Edinburgh Trams Farce Continues

[frankblack]

Is every city around the world (some a lot smaller than Edinburgh) installing trams engaged in a 'vanity project' or just Edinburgh?

 

Other cities can appoint competent professionals to run their schemes, who don't spend their budget before a fraction of one line is built.  To continue once the money is gone means the project is a vanity project for the councillors who hope that muppets who see the one semi-complete line think they have done a competent job.

 

This current idea of extending the line could bankrupt the city, and spending has to go on priority areas first.

[leginten]

Utterly indefensible and clearly he will have to go.

 

But the question is why Sue Bruce, Lesley Hinds and Andrew Burns are keeping him in post for now.  What hold over them does he have?

What mystifies me is the need for a "brand launch" in the first place. I can understand companies in a competitive market spending (their shareholders') money on stuff like that. But I'm at a loss to understand what other tram brand in Edinburgh TIE was competing against that necessitated blowing over a quarter of a million of the public's cash. Absolutely scandalous.

[Prince Buaben]

What mystifies me is the need for a "brand launch" in the first place. I can understand companies in a competitive market spending (their shareholders') money on stuff like that. But I'm at a loss to understand what other tram brand in Edinburgh TIE was competing against that necessitated blowing over a quarter of a million of the public's cash. Absolutely scandalous.

 

Effectivly arent TIE(Lothian Buses) comepeting against First Bus/Stagecoach?

[leginten]

Effectivly arent TIE(Lothian Buses) comepeting against First Bus/Stagecoach?

Is there a route on which the trams are competing against First Bus and Stagecoach? Do they do airport to city centre? I thought Lothian Buses had that one all tied up already.

[Prince Buaben]

Is there a route on which the trams are competing against First Bus and Stagecoach? Do they do airport to city centre? I thought Lothian Buses had that one all tied up already.

 

 

I got TIE and TFE mixed up.. ignore me

 

Although since the brand launch its Edinburgh Trams and not TIE

Edited December 22, 2014 by Prince Buaben

[King Of The Cat Cafe]

Still not enough new passengers to make any sizeable inroad into the debt incurred to provide the vanity project tram.

 

Someone told me today that the amount of money the trams have taken so far does not nearly meet the staff costs to date.

[Sheriff Fatman]

Someone told me today that the amount of money the trams have taken so far does not nearly meet the staff costs to date.

Someone was probably making up a sound bite more to do with perceived expectations than facts, Though to be fair that is par for the course. 

[Nookie Bear]

Is every city around the world (some a lot smaller than Edinburgh) installing trams engaged in a 'vanity project' or just Edinburgh?

 

It all boils down to the fact that we did not need a tram system.

 

It might have been "nice to have" but so would new sports/music facilities but the cost outweighs the benefits. Fow what it's worth, I would rather we developed our sporting facilities and our care services before we built a toy train track.

[The Real Maroonblood]

It all boils down to the fact that we did not need a tram system.

 

It might have been "nice to have" but so would new sports/music facilities but the cost outweighs the benefits. Fow what it's worth, I would rather we developed our sporting facilities and our care services before we built a toy train track.

Well said.

[leginten]

It all boils down to the fact that we did not need a tram system.

 

It might have been "nice to have" but so would new sports/music facilities but the cost outweighs the benefits. Fow what it's worth, I would rather we developed our sporting facilities and our care services before we built a toy train track.

What would be "nice to have" is roads and pavements which weren't crumbling, falling apart and sprouting weeds all over the city because of total neglect by those charged with their maintenance. The thick end of a billion quid that has been squandered on the toy would have gone a considerable way towards improving the situation.

 

You look after the basic things before you start spending money on luxuries.

[Cade]

We have the best bus network in Europe (with the awards to prove it). 

We did not need a tram to replace one of the routes on that network, especially not at a pricetag of ?1billion.

We could have given a quarter of that cash to Lothian buses and have spent it on an entire new fleet of hybrid/electric bendy buses to serve every bus route in the city.

 

Edinburgh city council is having to repay loans taken out to finance the trams at the rate of ?30million per year for the next THIRTY YEARS.

This is why leisure centres, libraries, public toilets and schools are closing.

This is why staff are being cut at every level of the council.

This is why the roads and pavements are in a terrible state.

This is why the streets are full of rotting garbage.

 

Bur never mind, eh? We have a nice wee toy-town train set that goes 9 miles.

[King Of The Cat Cafe]

King Of The Cat Cafe, on 22 Dec 2014 - 7:18 PM, said:

Someone told me today that the amount of money the trams have taken so far does not nearly meet the staff costs to date.

Someone was probably making up a sound bite more to do with perceived expectations than facts, Though to be fair that is par for the course

 

 

 

May be "a sound bite", but I would be interested to see if anyone can contradict it.

[FWJ]

What would be "nice to have" is roads and pavements which weren't crumbling, falling apart and sprouting weeds all over the city because of total neglect by those charged with their maintenance. The thick end of a billion quid that has been squandered on the toy would have gone a considerable way towards improving the situation.You look after the basic things before you start spending money on luxuries.

And much of the cost of the tram was replacing and renewing decades old underground utilities.

[FWJ]

We have the best bus network in Europe (with the awards to prove it). 

We did not need a tram to replace one of the routes on that network, especially not at a pricetag of ?1billion.

We could have given a quarter of that cash to Lothian buses and have spent it on an entire new fleet of hybrid/electric bendy buses to serve every bus route in the city.

 

Edinburgh city council is having to repay loans taken out to finance the trams at the rate of ?30million per year for the next THIRTY YEARS.

This is why leisure centres, libraries, public toilets and schools are closing.

This is why staff are being cut at every level of the council.

This is why the roads and pavements are in a terrible state.

This is why the streets are full of rotting garbage.

 

Bur never mind, eh? We have a nice wee toy-town train set that goes 9 miles.

Big news in Highland Council area is the massive cuts in services that will have to be implemented. No trams in Inverness. There are cuts in local government the country over.

What is different about Edinburgh is the enormous growth in population forecast over the next few years - another 140,000. These people are going to have to get about. Modern trams are being installed in cities around the world because they work and are popular. The (what I hope will be) first phase of Edinburgh's trams was very poorly handled but there's an enquiry going on and lessons hopefully have been learned.

 

What should we do? Rip up the line and abandon the whole thing - or try to make it work?

[3fingersreid]

We have the best bus network in Europe (with the awards to prove it).

We did not need a tram to replace one of the routes on that network, especially not at a pricetag of ?1billion.

We could have given a quarter of that cash to Lothian buses and have spent it on an entire new fleet of hybrid/electric bendy buses to serve every bus route in the city.

 

Edinburgh city council is having to repay loans taken out to finance the trams at the rate of ?30million per year for the next THIRTY YEARS.

This is why leisure centres, libraries, public toilets and schools are closing.

This is why staff are being cut at every level of the council.

This is why the roads and pavements are in a terrible state.

This is why the streets are full of rotting garbage.

 

Bur never mind, eh? We have a nice wee toy-town train set that goes 9 miles.

The day after this overpriced line was opened a young girl tragically lost her life in a school accident , a school like many others that needed and still does need upgrading if not replacing . I know where I'd rather my money went .

[Nookie Bear]

Big news in Highland Council area is the massive cuts in services that will have to be implemented. No trams in Inverness. There are cuts in local government the country over.

What is different about Edinburgh is the enormous growth in population forecast over the next few years - another 140,000. These people are going to have to get about. Modern trams are being installed in cities around the world because they work and are popular. The (what I hope will be) first phase of Edinburgh's trams was very poorly handled but there's an enquiry going on and lessons hopefully have been learned.

 

What should we do? Rip up the line and abandon the whole thing - or try to make it work?

 

True, cuts happen for reasons beyond trams.

 

But surely that population growth needs better services, better schools, better hospitals, better care for the elderly and better leisure facilities. Surely these needs are much more important than cutting journey times for one bus route by 10% and having free wifi.

[frankblack]

Big news in Highland Council area is the massive cuts in services that will have to be implemented. No trams in Inverness. There are cuts in local government the country over.

What is different about Edinburgh is the enormous growth in population forecast over the next few years - another 140,000. These people are going to have to get about. Modern trams are being installed in cities around the world because they work and are popular. The (what I hope will be) first phase of Edinburgh's trams was very poorly handled but there's an enquiry going on and lessons hopefully have been learned.

 

What should we do? Rip up the line and abandon the whole thing - or try to make it work?

 

Abandoning it might not be a bad idea if it can cut costs - even if it means we still have to repay loans we are legally bound by.

 

The council had a budget for the trams - they blew it and can't afford them.  Its that simple.

 

As for how people are going to get about the city without spending more on trams - how about adding more buses where the routes justify them?

[scott_jambo]

Big news in Highland Council area is the massive cuts in services that will have to be implemented. No trams in Inverness. There are cuts in local government the country over.

What is different about Edinburgh is the enormous growth in population forecast over the next few years - another 140,000. These people are going to have to get about. Modern trams are being installed in cities around the world because they work and are popular. The (what I hope will be) first phase of Edinburgh's trams was very poorly handled but there's an enquiry going on and lessons hopefully have been learned.

 

What should we do? Rip up the line and abandon the whole thing - or try to make it work?

 

Quite simple. Abandon the whole thing. 

[Cade]

Big news in Highland Council area is the massive cuts in services that will have to be implemented. No trams in Inverness. There are cuts in local government the country over.

What is different about Edinburgh is the enormous growth in population forecast over the next few years - another 140,000. These people are going to have to get about. Modern trams are being installed in cities around the world because they work and are popular. The (what I hope will be) first phase of Edinburgh's trams was very poorly handled but there's an enquiry going on and lessons hopefully have been learned.

 

What should we do? Rip up the line and abandon the whole thing - or try to make it work?

 

The council's own plans admit that the trams will be running at a loss for the first FIFTEEN YEARS of operation too.

So, we're crippled by ?30mil a year in loan repayments AND have to prop up a loss making tram line as well?

 

Abandon the feckers, see how much we can get at the scrappies for the rails and invest in the buses.

[Chester™]

True, cuts happen for reasons beyond trams.

 

But surely that population growth needs better services, better schools, better hospitals, better care for the elderly and better leisure facilities. Surely these needs are much more important than cutting journey times for one bus route by 10% and having free wifi.

 

Spot on.

 

Those who are really favour in the trams, can you honestly say you were pleased with the outcome, how the money was spent (the underground stuff is a bit of a red herring, though that did show how poor the council knew their own city as well) and are confident that lessons will ACTUALLY be learned? All on top of the cutbacks which are coming (tram related and dont let anybody kid you otherwise). If the population is going to boom, where are they all going to go if no houses are being built, no supports are in place and the absolute infrastructure of the city is on its knees?

 

The idea of the trams was a wonderful idea in theory. The apparent environmental benefits an absolute goer. They work in other cities (though how many have the issues or expense or results that we had). How it ended up was an absolute national scandal.

[Matthew Le Tissier]

A Monorail would have been better

[FWJ]

Spot on.

 

Those who are really favour in the trams, can you honestly say you were pleased with the outcome, how the money was spent (the underground stuff is a bit of a red herring, though that did show how poor the council knew their own city as well) and are confident that lessons will ACTUALLY be learned? All on top of the cutbacks which are coming (tram related and dont let anybody kid you otherwise). If the population is going to boom, where are they all going to go if no houses are being built, no supports are in place and the absolute infrastructure of the city is on its knees?

 

The idea of the trams was a wonderful idea in theory. The apparent environmental benefits an absolute goer. They work in other cities (though how many have the issues or expense or results that we had). How it ended up was an absolute national scandal.

Pleased with the outcome - I'm not pleased with the cost overrun, the delay or the fact that the line is truncated but I am pleased with the line as is, passenger numbers are greater than forecast - and the number of passengers using buses is up too.

I'm not sure the underground stuff is a red herring TBH and I am confident that lessons will have been learned.

Again I don't think the infrastructure is on its knees - and if further tram lines are built you can bet where house builders will want to go - in Dublin property prices near the LUAS rose an additional 15% above the average.

[pablo]

As I said earlier we need to consider network extension on it's own merit and let the inquiry deal with the previous management ****** up. To not do so could be an even greater mistake and more costly to the City generations on from now.

[Nookie Bear]

As I said earlier we need to consider network extension on it's own merit and let the inquiry deal with the previous management ****** up. To not do so could be an even greater mistake and more costly to the City generations on from now.

 

What sort of 'extension' do you envisage?

[scott_jambo]

What sort of 'extension' do you envisage?

 

Apparently a track going half way down leith walk will pay the billions off.

[pablo]

What sort of 'extension' do you envisage?

In time obviously. they've been building the Manchester network since the mid 90's. But, I think the original line will be completed to Leith and then on to Newhaven/Granton. After this a North-South line will follow. Following the proposed Line 2 route to Roseburn where it will join Line 1, it'll travel east on Line 1 before turning up Lothian Road, through Brougham Street and then skirt the north side of the meadows passing the Quartermile development and then South to the ERI and beyond via Dalkeith Road. Once you have a North - South and a West - East line, you start think about spurs and branches. London Road down to Portobello and beyond etc.

 

I thinking over the next 30 or so years.

[Nookie Bear]

In time obviously. they've been building the Manchester network since the mid 90's. But, I think the original line will be completed to Leith and then on to Newhaven/Granton. After this a North-South line will follow. Following the proposed Line 2 route to Roseburn where it will join Line 1, it'll travel east on Line 1 before turning up Lothian Road, through Brougham Street and then skirt the north side of the meadows passing the Quartermile development and then South to the ERI and beyond via Dalkeith Road. Once you have a North - South and a West - East line, you start think about spurs and branches. London Road down to Portobello and beyond etc.

 

I thinking over the next 30 or so years.

Will it terminate in cloud cuckoo land?

[pablo]

Will it terminate in cloud cuckoo land?

Cities are becoming more important than countries, politically, economically and in regards to culture. Edinburgh as one of the world's most desirable small cities will have a secondary transport system that moves people around. It's necessary for the future generations and the growth of the city and will happen at some point.

[frankblack]

Cities are becoming more important than countries, politically, economically and in regards to culture. Edinburgh as one of the world's most desirable small cities will have a secondary transport system that moves people around. It's necessary for the future generations and the growth of the city and will happen at some point.

 

The council will be debt ridden for decades to come thanks to the huge overspend on the trams and can't afford to even sustain the existing line let alone extend it.  Maintaining council services must take priority over the trams.

 

There is also the question of routes, and most of the roads in the city are too narrow to support a tram track, with the old tram lines long since built over.  The reality is that there is no chance of us getting a tram system that properly covers the full extents of the city.

[Sheriff Fatman]

The council will be debt ridden for decades to come thanks to the huge overspend on the trams and can't afford to even sustain the existing line let alone extend it.  Maintaining council services must take priority over the trams.

 

There is also the question of routes, and most of the roads in the city are too narrow to support a tram track, with the old tram lines long since built over.  The reality is that there is no chance of us getting a tram system that properly covers the full extents of the city.

We don't need nor will we get a tram system that covers the full extents of the city. We can have a tram system that covers the parts where they can go, and there are some areas no matter the moans of the 'the road belongs to me'  minority of car drivers, that links up with train and bus services, and even car parks, to give a total transport system that suits a city that cannot cope with the amount of cars that go through the city now, let alone as the city expands.

Edited December 25, 2014 by Sheriff Fatman

[portobellojambo1]

Cities are becoming more important than countries, politically, economically and in regards to culture. Edinburgh as one of the world's most desirable small cities will have a secondary transport system that moves people around. It's necessary for the future generations and the growth of the city and will happen at some point.

 

 

Do you genuinely believe that tosh, or are you just pushing this as part of your defence of the most expensive small, unfinished and un-needed train set ever thrown together. Edinburgh and its surrounds has probably one of the best, if not the best, existing transport systems on the planet, which very succesfully gets people into and around the city. The city's services are falling to bits, because we have no money to spend on things the citizens of this city actually need, to maintain their standard of living, not make it any better. This whole fiasco resulted from a vanity project being promoted by a small few councillors (thank feck London weren't involved, we would never have heard the end of it, but because it was being pushed by a few Edinburgh based arseholes people try to defend it, even thought it is totally indefensible). Should it be abandoned now, 100% of course it should, should it ever have been started, 100% of course it shouldn't, it wasn't wanted or needed by the people of Edinburgh.

[Angry Haggis]

Do you genuinely believe that tosh, or are you just pushing this as part of your defence of the most expensive small, unfinished and un-needed train set ever thrown together. Edinburgh and its surrounds has probably one of the best, if not the best, existing transport systems on the planet, which very succesfully gets people into and around the city. The city's services are falling to bits, because we have no money to spend on things the citizens of this city actually need, to maintain their standard of living, not make it any better. This whole fiasco resulted from a vanity project being promoted by a small few councillors (thank feck London weren't involved, we would never have heard the end of it, but because it was being pushed by a few Edinburgh based arseholes people try to defend it, even thought it is totally indefensible). Should it be abandoned now, 100% of course it should, should it ever have been started, 100% of course it shouldn't, it wasn't wanted or needed by the people of Edinburgh.

Nothing like a good tram seethe on Xmas day.

 

[Sheriff Fatman]

Do you genuinely believe that tosh, or are you just pushing this as part of your defence of the most expensive small, unfinished and un-needed train set ever thrown together. Edinburgh and its surrounds has probably one of the best, if not the best, existing transport systems on the planet, which very succesfully gets people into and around the city. The city's services are falling to bits, because we have no money to spend on things the citizens of this city actually need, to maintain their standard of living, not make it any better. This whole fiasco resulted from a vanity project being promoted by a small few councillors (thank feck London weren't involved, we would never have heard the end of it, but because it was being pushed by a few Edinburgh based arseholes people try to defend it, even thought it is totally indefensible). Should it be abandoned now, 100% of course it should, should it ever have been started, 100% of course it shouldn't, it wasn't wanted or needed by the people of Edinburgh.

Since when was it the job of the council to provide 'standard of living', that is what your wages are for. The bus service is still good, and getting used more than it was before the trams. I have yet to be on a tram that wasn't busy and so is providing the service it was intended to provide. It is not, never has been and never will be the job of councils to provide services that make a profit. if it was 90% of the buses wouldn't run, there would be no libraries, there would be no sports centres, there would be no litter collection.

[portobellojambo1]

Since when was it the job of the council to provide 'standard of living', that is what your wages are for. The bus service is still good, and getting used more than it was before the trams. I have yet to be on a tram that wasn't busy and so is providing the service it was intended to provide. It is not, never has been and never will be the job of councils to provide services that make a profit. if it was 90% of the buses wouldn't run, there would be no libraries, there would be no sports centres, there would be no litter collection.

 

 

Apologies SF, I didn't mean to say standard of living, I meant to say standard of services, i.e. those in place pre the non essential, in fact still non required train set. To me if it is already possible to get from A to B, by more than one means, then adding a further option to get from A to B is not adding to services, I'd call it diluting, or something along those lines, and it was a hell of an expensive form of dilution.

[davemclaren]

Apologies SF, I didn't mean to say standard of living, I meant to say standard of services, i.e. those in place pre the non essential, in fact still non required train set. To me if it is already possible to get from A to B, by more than one means, then adding a further option to get from A to B is not adding to services, I'd call it diluting, or something along those lines, and it was a hell of an expensive form of dilution.

With that logic we would still have horse drawn transport.

[FORTHCLYDE]

They should have reopened the 30 railway stations Edinburgh once had. 

[Sheriff Fatman]

Apologies SF, I didn't mean to say standard of living, I meant to say standard of services, i.e. those in place pre the non essential, in fact still non required train set. To me if it is already possible to get from A to B, by more than one means, then adding a further option to get from A to B is not adding to services, I'd call it diluting, or something along those lines, and it was a hell of an expensive form of dilution.

 

Glad you weren't around when Karl Benz invented the modern car, as there were already bicycles, horses, steam powered vehicles and horse-drawn carriages that could get you from A to B.

 

The tram does not appear to be diluting the bus service as numbers point to more people using buses since the trams started. 

[FWJ]

They should have reopened the 30 railway stations Edinburgh once had.

 

That would mean getting rid of the West Approach Road for starters.

[steve123]

All suspended due to ice on lines, would have thought they might have had contingency plans!!

[All Gone Wrong]

your F*****g kidding.

[steve123]

Na was on the radio this morning

[Stuart Lyon]

It is also reported on Transport for Edinburgh's app - ice on the overhead lines! Can just see them sending a crew out under the supervision of Councillor Hinds with a blow torch to thaw the ice! Maybe she can provide the hot air needed!

Edited December 26, 2014 by Stuart Lyon

[3fingersreid]

Glad you weren't around when Karl Benz invented the modern car, as there were already bicycles, horses, steam powered vehicles and horse-drawn carriages that could get you from A to B.

 

The tram does not appear to be diluting the bus service as numbers point to more people using buses since the trams started.

If more people are using the buses why have we got a tram line?

Edinburgh buses pre-tram had the best bus service in Britain , fact

[Sheriff Fatman]

If more people are using the buses why have we got a tram line?

Edinburgh buses pre-tram had the best bus service in Britain , fact

 

Oh, I don't know. Maybe the trams are persuading people out of their cars and they are using buses to get from where they live to where they get on the tram.

 

As to Edinburgh's service, yes it is a great service, but that does not mean that a linked up transport service that includes trans, trains, buses and carparks cannot improve it further. Sitting on laurels leads to stagnation not continuation.

[Sheriff Fatman]

your ******g kidding.

Imagine that, taking safety into consideration.

[CostaJambo]

Big news in Highland Council area is the massive cuts in services that will have to be implemented. No trams in Inverness. There are cuts in local government the country over.

What is different about Edinburgh is the enormous growth in population forecast over the next few years - another 140,000. These people are going to have to get about. Modern trams are being installed in cities around the world because they work and are popular. The (what I hope will be) first phase of Edinburgh's trams was very poorly handled but there's an enquiry going on and lessons hopefully have been learned.

 

What should we do? Rip up the line and abandon the whole thing - or try to make it work?

 

 

 

Would like to know where that statistic came from and when exactly. If it is from pre-independence vote then how on earth could anyone have made that prediction not knowing the result of the vote?

Edited December 26, 2014 by CostaJambo

[3fingersreid]

Oh, I don't know. Maybe the trams are persuading people out of their cars and they are using buses to get from where they live to where they get on the tram.

 

As to Edinburgh's service, yes it is a great service, but that does not mean that a linked up transport service that includes trans, trains, buses and carparks cannot improve it further. Sitting on laurels leads to stagnation not continuation.

Of course it could've been improved , investment in more environmentally friendly buses for one.

 

As to the linked up transport system who decided that the tram would stop at the foot of the Mound then the next one being St Andrew sq thereby giving the elderly, infirm or even those with heavy luggage a fairly long walk to get to Waverley station ?

[portobellojambo1]

Glad you weren't around when Karl Benz invented the modern car, as there were already bicycles, horses, steam powered vehicles and horse-drawn carriages that could get you from A to B.

 

The tram does not appear to be diluting the bus service as numbers point to more people using buses since the trams started. 

 

 

I'm guessing you know what I was getting at, but if not I didn't at any point say modernising, moving forward to a new method of transport was unacceptable. However, what we have done is gone backwards and reintroduced a form of transport which disappeared from Edinburgh in November 1956 (having originally started in its earliest form as far back as the early 1870's) as more modern forms of transport were them introduced. If reverting to trams was deemed to be the best means of getting around Edinburgh I think the citizens may have accepted that more readily if we actually had something which replaced, in full, the existing bus networks within and around the city, still recognised as one of the best on the planet, something which can get you from two points easily. What we have is something which adds another tier of transport into the city centre, from the airport. If I want to get to the airport I will walk along to Haymarket and jump on the airlink bus, which already goes there, or if I'm running late I'll phone for a taxi or ask a friend for a lift out, all options which already existed and worked.. What I don't think we needed or need was an additional service going to the same place, only my opinion but it isn't adding to existing services, it is replicating them, and replication is understandable to create competition, but competition is profit based, and as you say the council isn't meant to be creating entities as a form of competition for profit making. Any ways, it is clearly something that will divide opinion for a while yet, and my own opinion is that our local council could have spent the money on either repairing/upgrading existing infrastructure or offering support to those services which are maybe considered a bit more important to and by the citizens of Edinburgh rather than wasting it on the most expensive and short train set they could come up with. I'll leave it there I think

[Sheriff Fatman]

Of course it could've been improved , investment in more environmentally friendly buses for one.

 

As to the linked up transport system who decided that the tram would stop at the foot of the Mound then the next one being St Andrew sq thereby giving the elderly, infirm or even those with heavy luggage a fairly long walk to get to Waverley station ?

You mean like the environmentally friendly buses they are investing in and the free wireless that they are investing in. They don't have to just improve one facet of the transport service, they can do more at the same time.

 

I would think that the siting of stops would be to do with where they could be best placed at a sensible distance apart that causes as little disruption to other traffic as possible. At the junction of Princes St and the Mound there is no right turn allowed so Trams stopping just before there at a stop would not get in the way of traffic wanting to turn. At the junction of Princes Street and Waverley Bridge traffic is allowed to turn right, so if the stop was placed near that junction there all traffic wanting to turn right would have to sit in the left had lane stopping those that want to turn left or go straight on.

[3fingersreid]

You mean like the environmentally friendly buses they are investing in and the free wireless that they are investing in. They don't have to just improve one facet of the transport service, they can do more at the same time.

 

I would think that the siting of stops would be to do with where they could be best placed at a sensible distance apart that causes as little disruption to other traffic as possible. At the junction of Princes St and the Mound there is no right turn allowed so Trams stopping just before there at a stop would not get in the way of traffic wanting to turn. At the junction of Princes Street and Waverley Bridge traffic is allowed to turn right, so if the stop was placed near that junction there all traffic wanting to turn right would have to sit in the left had lane stopping those that want to turn left or go straight on.

" as little disruption as possible" really?

 

Improvements in buses has always been an ongoing thing but what would we have had in terms of buses and services after spending on LRT as they'd spent on the tram ?

 

I'd also like to know why they chose to bypass the second most popular tourist attraction in the city ? Especially as they could've ran the tracks around a golf course a course they may now need to close due to financial restrictions

Let me reiterate I'm not anti tram I'm anti cost of the tram , a cost that has the potential to bankrupt the city and will increase that chance if the same set of chancers are in charge of future development