 23 September 10am – 12pm Tansy Centre, South Hylton
Friday 25 September 8.30am – 10.30am Pelaw Metro Station
Friday 25 September 5pm – 7pm Pelaw Metro Station
Saturday 26 September 10.30am – 1.30pm The Bridges Shopping Centre, Sunderland

Are the station locations not public knowledge yet?

(14 Aug 2026, 7:14 pm)idiot wrote [ -> ]Are the station locations not public knowledge yet?

You can probably work them out quite close to where they're going to be looking at what's been announced for the 3 stations. 
Speculating, I reckon around Pattinson Road, Washington Road, and Follingsby Lane. Just depends on the space available for them.

(16 Aug 2026, 2:45 pm)deanmachine wrote [ -> ]You can probably work them out quite close to where they're going to be looking at what's been announced for the 3 stations. 
Speculating, I reckon around Pattinson Road, Washington Road, and Follingsby Lane. Just depends on the space available for them.

I think the only one that is perhaps set in stone is Washington North, as we know Nexus own a pocket of land around there. 

There's an EIA scoping request in to planning at the moment for 485 homes next to where the proposed station would be. See 26/00263/SCO on the Sunderland Planning Portal. This appears to form part of something I was accidentally sent in 2023, which included up to 1500 homes, but notably an outline of Nexus land at the bottom for a Park and Ride, Station and some shops. Roughly here:

[attachment=11336]

As you say, the others are likely to be around Pattinson Road and Follingsby Lane. The latter probably has more options than the former, with the easiest option perhaps being to use the former station site roughly behind Swan. A better option, if suitable, would be this:

[attachment=11337]

My rationale here is that I feel opening it up to this side of Fatfield is actually serving a larger catchment area. It'd be relatively simple to route a bus round Shepherd Way without altering the roads, you'd have a limited space for a car park, and it'd be relatively easy to build the local mini bus network around that and Washington North. The Swan site is a nightmare for parking during the day with all the businesses, there's limited space, and I think the closest you'd get is a mini bus around Barmston Court.

(16 Aug 2026, 5:51 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]My rationale here is that I feel opening it up to this side of Fatfield is actually serving a larger catchment area. It'd be relatively simple to route a bus round Shepherd Way without altering the roads, you'd have a limited space for a car park, and it'd be relatively easy to build the local mini bus network around that and Washington North. The Swan site is a nightmare for parking during the day with all the businesses, there's limited space, and I think the closest you'd get is a mini bus around Barmston Court.

Even known I can see the reasons, it'll be at the end of Station Road imo. 

Stations on curves are pretty much no go these days, unless you can get some form of deregulation. It's one of the reasons both Seaton Delaval and Newsham were both moved from the their original sites.

I agree with putting it at Fatfield, I wonder if you could flatten the curve somewhat for a station long enough for a Class 555? Right next to a housing estate, still easy access to the industrial areas, and all you'd have to do is reroute the 4 along Shepherd Way.

It's barely a curve at the point the station could sit, and the guidance is requiring justification. The other site being relatively prohibitive due to what's around it should be enough.

(14 Aug 2026, 1:30 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Kim and Nexus are pushing the Metro to Washington project again over the last couple of days. The Nexus website has a new and updated project page for it: https://nexus.org.uk/who-we-are/projects...ashington/

It has a timeline of what has been taking place up until now, but the key take is that a second round of engagement sessions across Washington and Sunderland will take place during September, which will also coincide with the public announcement of where the proposed station locations and route will be.

I dont know if its just me but do we need this or not

It just seems like the money could go be spent on better especially since theres talks of the franchise 

Like this has been an extreme hot topic but im unsure if it'll work or even go ahead. Prices rise every single day and this project will probably become to expensive and be Curtailed or cancelled all together 

Kim seems to be doing to much at once and doesn't seem to be getting the best press with her constantly talking about the buses now. Yet nothing seems to be going ahead. Her mayor fares killed the coast road agreement and says she "cut metro fares cause people were asked" with the slime line then saying "with a pop pay as you go"

Yeah i cant see this happening even if it does. We will see cuts left right & center and possibly even it Curtailed

(17 Aug 2026, 7:49 pm)Nerd4321 wrote [ -> ]I dont know if its just me but do we need this or not

It just seems like the money could go be spent on better especially since theres talks of the franchise 

Like this has been an extreme hot topic but im unsure if it'll work or even go ahead. Prices rise every single day and this project will probably become to expensive and be Curtailed or cancelled all together 

Kim seems to be doing to much at once and doesn't seem to be getting the best press with her constantly talking about the buses now. Yet nothing seems to be going ahead. Her mayor fares killed the coast road agreement and says she "cut metro fares cause people were asked" with the slime line then saying "with a pop pay as you go"

Yeah i cant see this happening even if it does. We will see cuts left right & center and possibly even it Curtailed

Buses have to have the Mayor's social media focus at the moment, it's in a statutory consultation period, and they don't get a second round of this if people don't bother first time round. Quite rightly she'll want as much participation as possible.

The thing about need is that it's subjective. It depends on where you live and then your individual circumstances. If you ask people in Washington, they'll tell you it's absolutely needed, whilst I'm sure people in the West End of Newcastle would prefer the money spent there, Northumberland on A1 dualling, and so on. That being said, I'd genuinely welcome your thoughts on why people in Washington shouldn't need this?

On the Coast Road, I don't think you could be further from the point. It wasn't the mayors fares that have killed it, it's greed. 

The Coast Road has, for a long time now, been one of the most profitable corridors on the network. The agreement was signed when perhaps different attitudes to partnership were around the table, as oppose to the current lot, where the interest is lining their own pockets. You would see how fast the attitude would change, if the BSIP for example funded additional X12s along Low Fell.

(17 Aug 2026, 7:49 pm)Nerd4321 wrote [ -> ]I dont know if its just me but do we need this or not

It just seems like the money could go be spent on better especially since theres talks of the franchise 

Like this has been an extreme hot topic but im unsure if it'll work or even go ahead. Prices rise every single day and this project will probably become to expensive and be Curtailed or cancelled all together 

Kim seems to be doing to much at once and doesn't seem to be getting the best press with her constantly talking about the buses now. Yet nothing seems to be going ahead. Her mayor fares killed the coast road agreement and says she "cut metro fares cause people were asked" with the slime line then saying "with a pop pay as you go"

Yeah i cant see this happening even if it does. We will see cuts left right & center and possibly even it Curtailed

tbf the links to Washington are pretty badly needed and everything between Pelaw and Washington South imo makes sense and I don't think anyone can really complain about it.

It turns a grey area though whether it should head to Sunderland or continue heading South to Penshaw / Shiney Row / Fencehouses though which seems like it would be much cheaper and give more people who have poor transport links to the main city especially considering there hasn't been a railway link between the Victoria Viaduct and South Hylton for over 50 year. 

Build that right and Penshaw could be a very powerful interchange to pretty much everywhere round there since everything hits it give or take ie. 2/4/37/78/79/X1. Sadly the current plans just miss it completely.

The North East parocial issues will kick in there though.

I get the Washington Loop is needed, but imo, it hardly seems worth it for 3 stations

I think it could be a good starting point, the metro should go to Durham after this using this as the initial build.

(19 Aug 2026, 12:34 pm)deanmachine wrote [ -> ]I think it could be a good starting point, the metro should go to Durham after this using this as the initial build.

Belmont/Carville as a park and ride yes, Durham City station? No. I’d heavily argue for an S-Bahn style system within NECA and TVCA.

(19 Aug 2026, 2:00 pm)220631612 wrote [ -> ]Belmont/Carville as a park and ride yes, Durham City station? No. I’d heavily argue for an S-Bahn style system within NECA and TVCA.

Wasn't there plans for the metro to go to the Belmont Park & Ride years ago?

I think it would work really well

(19 Aug 2026, 2:05 pm)Michael wrote [ -> ]Wasn't there plans for the metro to go to the Belmont Park & Ride years ago?

I think it would work really well

That's probably more a heavy rail use case.

From the noise so far, the intention is that the Washington stations could serve both light and heavy rail, so somewhere like Belmont (let's call it Durham Parkway) would be served by heavy rail via the Leamside line, branching off at Pelaw.

(19 Aug 2026, 2:00 pm)220631612 wrote [ -> ]Belmont/Carville as a park and ride yes, Durham City station? No. I’d heavily argue for an S-Bahn style system within NECA and TVCA.

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.

Latest Metro to Washington proposals unveiled
https://nexus.org.uk/news-media-hub/news...-unveiled/

[attachment=11343]

Nexus has today (Tuesday 1 September 2026)  unveiled the latest proposals for the planned extension of the Tyne and Wear Metro to Washington.

In a significant moment for the project, the proposed route and locations of each of the new stations has been published for the first time, as a series of public engagement events get underway.

The proposals outline three new stations – located at Follingsby, Washington North and Washington South – as well as seeing the line cross the River Wear via the Victoria viaduct, travel towards and under the A19, and connect with the current network at South Hylton.

The 13km Metro extension plays a critical role in North East Mayor Kim McGuinness’ vision to transform local transport and create an integrated network spanning the region.

The line is expected to see the first Metro trains running along it in 2033.

The public are invited to find out more and ask questions of the project team at a series of 14 engagement events. This follows similar drop in events in the summer of 2025.

North East Mayor Kim McGuinness, said: “I promised we’d extend the Metro to Washington and now the next stage in that plan is underway – three brand new stations for the first time in 30 years.

“We’re doing this because you told us you want more affordable, publicly-controlled transport across the North East. Now is the time to have your say on how these plans develop.”

Cathy Massarella, Managing Director of Nexus, said: “This is a really significant moment for the Metro to Washington project as the proposed route and station locations are shared publicly for the first time.

“This will be the first new Metro line for 30 years, providing a new route between the cities of Sunderland and Newcastle through Washington.

“We are committed to keeping the public up to date on the plans. A series of 14 public engagement events will now get underway over the coming weeks, giving people the chance to come along, ask questions, and give us their views. We look forward to seeing as many people there as possible.

“If people are struggling to get there in person, there is an also an option to provide feedback online through the Nexus website.

“This will be vital as we shape the plans further, ahead of construction getting underway.”

An outline business case for the project will be submitted to the North East Mayoral Strategic Authority early 2027, which will consider views from the public engagement alongside the outline development. Subject to the relevant approvals, it is hoped that construction would begin in 2030, with the first Metro trains on the new line running from 2033.

Each option for the route has been scored as part of the feasibility study, considering numerous factors with the highest scoring options forming the latest plans.

These options considered possible costs, impact on local residents, the environment and current infrastructure and land surveys. Factors such as connection with bus services and improving pedestrian and cycle access also played a vital role in these proposals – helping to deliver cleaner, safer, more accessible and modern transport options for the region.

Discussions with potentially impacted landowners have already begun as part of the proposals.

Local residents are being encouraged to view the plans in more detail and provide their feedback at a number of drop-in sessions starting from today, or through the Metro to Washington page on the Nexus website.

Utilising the Leamside Line
Metro to Washington will be the first new Metro line for 30 years when it opens. It will provide a new route between the cities of Sunderland and Newcastle through Washington, making a practical and positive use of the old Leamside Line route from Pelaw to the River Wear.

The Metro to Washington extension would run along the northern section of the former Leamside Line. The North East Mayoral Strategic Authority (North East MSA) is developing a separate business case to reinstate the southern section of the Leamside Line for heavy rail trains and the Metro to Washington route provides an important part of this development.

Key proposal points
Visualisations will change over time based on feedback from the engagement events and further design development.

Download a PDF version of the latest proposals.

[attachment=11346]
[attachment=11345]
[attachment=11344]

There's also an interesting bit to note about South Hylton:

A key challenge at South Hylton is the need to retain permanent vehicle access to properties located north of the railway. Two options have been shortlisted. Both would see Hylton Bank closed to vehicles, with alternative road access constructed, as well as moving the station further to the east to allow access to both platforms.

Option A – (shown by purple arrows) This option would see a new road connecting Railway Terrace to St Luke’s Road, via a tunnel constructed underneath the existing station site.

Option B – (shown by green arrows) This option would see the existing underpass at Keelman’s Road upgraded, enabling vehicle access to South Hylton via Keelman’s Lane and Claxheugh Road.

[attachment=11348]
[attachment=11347]

Complete waste of this money in it's current form and I don't care what anyone says and everyone on SkyScraperCity is having similar views.

Unless there's a sudden influx of demand from Sunderland wanting to go to a few factories then this Washington South <> South Hylton is just a complete waste of money considering it now needs 5 roads bridges - one involving the A19 so it ain't a £10 job, land acquisition and it serves literally nothing en-route.

I know some will say but this but that, but I'll just leave this here - imagine how much you could spend on alternative transport ie. buses using the same money which actually serves people's doors since there's zero parking at the stations either; The Chester Road, Durham Road, Washington Road/North Hylton Road corridors, in particular. 

Washington South <> Pelaw has more merit, but imo it should be national rail but that's another debate.

(01 Sep 2026, 2:57 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Complete waste of this money in it's current form and I don't care what anyone says and everyone on SkyScraperCity is having similar views.

Unless there's a sudden influx of demand from Sunderland wanting to go to a few factories then this Washington South <> South Hylton is just a complete waste of money considering it now needs 5 roads bridges - one involving the A19 so it ain't a £10 job, land acquisition and it serves literally nothing en-route.

I know some will say but this but that, but I'll just leave this here - imagine how much you could spend on alternative transport ie. buses using the same money which actually serves people's doors since there's zero parking at the stations either; The Chester Road, Durham Road, Washington Road/North Hylton Road corridors, in particular. 

Washington South <> Pelaw has more merit, but imo it should be national rail but that's another debate.

Ah, you've got me there! It must be true if it's on SkyScraperCity...

To take a few of the comments on there:

"In Washington itself I’m not convinced by the station locations, park and ride or provision for connecting public transport. They seem intent on serving 3 industrial estates as if commuter traffic will be inward not outward." - Washington North would benefit Nissan, yes, but Usworth and Sulgrave are two densely populated areas versus other parts of Washington. You have to remember that Sulgrave built upwards. There's also the land right next to the station site that has long been earmarked for housing. The 50/56 also stop right outside of it. Washington South is also serving Teal Farm, Columbia and Fatfield, though I agree the bus integration for this one needs to be better worked out. A location further along the line would have worked better for South imo, but you don't really have a lot of choice to deviate! 

"No P&R plans for Washington South seem a big miss." - Why is it? I'd have liked to have seen one at Usworth, and indeed it was on an earlier plan that I saw, but realistically it's a 6 minute drive away from Follingsby, and most of Washington sits on that arterial road (the A195/Northumberland Way) to get there. Those parts that don't, e.g. Ayton and Blackfell and get there (via the A194) in about 2/3 minutes more than it'd take to get down to Swan/Barmston Court.

"This whole proposal is utterly ridiculous and the birth child of petty North East parochialism thats now going to waste a billion quid." - I'm surprised NEMSA spend money on professionals to come in and carry out technical, strategic and business assessments for them, when they could listen to people like this on SCC. What he may refer to as 'petty North East perochialism' is actually the North East getting a bite at the cherry for once. The North East overall receives the lowest transport investment to any other region by some margin: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/res...2025-0170/

"Surely a Washington branch from Pelaw would have been a cheaper and easier start." - I understand the point, but I'd suggest it would significantly weaken the business case. Baring in mind the long-term aim is still to get the Leamside south open, so that Viaduct has to be tackled at some point. The link to Sunderland provides a massively improved access to jobs in the City, not to mention leisure and the night-time economy. It links up to everything Sunderland have been doing in and around Vaux, Sheepfolds, the Stadium and on to Seaburn. It also provides a really handy fall-back for trains not being blocked in the event of disruption. 

"However without an A19 park and ride station I think this just hasn't been thought through" - I'm not sure Washington is the best place for an A19 park and ride station personally. I don't think people will travel to Washington to park their car, when they could just as easily use the existing long-stay at Heworth or the car park at Fellgate. Neither of which, I believe, are bursting at the seams?

"I think they’re using Leamside as an easy, populist option, but it skirts Washington‘s east side, and isn’t going to tempt people to use it with a 1-2 mile walk to get to a station…" - I tend to agree, but by the very nature of a railway, it can't operate on everyone's doorstep. The plan is for buses to be under public control by then, so I think it's a reasonable expectation that we'll see changes to the Washington mini bus network that links people up to a Metro station as part of an integrated solution. Washington also has excellent cycling access, given most of the new town was built with a network of subways. It's possible to travel to most parts without using a major road.

I think the points around the alignment along Cox Green needs some additional explanation, but I suspect it's to avoid having the Metro going right between two houses. The former station house and the build to the rear. Once you get the dual track in, there'd not be a lot of space for lineside equipment or OHL.

(01 Sep 2026, 8:16 am)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Latest Metro to Washington proposals unveiled
https://nexus.org.uk/news-media-hub/news...-unveiled/








There's also an interesting bit to note about South Hylton:

Am I missing something with South Hylton, why can't the bank remain open with a level crossing as seen elsewhere on the network? I get that they'd need track realignment and that the space isn't there with the station in its current location which is why they're moving it - but it's moving to the east?

(01 Sep 2026, 4:19 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Ah, you've got me there! It must be true if it's on SkyScraperCity...

To take a few of the comments on there:

"In Washington itself I’m not convinced by the station locations, park and ride or provision for connecting public transport. They seem intent on serving 3 industrial estates as if commuter traffic will be inward not outward." - Washington North would benefit Nissan, yes, but Usworth and Sulgrave are two densely populated areas versus other parts of Washington. You have to remember that Sulgrave built upwards. There's also the land right next to the station site that has long been earmarked for housing. The 50/56 also stop right outside of it. Washington South is also serving Teal Farm, Columbia and Fatfield, though I agree the bus integration for this one needs to be better worked out. A location further along the line would have worked better for South imo, but you don't really have a lot of choice to deviate! 

"No P&R plans for Washington South seem a big miss." - Why is it? I'd have liked to have seen one at Usworth, and indeed it was on an earlier plan that I saw, but realistically it's a 6 minute drive away from Follingsby, and most of Washington sits on that arterial road (the A195/Northumberland Way) to get there. Those parts that don't, e.g. Ayton and Blackfell and get there (via the A194) in about 2/3 minutes more than it'd take to get down to Swan/Barmston Court.

"This whole proposal is utterly ridiculous and the birth child of petty North East parochialism thats now going to waste a billion quid." - I'm surprised NEMSA spend money on professionals to come in and carry out technical, strategic and business assessments for them, when they could listen to people like this on SCC. What he may refer to as 'petty North East perochialism' is actually the North East getting a bite at the cherry for once. The North East overall receives the lowest transport investment to any other region by some margin: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/res...2025-0170/

"Surely a Washington branch from Pelaw would have been a cheaper and easier start." - I understand the point, but I'd suggest it would significantly weaken the business case. Baring in mind the long-term aim is still to get the Leamside south open, so that Viaduct has to be tackled at some point. The link to Sunderland provides a massively improved access to jobs in the City, not to mention leisure and the night-time economy. It links up to everything Sunderland have been doing in and around Vaux, Sheepfolds, the Stadium and on to Seaburn. It also provides a really handy fall-back for trains not being blocked in the event of disruption. 

"However without an A19 park and ride station I think this just hasn't been thought through" - I'm not sure Washington is the best place for an A19 park and ride station personally. I don't think people will travel to Washington to park their car, when they could just as easily use the existing long-stay at Heworth or the car park at Fellgate. Neither of which, I believe, are bursting at the seams?

"I think they’re using Leamside as an easy, populist option, but it skirts Washington‘s east side, and isn’t going to tempt people to use it with a 1-2 mile walk to get to a station…" - I tend to agree, but by the very nature of a railway, it can't operate on everyone's doorstep. The plan is for buses to be under public control by then, so I think it's a reasonable expectation that we'll see changes to the Washington mini bus network that links people up to a Metro station as part of an integrated solution. Washington also has excellent cycling access, given most of the new town was built with a network of subways. It's possible to travel to most parts without using a major road.

I think the points around the alignment along Cox Green needs some additional explanation, but I suspect it's to avoid having the Metro going right between two houses. The former station house and the build to the rear. Once you get the dual track in, there'd not be a lot of space for lineside equipment or OHL.

Some valid points, I can't really comment though as they're not my opinions to be fair. The Washington South P&R I believe was more about people coming from Houghton Le Spring etc rather than Washington itself though. By the time you've messed around getting to Follingsby you will won't be a kick in the teeth from being at Team Valley going the way you'd head to Newcastle so isn't very attractive.

I do agree there tbf.

(01 Sep 2026, 6:37 pm)PH - BQA wrote [ -> ]Am I missing something with South Hylton, why can't the bank remain open with a level crossing as seen elsewhere on the network? I get that they'd need track realignment and that the space isn't there with the station in its current location which is why they're moving it - but it's moving to the east?

New level crossings are pretty much banned on new lines, whether they should be is another debate but I'd assume that is why, It's no doubt for having to bridge all the roads around Cox Green which aren't busy at all.

(01 Sep 2026, 6:37 pm)PH - BQA wrote [ -> ]Am I missing something with South Hylton, why can't the bank remain open with a level crossing as seen elsewhere on the network? I get that they'd need track realignment and that the space isn't there with the station in its current location which is why they're moving it - but it's moving to the east?

Network Rail don't want new level crossings and are actively trying to remove existing ones, and I would imagine the risk factor is too high on this bank.

Not sure if you've ever been down there, but coming back up hill, there's a kink in the bank, which combined with the often double-parking, can really obscure driver vision there. It's quite high traffic route, as it serves a lot of estates that branch off from it.

The other level crossing (Washington North) is getting a similar treatment to South Hylton option A, but I don't think it's clear what they're doing with the new proposed Cox Green alignment. They've still got three roads to cross, old alignment or new. Albeit a very low traffic volume.

(01 Sep 2026, 7:00 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Some valid points, I can't really comment though as they're not my opinions to be fair. The Washington South P&R I believe was more about people coming from Houghton Le Spring etc rather than Washington itself though. By the time you've messed around getting to Follingsby you will won't be a kick in the teeth from being at Team Valley going the way you'd head to Newcastle so isn't very attractive.

I do agree there tbf.

You did comment though! You said "Complete waste of this money in it's current form and I don't care what anyone says" 

Regarding Houghton, I'm not sure that they've ever been the target audience for this, and including them would presumably weaken any business case for phase 2, where Rainton/Fencehouses houses would be one of the sites for a station. As would Penshaw.

(01 Sep 2026, 7:21 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]You did comment though! You said "Complete waste of this money in it's current form and I don't care what anyone says" 

Regarding Houghton, I'm not sure that they've ever been the target audience for this, and including them would presumably weaken any business case for phase 2, where Rainton/Fencehouses houses would be one of the sites for a station. As would Penshaw.

Aye it's more about the real demand between Washington and Sunderland for me, which couldn't be done by improved buses (or alternative) instead. Like is there enough demand from the stations to the city since there's no parking?

I can't see anyone realistically getting a bus which goes to Sunderland (the 8/56) and changing to a Metro to go to well Sunderland. Might aswell just stay on the 8/56 really and there's no demand coming outside of Washington as anyone sane is going the direct route via East Boldon. 

The amount of work needed, it could be a huge investment in the alternative and it'd be interesting what a study would say for a comparison. The 56 corridor, in particular, is screaming for something with a decent interchange at Washington North which appears to be missing right now.

(01 Sep 2026, 8:43 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Aye it's more about the real demand between Washington and Sunderland for me, which couldn't be done by improved buses (or alternative) instead. Like is there enough demand from the stations to the city since there's no parking?

I can't see anyone realistically getting a bus which goes to Sunderland (the 8/56) and changing to a Metro to go to well Sunderland. Might aswell just stay on the 8/56 really and there's no demand coming outside of Washington as anyone sane is going the direct route via East Boldon. 

The amount of work needed, it could be a huge investment in the alternative and it'd be interesting what a study would say for a comparison. The 56 corridor, in particular, is screaming for something with a decent interchange at Washington North which appears to be missing right now.

The Metro will take you into Sunderland in about 12 minutes, frequent, and each train can hold hundreds. The 56, 2 and 8 take 40+ minutes from the bus stations.

If people didn't have a desire to get places faster, fewer people would bother with a car, and we'd have a bus service to London instead of a train. Unless you're going to tell us something that we don't know.

How is an interchange with Washington North missing? I agree that I'd prefer a through loop, but there's really nothing preventing interchange here.

(01 Sep 2026, 9:34 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]The Metro will take you into Sunderland in about 12 minutes, frequent, and each train can hold hundreds. The 56, 2 and 8 take 40+ minutes from the bus stations.

If people didn't have a desire to get places faster, fewer people would bother with a car, and we'd have a bus service to London instead of a train. Unless you're going to tell us something that we don't know.

How is an interchange with Washington North missing? I agree that I'd prefer a through loop, but there's really nothing preventing interchange here.

Aye but you've got to get to the Metro Station first.

The 56 is only 30 minutes from Concord to Fawcett Street btw, and the 8 could easily be the same from the Galleries if it didn't piss about with Teal Farm. Assuming it takes 5 minutes to get to Metro, 8 minute interchange and then 12 minutes; there's not much savings here but it's a bit of a piss on and that's been quite generous timings wise. Neither have peak time issues either since there's not really traffic problems.

Just seems a bit pointless; surely money would be better trying to speed up the buses instead? Like you could easily knock off another 5/10 minutes if you send some over the Spire Bridge; even if they were peak only. 

Obviously Newcastle the other way is a whole different kettle of fish because traffic is a nightmare at peak times so 100% makes sense and there's loads of unique connections anyway.

(01 Sep 2026, 10:06 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Aye but you've got to get to the Metro Station first.

The 56 is only 30 minutes from Concord to Fawcett Street btw, and the 8 could easily be the same from the Galleries if it didn't piss about with Teal Farm. Assuming it takes 5 minutes to get to Metro, 8 minute interchange and then 12 minutes; there's not much savings here but it's a bit of a piss on and that's been quite generous timings wise. Neither have peak time issues either since there's not really traffic problems.

Just seems a bit pointless; surely money would be better trying to speed up the buses instead? Like you could easily knock off another 5/10 minutes if you send some over the Spire Bridge; even if they were peak only. 

Obviously Newcastle the other way is a whole different kettle of fish because traffic is a nightmare at peak times so 100% makes sense and there's loads of unique connections anyway.

Postcode lottery, isn't it? You're just as likely to live a close walk to one of these stations as you are to one of those bus services, otherwise you're on the mini buses first.

You keep suggesting that buses are the solution, but if they had been, the idea or the Metro extension wouldn't have even made it this far. Fact remains that its 40+ minutes to Sunderland and Newcastle is just shy of that, which is unacceptable. I used to do 60-90 minutes each way 5 days a week and it is absolutely mind-numbing.

You're also never going to speed buses up to the point that it will be anywhere near the 12 minutes the Metro is likely to take, not without building new roads. Buses still have to serve the immediate stops.

I like how there's always people saying new railway lines are pointless and nobody will use them. Bit like the Northumberland Line, which then immediately carry more people then they planned for. It's almost as if people like using the train.

Anyways, great to see the proposals in full now, will be fascinating to see all the work taking place, especially in South Hylton, seems like quite a task.

(01 Sep 2026, 11:13 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Postcode lottery, isn't it? You're just as likely to live a close walk to one of these stations as you are to one of those bus services, otherwise you're on the mini buses first.

You keep suggesting that buses are the solution, but if they had been, the idea or the Metro extension wouldn't have even made it this far. Fact remains that its 40+ minutes to Sunderland and Newcastle is just shy of that, which is unacceptable. I used to do 60-90 minutes each way 5 days a week and it is absolutely mind-numbing.

You're also never going to speed buses up to the point that it will be anywhere near the 12 minutes the Metro is likely to take, not without building new roads. Buses still have to serve the immediate stops.

Aye don't disagree but there's very little density on the stations to support 6 TPH. 

Just don't know where these people are coming from since there's now no parking facilities and let's be honest very few people are interchanging towards Sunderland, at least. 

We'll have to see, I'm happy to be proven wrong. 

(02 Sep 2026, 2:31 am)deanmachine wrote [ -> ]I like how there's always people saying new railway lines are pointless and nobody will use them. Bit like the Northumberland Line, which then immediately carry more people then they planned for. It's almost as if people like using the train.

Anyways, great to see the proposals in full now, will be fascinating to see all the work taking place, especially in South Hylton, seems like quite a task.

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).

I for one looking forward to seeing the Metro develop.i used to live in between Millfield and University Station , but now live down Hartlepool . Train / Metro beats Bus every day of the week where quite a distance is involved. During train strikes before Covid, I had to endure the Arriva 23 service that called at every nook and cranny on the way to Sunderland. Imagine the journey back with a bladder full of lager!