Ep. 2 – How Birmingham’s Transport Past Shapes Its Future

Filed under: Podcast

We talk with Mike Ashworth, a transport historian on the development of transport within Birmingham. We explore the historical context of urban planning in Birmingham, focusing on the car-centric schemes that led to significant changes in inner city suburbs. It highlights the booming car ownership in the 1960s and the neglect of public transport in urban development.

Like the vast majority of such estates WC was built with expectation of low levels of car ownership. Birmingham CT, along with majority of municipal operators, saw the developing motor bus as ideal for such new estates saving on capital expense of tramway extensions

— Mike (@mikeyashworth.bsky.social) 2025-08-28T13:34:22.284Z

Transcript

Kevin Carmody (00:07)
Birmingham removed the last of its trams in 1953. Six years later we’re spending hundreds of millions trying to bring them back. We carved motorways through our neighbourhoods in the 60s and now we’re tearing sections down. I’m Kevin Carmody. This is Better Streets for Birmingham and if you’ve ever wondered why our buses are stuck in traffic, why cycling feels dangerous or why third of Birmingham’s households manage without a car despite how hard it is, the answer is in our history. This week I’m joined by Mike Ashworth.

transport historian who grew up in Birmingham in the 1960s and watched Birmingham transform from Motor City and back again. We’re going to explore the planning decisions that created the problems that Better Streets is fighting to fix today. Because if we don’t learn from our history, Birmingham is about to repeat the same mistakes.

Kevin Carmody (00:54)
Mike, thank you very much for joining me today.

Mike (00:56)
Not at all my pleasure.

Kevin Carmody (00:58)
So

when I first came across you were writing about Weoley Castle and Weoley Castle we know is one of the social housing estates of Birmingham where residents initially walked to trams and then later on the buses filled in the gap.

Mike (01:03)
Yes.

Kevin Carmody (01:16)
what’s the kind of legacy of that in terms of kind of transport today?

Mike (01:22)
Weoley you which was developed in the late 20s early 30s was just slightly remote from the Bristol Road tramway route now, Bristol Road was one of the jewels in the crown of Birmingham City Transport Department and it had opened as an almost completely reserved tramway line in between 1924 26 and to get anywhere really from Weoley Castle you effectively either made the short red

relatively short walk to Bristol Road, where you cycled. you know, there was an insistent clamour for obviously for bus services, some sort of public transport, very early on in the estate’s history. And if you look at many social housing, in fact, housing developments full stop in suburban British towns and cities

public transport particularly follows on from the building. It’s rarely that you see that public transport comes first in many respects, as a key component of development. It tends to follow on. And Weoley Castle is fairly typical in that the bus, of course, was a relatively straightforward and easy option. It is flexible by its nature. It doesn’t require the capital investment of laying a tram line and putting the overhead up, for example.

So quite early on what you find in the mid-30s is the start of a bus service into Weoley Castle which feeds into the tramways at Selly Oak and then actually develops into a ⁓ bus system in its own right. It starts connecting Weoley Castle to places like Selly Oak and the city centre. So it gains a degree of traction in terms of its public transport infrastructure but largely based on the flexible bus.

Kevin Carmody (03:03)
say wasn’t so much the planning of how the transport was going to be in that initial development. there just not discussion between the housing departments and the transport? Is there attention? Is it just, we’ll just put in the buses as a cheap fix

Mike (03:20)
is obviously a degree of cooperation between what were at the time two municipal departments in many cases, between the Housing Department or the Estates Department in Birmingham and the Transport Departments.

Birmingham, mean, was a very tram city. I think we tend to forget that in the 1930s Birmingham was a proponent of tramways. was not one of the early corporations that decided to ditch its tramways. In the late 20s into the early 30s it was still building very nice, dense, sort of high-speed reservation tramways, particularly into the northeastern areas around Erdington and Pipehays.

around which of course major housing estates were developed and being constructed. Equally on the other side, King’s Standing, arguably one of Europe’s largest municipal housing schemes developed from 1929 onwards, was resolutely bussed from the first time. It was road-centric rather than tramway or of course railway-centric. So it is interesting that there does appear to be a lag between town planning in general and the provision of public or active transport.

I think the other tension that’s interesting around the time, it certainly played out very obviously in Manchester and it’s much the same in Birmingham, is a debate between the Housing Department and the Transport Department about fares. Because obviously, are displacing, Birmingham was displacing large numbers of people from crowded inner-city areas, from slum areas to new houses on the outskirts. And of course, Birmingham saw that massive expansion of land

when it took over, its boundaries were extended in 1928 into Warwickshire and Worcestershire, to enable suburban development. And of course that means several things. One of which is that most people’s journey times to and from work go from relatively short, might even be walking if you’re somewhere in Aston or Handsworth, to actually quite lengthy journeys by bus or by tram. And the other thing is of course the cost of that.

all of a sudden the cost of transport becomes a larger part of people’s weekly expenses on top of often increased rent. And you’ll find that the housing department and local population…

really are asking the Transport Department for cheaper fares and you’ll find that most Transport Departments said, well, you it’s not our business to subsidise your housing choices. We can only charge economic fares effectively. And there is an interesting tension, I think, as you say, a lack of potentially obvious joined up thinking between spatial planning and land use and transport policy.

Kevin Carmody (05:54)
Yeah.

we’ve talked before about the busways moving in to take it to add flexibility to the tram network.

was this ultimately the downfall of the trams?

Mike (06:22)
And Birmingham was very typical. It municipalised the private tramway companies at the time and it’s electrified.

into the 1920s and 1930s, most of this needed renewing in many respects. So you get a bow wave of places that actually choose to, stick with tram or smaller operators, which decided that at the time the cost of renewing or extending its tramway system was better to move towards the bus. And it’s also at a time when in terms of technological development of the bus itself,

1930s they’re transformed into incredibly reliable heavy-duty vehicles an awful lot of which of course you know many of them were built in Birmingham at Metrocamel Wayman. So the bus very rapidly became what was perceived as a better option at the time. Another thread

in terms of the end of tramways, interesting enough is really national policy, is there was a royal commission into the tramways in the late 20s which basically recommended that tramways should be abolished, that they were the cause of road congestion for example because the numbers of road vehicles themselves were starting to grow.

there was that very early national pressure to abandon tramways.

So the motor bus very rapidly became supreme

mean, arguing on the other side is that particularly around electric rail traction, heavy or light in terms of tramways, is the ability to be able to move larger numbers of people, you know, per hour using rail transport than buses. But, you know, if you look at Birmingham, an interesting example, the, you the, the, the,

Hall Green tramways extension out to Sturchley out to the city city boundary on Stratford Road which took place I think in 1929. It was abandoned in 1937 because they realized that they’d introduced so many feeder bus routes or parallel bus routes along the Stratford Road corridor into Hall Green into Acox Green to Yardley Wood that in fact actually the Transport Department made the first big decision to abandon tramways at that time and move to what was perceived as being a

cheaper, flexible option of being able to match demand as housing estates were growing and also where necessary pull back outside peak hours. It’s easier to take a bus back to the depot to give them the more flexibility and therefore the cheaper costs of operation. So I think that’s the tension in some respects.

Kevin Carmody (08:58)
Right, so, I mean, it’s just saying that they almost weren’t able to keep up with that capacity with the trams.

Mike (09:05)
I think the other thing was, as say, around capital investment, there was a belief that even with a bus that sat 50, 60 people at most,

even if you had to run a bus every minute or two minutes. And it’s worth looking at old bus timetables. Quite often, peak hour requirements on things like Bristol Road, there was a bus every two or three minutes. If you missed the bus, you could see the next one coming along the road. It was considered because of the passenger figures at the time that the bus was capable of moving so many people. And it was perceived as being in a more economic way at the time of doing that.

Kevin Carmody (09:49)
So

as we head into the 50s, we’re heading into Motor City and we’re looking then at the development of the city more suited to the car. So we’re pulling out these kind of tramways and public transports. mean, okay, so it’s hard not to say this without talking about Herbert Manzoni and the impact that he had in, know, of tearing up what for many people would say is the historical.

Mike (10:13)
you

Kevin Carmody (10:18)
part of the city and replacing it with motorways that run through. And I know we say a lot of this was Manzoni’s vision, but are we scapegoating Manzoni? Is he actually just a reflection of the times?

Mike (10:36)
Yes, I mean it’s interesting isn’t it? Birmingham obviously finally got rid of its trams in 1952, 1953 when the last tram ran and know Birmingham became a bus-centric city at a time when of course

Also worth remembering, Birmingham has never had a particularly strong suburban rail network But with the trams, if you like, you know, obviously there was a blank canvas in terms of road development. think where Manzoni, is he maligned? He’s fascinating, isn’t he? He’s a great demon of the city of Birmingham. He had such a long tenure, obviously, he was without doubt very

influenced by American design policy around the supremacy of the car. And the city council, the councillors very enthusiastically backed Manzoni and his post-war plans. The argument goes that even though Birmingham, obviously, a city centre, wasn’t devastated by bombing, Manzoni cracked on and got on with it.

But the interesting thing, I think the thing about Birmingham to an extent, Glasgow, if you compare Birmingham with particularly like London,

the same sort of ideas of ringways largely took place in Birmingham. You know, we did get the inner ring road, we got the middle ring road.

didn’t quite get the outer ring road. of course, Manzoni’s car centric schemes also included carving up many inner city suburbs. So for those of us who can remember, you know, the reconstruction round Newtown, for example, or the Hockley viaduct or sections of Coventry Road, you know, which were large scale obliterations, you know, topped by the Aston Expressway, you know, which had devastating impacts on the inner city.

So Birmingham did become very car-centric. By the late 60s, certainly by the mid late 60s, the number of car ownership in cities like Birmingham was booming. So you this expansion of the road system, this expansion of

private motoring. For me from a public transport point of view what’s interesting is that there was very little thought given to actually the role for public transport in that scheme.

So you know think Manzoni’s plans for Road City

without a doubt were quite thoughtless in terms of what they were achieving for either active travel or public transport in that respect. And one last thing I think that’s fascinating about Manzoni, he wasn’t just the city engineer, he de facto became the city architect. He had a very problematic relationship with several city architects. And in fact, Manzoni really did play a leading role in the spatial planning of Birmingham, in terms of not just where

houses were to be built on the outer ring.

It was once described as Birmingham was going to be surrounded by a series of housing forts around the ring road. But also in fact actually the type of housing that was built was largely influenced by Manzoni in the 50s and into the early 60s. I think love him or loathe him. Subsequent history is we’ve watched the parts of the inner ring road being torn down. Take that Herbert Manzoni, we’ve got our revenge on you.

cannot deny his impact and influence on Birmingham as a city and how he was channeling in many respects were quite common planning decisions around the supremacy of the car. think what Mancione achieved with the City Council in Birmingham is they probably went as far as say, Glasgow is possibly the only other British example where you do get that supremacy not just as an idea but actually developed on the ground.

Kevin Carmody (14:26)
Yeah,

yeah, it happened all over didn’t it adding motorways into city centers it was it was not you

Mike (14:31)
Yes, Birmingham, you know, as I say,

Birmingham really is a supreme example of that. There’s no two ways about it.

Kevin Carmody (14:42)
So now we’re working through the process of, in some ways, the manzonification, I think is as the term is, but I know we had in the early 2000s, the removal of the Mass House Circus and the return of the trams. Now, I am very enthusiastic for trams. I think their capacity is amazing and I think that people enjoy using them.

Mike (15:11)
Yes.

Kevin Carmody (15:12)
But

we’ve had them and they’ve been removed. I mean, is my enthusiasm misplaced here based on what’s happened historically?

Mike (15:20)
I think several things obviously have happened. One of which is there is a growing recognition in terms of planning and land use, know, of this stranglehold of road systems. But, you know, yes, with Mass House going, obviously it’s part of

of that absolute intent to redevelop the East End of Birmingham, the East Side of Birmingham, around HS2 and other major projects. And obviously, that concrete girdle of Masthouse Circus was just an impediment. It was like the Berlin Wall, trying to, as a pedestrian, fluidity of movement and feel between the traditional city centre and the new area required the removal of that.

I think it’s worth remembering, 1969 Birmingham City Transport became part of the New West Midlands passenger transport executive, which was an attempt to gain far more in the way of planning coordination over transport systems as a whole. Birmingham is interesting. It never had a particularly strong suburban rail network.

The Harbourn branch was killed by buses very early on. It is interesting that the PTE obviously brought bus systems together. It merged ex-Midland Red routes in. It attempted to reduce the simplification of fares through travel card. That’s an important ability to be able to have an easy form of actually using public transport in terms of fare ownership.

You’ve seen things such as the cross city electrification. now you’ve got the Midland Rail Hub, the idea around the Camp Hill line.

but you know you do have movement back towards heavy rail which is welcome. think the advantage of light rail passenger transport is the ability to be able to penetrate the central area by if necessary on street running.

And of course, you know, the Metro basically uses for the main core part of it, the abandoned rail line between Wolverhampton and Birmingham Snow Hill and subsequent extensions have seen that away from a rather artificial terminus, at Snow Hill into the city centre, because that’s where people want to go. So tramways gives you,

something that’s got high capacity is low pollution at the point of delivery and does bring with it, sort of sparks effect in some respects. It’s difficult in a way. People perceive tramways, as being more regular because they’re fixed and they’re more determined than a bus which can turn off and go anywhere, The tram nevertheless has that sort of sense of strange sort of stability.

⁓ So Birmingham has at least seen the development of on-street tramways. It is

And let’s face it, there are big plans ahead to continue to develop. We see extensions to the Midland Metro as we speak. The Digbeth extension, the long medium term plans to extend out into East

Birmingham, which is interesting because that in some respects is an example of seeing a tramway as something that can help regenerate. That if you put the public transport, mass public transport, in first, development will follow around it. And I think that’s a really key thing. We saw it in London with the Dotlands Light Railway, which is one of the very few examples where we actually put the infrastructure in first to enable development.

but you know I think that’s where you like the hope of things like the tramway are. I think the interesting little downside of it is is you know where would

Midland, where would the Birmingham tram, Midland Metro, next? because there are still very large areas central Birmingham and suburban Birmingham, which really do not have strong public transport links. last time I wandered down Bristol Road, and then that beautiful verdant…

Kevin Carmody (19:21)
Yeah.

Mike (19:27)
traffic clogged dual carriageway with that treeline central reservation, knowing full well that there were once rails in the middle of it. It’s slightly galling sometimes as a transport historian. there is undoubtedly a need to be able to, to

Kevin Carmody (19:33)
you

Mike (19:41)
non-car centric transport back into cities

Tramways is one option, but there are others which range from other forms of public transport integrated, connected on single fare systems and then into the actual structural planning of cities.

But you know, as I say, one thing that fascinates me increasingly in some respects with this need to develop and Greenfield expansion and Brownfield this.

is not just bringing public transport and transport policy together in a coordinated way but to bring in like spatial planning and the impact of things on services and public health together in a more meaningful way so that we develop communities now that are interlinked in many ways socio-economic and transport.

Kevin Carmody (20:34)
So I think one of the key lessons is that we’ve been here before. That we did have great trams, we did have great public transport and that we abandoned those in the Manzoni era. This was for an expectation that everyone wants to be driving. Of course they don’t and now we’re spending millions trying to fix those mistakes. steps have been made. The removal of the mass house circus, the small book riddle way, the reintroduction of the trams.

and the ongoing renationalisation of the buses. However, every time Better Streets does any campaigning to address this, whether it’s through better walking, cycling infrastructure or improving the public transport, there is a continual drag to keep these failed revisions. Cities across Europe who have kept those trams have prospered and these accessible cities are the places that we like to visit.

Cities in the UK that have made investments, like Manchester, are more effective at moving people and are more economically prosperous. The longer we take to invest in our city’s infrastructure, the further behind we will fall. you want to be part of making Birmingham’s streets safer, healthier and better connected, please visit betterstreetsforbirmingham.org.

Join for free to support our campaigns and learn about upcoming events and find out how you can make sure that Birmingham gets it right this time. Thank you very much for listening. See you all again next time.