Trams - Labour party

[super_vlad]

Right, we all hate the daft trams and i can't of anyone who wanted them in the first place. But what is totally shocking, is in the evening news today ! In the paper it calls for the trams to be axe and says there was never any need for them in the first place- shock horror ! But is even worse is the prat who wrote the piece - M(major)P(*****) Nigel Griffiths of the Labour party. Would that be the same man who campagin for the trams in the first place, and told us edinburgh needed them, would that be the same man whos party wanted the trams, would that be the same man who's scottish collegues passed it thru the Scottish parilment ! I'm raging, i've always know that all MP's are svumbags but this takes the biscuit

[bighusref]

Thing that gets me about the tram (singular) is that there is only one tram line. Currently we have a high number of buses that go many different directions, ?500 Million for ONE tram route?

[JT's & Irons]

I like trams. I reckon they'll look groovy.

[Jambo66]

I like trams. I reckon they'll look groovy.

 

Tell you what - you pay for them then.

[Optimus Prime]

I want Trams because it will be one of the best things ever to happen to the city. People need to see beyond a few years of construction for the long term benefits.

 

The Evening News has had an anti council agenda for years and take great delight on putting a negative spin on this project.

 

The Labour politician is just backing what he thinks will be the winning horse at the time so he can say i told you so and hold on to power when Election time comes round.

[Optimus Prime]

Tell you what - you pay for them then.

 

Yeah because using public money for the benefit of the public is so wrong isn't it......

[super_vlad]

I want Trams because it will be one of the best things ever to happen to the city. People need to see beyond a few years of construction for the long term benefits.

 

The Evening News has had an anti council agenda for years and take great delight on putting a negative spin on this project.

 

The Labour politician is just backing what he thinks will be the winning horse at the time so he can say i told you so and hold on to power when Election time comes round.

 

Please explain your reasons why it is the best thing for the city !

[rossi_1983]

I want the trams too!

 

Been to numerous cities where they are used, and they are far better than buses. Faster, more comfortable, more eco friendly public transport is only a good thing. I can put up with roadworks for a couple of years to greatly improve our public transport

[Optimus Prime]

Please explain your reasons why it is the best thing for the city !

 

1. Provides a modern and efficent light rapid transit system through the core of the city which are far more effective and efficent for circulating mass numbers of people than bus systems alone. (see London, Paris, Madrid, Melbourne, Sydney, New York, Hong Kong and many, many more.

 

2. Will provide a direct link between the Airport, the city centre and all major commercial and political centres within the city. This will only enhance economic opportunities within the city. This is something that given the current climate is more vital than ever.

 

3. It will provide a vital transport link to the new Leith developments which which have the potential of adding numbers equivilent to the population of Dundee to Edinburgh.

 

4. Edinburgh's bus service (as good as it is) is running at full capacity and the size of edinburgh means it cannot physical take the pressure of more buses on it's road network. (Just look at Princes St at rush hour) Given the population increase mentioned in point 3, other alternatives have to be introduced.

 

5. Congestion will be reduced through Edinburghs main transport corridors for example traffic to and from the airport will be greatly reduced as the tram will provide a direct link via an off road network which will have a huge impact on cutting congestion in the west of the city.

 

6. Considerable environmental benefits. Less congestion will lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions and the Tram vehicles themselves are also economically friendly using less energy and omitting far less CO2 emissions than cars and buses ever could. These changes will significantly reduce the cities Carbon Footprint.

[Stuart Lyon]

There would be much less congestion if the Council re-opened many of the roads they have blocked-off which has forced increased traffic onto already busy roads. Take Craiglockhart Avenue as an example. You can't cut through openings on the left (going up) to avoid the traffic lights at the top of the hill but you can cut through the roads on the right to do so! Now both sides of the road are residential so why does one part get no through traffic while the other does?

 

Mark my words many of the 'temporary' road restrictions will sneakily become permanent!

 

None of this will affect our Councillors, MSPs, MPs, Senior Council employees etc as they will just take cabs at the taxpayers expense to avoid the problems.

[Optimus Prime]

There would be much less congestion if the Council re-opened many of the roads they have blocked-off which has forced increased traffic onto already busy roads. Take Craiglockhart Avenue as an example. You can't cut through openings on the left (going up) to avoid the traffic lights at the top of the hill but you can cut through the roads on the right to do so! Now both sides of the road are residential so why does one part get no through traffic while the other does?

 

Mark my words many of the 'temporary' road restrictions will sneakily become permanent!

 

None of this will affect our Councillors, MSPs, MPs, Senior Council employees etc as they will just take cabs at the taxpayers expense to avoid the problems.

 

I'm sure Craiglockhart Avenue was a safety issue as a residential street was just being used as a rat run.

[The Vulture]

London has an underground network, which I believe is slightly different from the tram network proposed in EH.

[The Brow]

Yes, but all the cities you mentioned in your post have huge systems in place covering THE ENTIRE CITY.

 

Edinburgh wont.

 

Do we really need ANOTHER tram debate? Most folk dont want them, others do.

 

I suspect (and I fall into this category) that after months and months of taking ages to get to work its starting to wear thin. Its frustrating and has made the city look like a complete ***** hole. I agree with most of Optimus Primes points with regards to population etc but the fact remains, its a lot of hassle to serve only one side of the city at a huge expense.

[Stuart Lyon]

Optimus Prime but why are the residential areas either side of the road treated differently? I'm sure we would all like to live in cu-de-sacs or dead ends so we didn't have through traffic but that is unrealistic.

 

I live in south Edinburgh minutes away from the South suburban railway and that would seem to have a lot more potential to take cars off the road than the single line tram but it can't get the circa ?30M needed to open it up to passenger trains.

[super_vlad]

1. Provides a modern and efficent light rapid transit system through the core of the city which are far more effective and efficent for circulating mass numbers of people than bus systems alone. (see London, Paris, Madrid, Melbourne, Sydney, New York, Hong Kong and many, many more.

 

All these cities are serval times bigger than edinburgh, also many apart from Madrid have being rebuilt in the last 70-80 years

 

2. Will provide a direct link between the Airport, the city centre and all major commercial and political centres within the city. This will only enhance economic opportunities within the city. This is something that given the current climate is more vital than ever.

 

It takes less than 15 mins on the direct airport bus, i can't think of any other major city were from the centre to the airport is quicker. same goes for the 22 going to the gyle

 

3. It will provide a vital transport link to the new Leith developments which which have the potential of adding numbers equivilent to the population of Dundee to Edinburgh.

 

Leith is a dump and will stay a dump, why is it that the new builds have not sold ? Are you telling me that the trams will make more people move to the leith

 

4. Edinburgh's bus service (as good as it is) is running at full capacity and the size of edinburgh means it cannot physical take the pressure of more buses on it's road network. (Just look at Princes St at rush hour) Given the population increase mentioned in point 3, other alternatives have to be introduced.

 

And how will taking road space away from buses for trams help ease the pressure ? Nonesense that more buses could not have being added, why is it that LRT have recently started to sell off buses ?

 

5. Congestion will be reduced through Edinburghs main transport corridors for example traffic to and from the airport will be greatly reduced as the tram will provide a direct link via an off road network which will have a huge impact on cutting congestion in the west of the city.

 

Absoulty nonesense ! how can you seriously reduce Congestion by taking road space away, the only people who will use the new trams are the same people who got the NO. 22, people will not give up cars and go on trams, i'm sorry but that is just navie to think. and how the feck are they using off-road tracks ? would this be the same route that the 22 took?

 

6. Considerable environmental benefits. Less congestion will lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions and the Tram vehicles themselves are also economically friendly using less energy and omitting far less CO2 emissions than cars and buses ever could. These changes will significantly reduce the cities Carbon Footprint.

 

Look above !

[speedbump]

Optimus Prime but why are the residential areas either side of the road treated differently? I'm sure we would all like to live in cu-de-sacs or dead ends so we didn't have through traffic but that is unrealistic.

 

I live in south Edinburgh minutes away from the South suburban railway and that would seem to have a lot more potential to take cars off the road than the single line tram but it can't get the circa ?30M needed to open it up to passenger trains.

 

The South-Sub, should be reopened to passenger trains, as it's reasonably cheap at only ?30 million and could relieve services such as the cross rail service (Newcraighall to Bathgate) thus providing extra seats and passenger numbers to Haymarket/Gorgie areas from the eastern part of the city.

[Robbos Right Peg]

6. Considerable environmental benefits. Less congestion will lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions and the Tram vehicles themselves are also economically friendly using less energy and omitting far less CO2 emissions than cars and buses ever could. These changes will significantly reduce the cities Carbon Footprint.

 

It will have to go some to even level out the extra CO2 emissions that come from hundreds of idling engines while stuck in traffic for the next 3 years. All this tosh about 'carbon footprint reduction' is tosh anyway. The introduction of trams will contribute the square root of diddly squat to the worlds problems.

[Stuart Lyon]

Last week I arranged to meet a mate at Register House at the east end of Princes Street. He lives at Kingsnowe so got a train in taking 15 minutes for ?2.40 return. I got a bus from Blackford and had to walk the final part of my journey which in total took almost 30 minutes. His experience of the benefits of using the railway in the city could be shared by many more if the SS was re-opened.

[Stuart Lyon]

RRP by cutting off so called 'rat runs' the Council have contributed to the increase in pollution by causing traffic jams. Similarly the build-up of traffic caused by drivers who can't read to see when bus lanes are in operation leads to single file traffic travelling at a slower pace thereby increasing congestion. The availability of bus lanes should be highlighted by PR or better signage.

[Optimus Prime]

1. Provides a modern and efficent light rapid transit system through the core of the city which are far more effective and efficent for circulating mass numbers of people than bus systems alone. (see London' date=' Paris, Madrid, Melbourne, Sydney, New York, Hong Kong and many, many more.[/b']

 

All these cities are serval times bigger than edinburgh, also many apart from Madrid have being rebuilt in the last 70-80 years

 

2. Will provide a direct link between the Airport, the city centre and all major commercial and political centres within the city. This will only enhance economic opportunities within the city. This is something that given the current climate is more vital than ever.

 

It takes less than 15 mins on the direct airport bus, i can't think of any other major city were from the centre to the airport is quicker. same goes for the 22 going to the gyle

 

3. It will provide a vital transport link to the new Leith developments which which have the potential of adding numbers equivilent to the population of Dundee to Edinburgh.

 

Leith is a dump and will stay a dump, why is it that the new builds have not sold ? Are you telling me that the trams will make more people move to the leith

 

4. Edinburgh's bus service (as good as it is) is running at full capacity and the size of edinburgh means it cannot physical take the pressure of more buses on it's road network. (Just look at Princes St at rush hour) Given the population increase mentioned in point 3, other alternatives have to be introduced.

 

And how will taking road space away from buses for trams help ease the pressure ? Nonesense that more buses could not have being added, why is it that LRT have recently started to sell off buses ?

 

5. Congestion will be reduced through Edinburghs main transport corridors for example traffic to and from the airport will be greatly reduced as the tram will provide a direct link via an off road network which will have a huge impact on cutting congestion in the west of the city.

 

Absoulty nonesense ! how can you seriously reduce Congestion by taking road space away, the only people who will use the new trams are the same people who got the NO. 22, people will not give up cars and go on trams, i'm sorry but that is just navie to think. and how the feck are they using off-road tracks ? would this be the same route that the 22 took?

 

6. Considerable environmental benefits. Less congestion will lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions and the Tram vehicles themselves are also economically friendly using less energy and omitting far less CO2 emissions than cars and buses ever could. These changes will significantly reduce the cities Carbon Footprint.

 

Look above !

 

1) Ok substitute these cities for the following. Dublin, Nottingham, Sheffield, Manchester, Lyon and Cannes off the top of my head. Regardless of the size of the city the operational principle still remains.

 

2) The tram will take about 15 mins and will go to the Gyle and the Airport. This will reduce the pressure on both the 22 and Airport bus. Two birds with one (quicker, more efficient and environmentally friendlier) stone.

 

3) "Leith is a dump and will stay a dump" nice attitude!

Leith is going through a major regeneration and development scheme. Yes, more people will likely want to live in a regenerated and newly developed Leith, in the same way as the Gorbels in Glasgow is now a desirable location. Therefore an increase in people will lead to a need for sufficent transport infrastructure to meet demand.

 

4) Trams will run quicker that buses and will accomodate more people thus reducing the need for the same level of buses and certain bus routes.

 

5) The whole of the proposed western route (from Haymarket yards to the Airport) does not use any existing road space. As i stated in point two, this will decrease the pressure on the road network especially on busy routes such as the 22 and airport routes.

[Ribble]

1. Provides a modern and efficent light rapid transit system through the core of the city which are far more effective and efficent for circulating mass numbers of people than bus systems alone. (see London, Paris, Madrid, Melbourne, Sydney, New York, Hong Kong and many, many more.

 

2. Will provide a direct link between the Airport, the city centre and all major commercial and political centres within the city. This will only enhance economic opportunities within the city. This is something that given the current climate is more vital than ever.

 

3. It will provide a vital transport link to the new Leith developments which which have the potential of adding numbers equivilent to the population of Dundee to Edinburgh.

 

4. Edinburgh's bus service (as good as it is) is running at full capacity and the size of edinburgh means it cannot physical take the pressure of more buses on it's road network. (Just look at Princes St at rush hour) Given the population increase mentioned in point 3, other alternatives have to be introduced.

 

5. Congestion will be reduced through Edinburghs main transport corridors for example traffic to and from the airport will be greatly reduced as the tram will provide a direct link via an off road network which will have a huge impact on cutting congestion in the west of the city.

 

6. Considerable environmental benefits. Less congestion will lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions and the Tram vehicles themselves are also economically friendly using less energy and omitting far less CO2 emissions than cars and buses ever could. These changes will significantly reduce the cities Carbon Footprint.

 

Few points,

 

1. Other city's have tram systems which allow movement throughout the city, not 1 line!

 

2/6. Kinda contradictory isn't it? Lobbying for more business/travel to from the airport and yet worried about Carbon Footprint??

 

3. Would that be the Leith developments that have ground to a halt?

 

4/5. if the developments mentioned in 3 ever get off the ground again and the population does rise (4) how will this then reduce congestion (5)??

 

and finally with point 2, you talk about the trams aiding economic delelopment, so why are so many shops on the tram route ready to shut their doors due to a loss of trade?? Any further delays will also see a massive impact for the big stores on Princes St over xmas!

[Optimus Prime]

The South-Sub, should be reopened to passenger trains, as it's reasonably cheap at only ?30 million and could relieve services such as the cross rail service (Newcraighall to Bathgate) thus providing extra seats and passenger numbers to Haymarket/Gorgie areas from the eastern part of the city.

 

I agree. This is something that also should be looked at.

[BlackJAC?]

What I want to know is will I have to pay more to use what was essentially the number 22 bus route?

 

I heard whilst you could use your bus pass (?42), the trams were working under a similar system to the night buses. Don’t know how much the night buses are nowadays, but I still had to pay ?1 along with my bus pass. They’ve openly admitted the 22 bus service will be slowly disbanded over the course of a few months, so basically if I understand this correctly I’ll be paying a helluva lot more in travel fares than someone that doesn’t require the 22 bus service. They can get to **** if they think I’m paying more to get into work than someone else that uses the buses elsewhere within Edinburgh.

 

Cut their losses and scrap the trams. It’s the parliament building fiasco all over again.

[super_vlad]

 

1) Ok substitute these cities for the following. Dublin' date=' Nottingham, Sheffield, Manchester, Lyon and Cannes off the top of my head. Regardless of the size of the city the operational principle still remains.

 

I think the size issues is very important, is shaving a couple of mins at most worth all the money here. Larger cities can have trams because of the sizes of the cities themselves and also road space. Right now our main roads and one lanes or 2 lanes at most.

 

2) The tram will take about 15 mins and will go to the Gyle and the Airport. This will reduce the pressure on both the 22 and Airport bus. Two birds with one (quicker, more efficient and [b']environmentally friendlier[/b]) stone.

 

Sorry, were does electricity came from ?

 

3) "Leith is a dump and will stay a dump" nice attitude!

Leith is going through a major regeneration and development scheme. Yes, more people will likely want to live in a regenerated and newly developed Leith, in the same way as the Gorbels in Glasgow is now a desirable location. Therefore an increase in people will lead to a need for sufficent transport infrastructure to meet demand.

 

My point is that the devlopers are moving out of the area because they can not sell these house. if you even had 80 % of these new homes sold, then yes by all means look for new ways for transporting people, but its a little like the chicken and egg thing.

 

4) Trams will run quicker that buses and will accomodate more people thus reducing the need for the same level of buses and certain bus routes.

 

NO, because they will only replace one route, as there is only one line.

 

5) The whole of the proposed western route (from Haymarket yards to the Airport) does not use any existing road space. As i stated in point two, this will decrease the pressure on the road network especially on busy routes such as the 22 and airport routes.

 

i can understand your reasoning, but if this was put to a vote there is no way it would have got passed by the people of edinburgh

[Optimus Prime]

Few points,

 

1. Other city's have tram systems which allow movement throughout the city, not 1 line!

 

2/6. Kinda contradictory isn't it? Lobbying for more business/travel to from the airport and yet worried about Carbon Footprint??

 

3. Would that be the Leith developments that have ground to a halt?

 

4/5. if the developments mentioned in 3 ever get off the ground again and the population does rise (4) how will this then reduce congestion (5)??

 

and finally with point 2, you talk about the trams aiding economic delelopment, so why are so many shops on the tram route ready to shut their doors due to a loss of trade?? Any further delays will also see a massive impact for the big stores on Princes St over xmas!

 

1. Rome wasn't built in a day. Building an entire network in one go is operational and finacially impossible. Other lines will follow in the future once the first one gets off the ground and people see the benefits (which they will) of this system.

 

2. Not really when the mode of travel is environmentally friendly and will reduce the impact of the motor car.

 

3. It will happen once private developers have reappraised the impact the current economic downturn is having.

 

4. I've answered this in a previous post.

 

5. The facts are only two shops in Leith Walk have closed. A gas fireplace appliance store and a tropical fish shop. I would suspect these have more to do with the escalation of world gas prices and the reluctance of people to spend money on tropical fish during times of recession than the tram project. Regardless of what kind of spin the Evening News puts on it.

[Optimus Prime]

 

i can understand your reasoning' date=' but if this was put to a vote there is no way it would have got passed by the people of edinburgh[/quote']

 

Doesn't mean it's right. Edinburgh people voted against congestion charging and that was a mistake, it's been a massive success in London.

 

I assure you that when this network is up and running public opinion will change sharply and the people will embrace it and want more routes. Remember i said this.

[Sparky]

Yes, but all the cities you mentioned in your post have huge systems in place covering THE ENTIRE CITY.

 

Edinburgh wont.

 

That's the nub of the matter for me. If they build the tram system as originally envisaged and incorporated it into a citywide integrated transport scheme then they could have been a success.

 

Instead they just build the section which already has great bus coverage and seem to be making no efforts to provide a quality public transport system for the whole city.

[BlackJAC?]

1. Rome wasn't built in a day. Building an entire network in one go is operational and finacially impossible. Other lines will follow in the future once the first one gets off the ground and people see the benefits (which they will) of this system.

 

2. Not really when the mode of travel is environmentally friendly and will reduce the impact of the motor car.

 

3. It will happen once private developers have reappraised the impact the current economic downturn is having.

 

4. I've answered this in a previous post.

 

5. The facts are only two shops in Leith Walk have closed. A gas fireplace appliance store and a tropical fish shop. I would suspect these have more to do with the escalation of world gas prices and the reluctance of people to spend money on tropical fish during times of recession than the tram project. Regardless of what kind of spin the Evening News puts on it.

 

Hahahaha. You sound like a politician, mate. In fact, i suspect you're in the vast minority here and rightly so.

[Optimus Prime]

That's the nub of the matter for me. If they build the tram system as originally envisaged and incorporated it into a citywide integrated transport scheme then they could have been a success.

 

Instead they just build the section which already has great bus coverage and seem to be making no efforts to provide a quality public transport system for the whole city.

 

Do you think the London underground network just appeared overnight? It's been built up over decades with lines and extensions being built and added through time. This would also happen in Edinburgh over time but you need to start somewhere and the busiest cross-section of the city is the place to start.

[Optimus Prime]

Hhahahaha. You sound like a politician, mate. In fact, i suspect you're in the vast minority here and rightly so.

 

As i've said already the majority can be wrong and IMO they are in this case.

[BlackJAC?]

As i've said already the majority can be wrong and IMO they are in this case.

 

 

And imo you're wrong. Why? It's simple really - we've all seen this happen before. It really is turning into the farce we witnessed with the parliament building and if you can’t see that, then why should anyone take you seriously? They have previous for arsing up major projects and I wouldn’t be surprised if this all went ahead, that we [the tax payers] will be footing a bill in the region of ?800m, not the ?500-odd million that was originally quoted.

 

Time to stop the careless spending and instead invest the money into areas where it’s really needed i.e. Education and Healthcare.

[Optimus Prime]

And imo you're wrong. Why? It's simple really - we've all seen this happen before. It really is turning into the farce we witnessed with the parliament building and if you can?t see that, then why should anyone take you seriously? They have previous for arsing up major projects and I wouldn?t be surprised if this all went ahead, that we [the tax payers] will be footing a bill in the region of ?800m, not the ?500-odd million that was originally quoted.

 

Time to stop the careless spending and instead invest the money into areas where it?s really needed i.e. Education and Healthcare.

 

We'll agree to differ then but the key difference from the parliament is that this will enhance the day to day lives of the citizens of Edinburgh once it's constructed and the people will embrace it over time.

[Ribble]

Sorry but I for one will not embrace the trams at any point, yes I will use them if my place of work doesn't change by 2011/12 however I will not forget the 4 years of having my daily commute extended by over an hour so the tram can drop me off 500 yards further away from my workplace! Also the trams will only be of benefit to the current users of the 22 bus and not all the citizens of edinburgh as suggested!

[Boris]

There would be much less congestion if the Council re-opened many of the roads they have blocked-off which has forced increased traffic onto already busy roads. Take Craiglockhart Avenue as an example. You can't cut through openings on the left (going up) to avoid the traffic lights at the top of the hill but you can cut through the roads on the right to do so! Now both sides of the road are residential so why does one part get no through traffic while the other does?

 

Mark my words many of the 'temporary' road restrictions will sneakily become permanent!

 

None of this will affect our Councillors, MSPs, MPs, Senior Council employees etc as they will just take cabs at the taxpayers expense to avoid the problems.

 

I travel up Craiglockhart Avenue every week day and today was a nightmare.

 

That said, for all the cars causing the tailbacks 99% of them only had one person in them i.e. the driver.

 

The whole point about the trams or any public transport network is to get people using it rather than taking their own vehicle.

 

(Quiet what the Trams have to do with Craiglockhart Avenue I don't know anyway...)

 

I'm with Optimus Prime on this one.

 

I think the trams will be good for Edinburgh.

[The Doctor]

I'm with Optimus.

 

I was in Dublin last year and the trams were brilliant, but I understand that whilst they were being put in public opinion was very negative. Dubliners minds were changed and so will the people of Edinburgh's be.

[N User]

Whether the trams are the right choice or not.

Was it worth putting in this ridiculous amount of money for one line that was already being excellently covered by the city's best bus (the 22)?

 

I don't think they fully thought it through. They thought it would look nice and so went for it.

[Jambo66]

Yeah because using public money for the benefit of the public is so wrong isn't it......

 

If this single tram line from the airport to Leith has anything to do with "public benefit", I will be astonished. The whole project from start to finish is politically motivated. The total cost for the tramline is likely to be in excess of ?600m. Imagine what that money could have done to improve still further Edinburgh's excellent bus services? Or to reopen the suburban railway lines to passengers? Spending the money on either of these would have no negative impact environmentally and in fact, would almost certainly have resulted in a positive impact. The tramline may have a positive impact, but only after the massive negative impact caused by the construction of it.

 

If only the politicians had the guts to admit that they got it wrong and scrapped the whole project ... but they can't do that, because they're politicians.

 

I am lucky because I am able to walk to work, so I don't have to use public transport often. When I do, I have no complaints. I cannot see any circumstances at all in which I will need or want to use the tramline when it is complete because the route is not one that I would ever use. I have never used the 22 bus. So here is one member of the public that will receive no benefit at all from this white elephant project.

 

Everyone who does live on the tramline seems to be entirely satisfied with the 22 bus, so where is the public benefit? It seems to me that the Council has decided to replace the 22 bus at a cost of ?600m. What a fabulous use of public funds.

[Stuart Lyon]

Boris the Trams are supposed to seduce people out of their cars which are caught up in traffic jams created to a great extent by the closing off of certain streets or 'rat runs' as you call them. Craiglockhart Avenue was used as an example of the chaos caused by such action. Nobody has yet said why it is OK to use the still available 'rat runs" on the west side of Craiglockhart Ave (going up the hill) but you can't do likewise on the east side.

 

As for the majority of cars having single passengers what do you expect? There are very few situation where car pooling is a practical solution.

[The Vulture]

To say it's more environmentally friendly it maybe that once it is up and running, but to build it requires the use of heavy machinery and resources that mean that nice gases like NOx and SOx, COx etc will be pumped into the atmosphere by the ton.

[The Mighty Thor]

The trams are a fairly emotive subject.

 

The issue with them for me is the 'suggested' benefits will never materialise.

 

The whole city (and it's surrounds) is served already by one of the best public bus services in Europe. The work already carried out in easing the buses routes into town has further enhanced the services provided.

 

The cost of providing a 'tram system' is not something Edinburgh can afford, nor will it ever be able to. The current price tag, for only one line, of ?512 million (not including the ?50 million extra already asked for) is fanciful. The whole project is on a knife edge of becoming another Scottish parliament. The conservative estimate is nearer ?800 million. For one line? There's little economy of scale either as other lines will utilise a minimal amount of the tracks already laid (assuming they ever get laid) therefore every additional route is pretty much a scratch project.

 

I know 2 people involved in the project, one on the council side and one on the contractor side. The council boys are busy 'managing' - filling in spreadsheets and having meetings about er filling in the spreadsheets. The contractor hasn't struck a blow since the start of Dec (on full whack salary incidentally) when work was suspended as they are waiting on the sub-contractor that did work at the bottom of Leith coming back to make good the shoddy work already done (which was approved as good by the council boys!!) This very small section is already nearly a year behind schedule!

 

Environmental benefits? Aye right you are then. Absolutely negligible. The carbon footprint of the construction phase alone will be equalised out by about the year 2525 (if man is still alive)

 

Transport policy - City of Edinburgh are pursuing a blinkered anti car transport policy. Evidence of this is the ring of park and rides springing up around the city. very noble idea but no use to anyone that doesn't work bang in the city centre. I made the point last friday about straiton which cost ?5.3 million and has no more than 150 cars per day out of a capacity of 600. The cost v return equation on these things doesn't stack up. It never will.

 

There's plenty of people on about other cities and their systems. Prague has a great system, a huge network of lines servicing a fairly large city. The first tram ran in 1891, the network was expanded in the early 1900's. Someone with foresight actually thought it through and the whole thing was done in an era of relatively cheap construction and labour and of course a fairly immobile population.

 

What we've got in Edinburgh is a self serving group of individuals saying we want that with little thought of the true cost or the implications in a densely populated small metropolis with a highly mobile population.

 

All in all this is another classic example of public spending policy being determined by people that have no foresight, no commercial experience and in the case of the city of Edinburgh councillors, limited intelligence.

[Jambo66]

1. Provides a modern and efficent light rapid transit system through the core of the city which are far more effective and efficent for circulating mass numbers of people than bus systems alone. (see London, Paris, Madrid, Melbourne, Sydney, New York, Hong Kong and many, many more.

 

2. Will provide a direct link between the Airport, the city centre and all major commercial and political centres within the city. This will only enhance economic opportunities within the city. This is something that given the current climate is more vital than ever.

 

3. It will provide a vital transport link to the new Leith developments which which have the potential of adding numbers equivilent to the population of Dundee to Edinburgh.

 

4. Edinburgh's bus service (as good as it is) is running at full capacity and the size of edinburgh means it cannot physical take the pressure of more buses on it's road network. (Just look at Princes St at rush hour) Given the population increase mentioned in point 3, other alternatives have to be introduced.

 

5. Congestion will be reduced through Edinburghs main transport corridors for example traffic to and from the airport will be greatly reduced as the tram will provide a direct link via an off road network which will have a huge impact on cutting congestion in the west of the city.

 

6. Considerable environmental benefits. Less congestion will lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions and the Tram vehicles themselves are also economically friendly using less energy and omitting far less CO2 emissions than cars and buses ever could. These changes will significantly reduce the cities Carbon Footprint.

 

1. We should be trying to stop the mass circulation of people. That is one of the reasons we continue to pump so many greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. We should be encouraging people to live closer to their place of work. That is what tends to happen in France - partly because most people like to go home for lunch.

 

2. We already have direct links. This will provide another direct link. all the evidence suggests that this will increase traffic flows, not decrease them.

 

3. That would be an unmitigated disaster. What exactly do we want to increase the size of our city for? Edinburgh is big enough as it is. Have you been paying attention to what has happened over the last 10 or 20 years? Politicians have been trying to convince us that year on year growth is a good thing and sustainable. No it's not. The resources of the earth are finite.

 

4. Bollocks. Virtually every bus service goes along or through Princes Street. They don't need to and this could be easily sorted with a little bit of planning. If you want to take a bus from Morningside to Trinity, you have to go through Princes Street, but only because that is the way the routes are set up.

 

5. Only if people use the tram. You seem to think that is a given. The vast majority of residents won't, because the tram doesn't take them home. A large proportion of tourists are met by tour guides and buses and this will continue because it's a cheaper, quicker and more reliable option than any other. Business travellers will still use taxis in large numbers, because that will remain more convenient.

 

6. Guesswork, pure and simple.

[Jambo66]

The trams are a fairly emotive subject.

 

The issue with them for me is the 'suggested' benefits will never materialise.

 

The whole city (and it's surrounds) is served already by one of the best public bus services in Europe. The work already carried out in easing the buses routes into town has further enhanced the services provided.

 

The cost of providing a 'tram system' is not something Edinburgh can afford, nor will it ever be able to. The current price tag, for only one line, of ?512 million (not including the ?50 million extra already asked for) is fanciful. The whole project is on a knife edge of becoming another Scottish parliament. The conservative estimate is nearer ?800 million. For one line? There's little economy of scale either as other lines will utilise a minimal amount of the tracks already laid (assuming they ever get laid) therefore every additional route is pretty much a scratch project.

 

I know 2 people involved in the project, one on the council side and one on the contractor side. The council boys are busy 'managing' - filling in spreadsheets and having meetings about er filling in the spreadsheets. The contractor hasn't struck a blow since the start of Dec (on full whack salary incidentally) when work was suspended as they are waiting on the sub-contractor that did work at the bottom of Leith coming back to make good the shoddy work already done (which was approved as good by the council boys!!) This very small section is already nearly a year behind schedule!

 

Environmental benefits? Aye right you are then. Absolutely negligible. The carbon footprint of the construction phase alone will be equalised out by about the year 2525 (if man is still alive)

 

Transport policy - City of Edinburgh are pursuing a blinkered anti car transport policy. Evidence of this is the ring of park and rides springing up around the city. very noble idea but no use to anyone that doesn't work bang in the city centre. I made the point last friday about straiton which cost ?5.3 million and has no more than 150 cars per day out of a capacity of 600. The cost v return equation on these things doesn't stack up. It never will.

 

There's plenty of people on about other cities and their systems. Prague has a great system, a huge network of lines servicing a fairly large city. The first tram ran in 1891, the network was expanded in the early 1900's. Someone with foresight actually thought it through and the whole thing was done in an era of relatively cheap construction and labour and of course a fairly immobile population.

 

What we've got in Edinburgh is a self serving group of individuals saying we want that with little thought of the true cost or the implications in a densely populated small metropolis with a highly mobile population.

 

All in all this is another classic example of public spending policy being determined by people that have no foresight, no commercial experience and in the case of the city of Edinburgh councillors, limited intelligence.

 

Absolutely spot on.

[Stuart Lyon]

I challenge the Council and/or wee smug Ecks minority Executive to give the people of Edinburgh a vote on whether they want the Tram project to continue. If we were considered responsible enough to vote on congestion charging then they should have a vote on the dam tram!

 

 

Could a petition to Downing Street be the way to express the opposition to the tram?

[davemclaren]

I challenge the Council and/or wee smug Ecks minority Executive to give the people of Edinburgh a vote on whether they want the Tram project to continue. If we were considered responsible enough to vote on congestion charging then they should have a vote on the dam tram!

 

 

Could a petition to Downing Street be the way to express the opposition to the tram?

 

Eck didn't want it but was forced to continue it by other parties.

 

Personally I'm rather looking forward to it.

[super_vlad]

I challenge the Council and/or wee smug Ecks minority Executive to give the people of Edinburgh a vote on whether they want the Tram project to continue. If we were considered responsible enough to vote on congestion charging then they should have a vote on the dam tram!

 

 

Could a petition to Downing Street be the way to express the opposition to the tram?

 

To be fair, they were voted in because one of there policies was to stop the trams, but they let the other parties deciede on the project and were really forced into it. The problem was and still is the masses of sunk costes that have already being paid.

 

When you are getting you council tax bill in for the next 4 years just remember where your money is going to !

[N User]

Whilst I'm not a fan of any of our political parties. One of the first things the SNP tried to do was stop the Tram works going ahead.

The other parties all banded together against them to show politically how much control the SNP had (or didn't have).

Come voting time, I reckon i'll remember that.

[felix]

I've never seen so many cyclists on Edinburgh's roads.

Congratulations to the Council for their ?500million tram development, encouraging people to get on their bikes.

[felix]

Whilst I'm not a fan of any of our political parties. One of the first things the SNP tried to do was stop the Tram works going ahead.

The other parties all banded together against them to show politically how much control the SNP had (or didn't have).

Come voting time, I reckon i'll remember that.

 

But according to Nigel Griffiths ,it was the SNP who signed up to the trams.

He's always been a snake.

[bighusref]

Just to remind people, one tram line = ?500 Million. I wonder how much a new set of buses would cost to run the same route?

[Louise]

I am 100% against the trams, for all the reasons previously stated by other posters.

 

My question is this: if the people of Edinburgh were allowed to vote on the congestion charge, why were they not allowed to vote on the trams?

 

Answer: because they knew what the result would be!