Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Princes Street traffic-free from January



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 24 April 2008
Seven months to lay tram tracks on busiest shopping street as cost of route jumps £10m.
PRINCES Street is to close to all traffic for seven months next year during work on the city's tram line.

The Evening News can reveal the city's busiest shopping street will be closed from January until the start of the festivals in August for t
he laying of tram tracks.

Click here to see when where and when the trams work will start

Pedestrian access will be unaffected, but buses, bikes and taxis will be diverted on to George Street for the duration of the work.

It is understood that statues of George IV and William Pitt, which stand in the middle of roundabouts in George Street, will be moved along with other measures to allow the extra flow of buses.

The public opening of the tram line – previously stated as February 25, 2011 – is also likely to slip by up to two months as a result of protracted contract negotiations. And the overall cost of building the airport to Newhaven route has jumped from £498 million to £508m.

It is understood this is down to higher-specification trams being chosen for the scheme, as well as exposure to euro currency fluctuations.

Tram firm TIE today refused to be drawn on a future schedule of works, but next year looks set to be the most problematic for city residents with major works scheduled for every section of the line.

Documents obtained by the Evening News show continuous works on the different sections of Leith Walk are expected to last until the summer of 2010.

Construction on Princes Street will also coincide with work at the junction of Lothian Road at the West End. Shandwick Place is set to re-open to traffic by the end of this year, but will close again to allow tram workers to lay tracks in the autumn of 2009.

The last completed section of the tram line is expected to be at Picardy Place, where a tram and bus interchange will be built.

However, it is expected that the first trams won't be on the city's streets until August, 2010, when engineers begin to test the 27-strong Spanish-built fleet.

Driver and bus groups today warned motorists and passengers that disruption will be inevitable but business leaders said the closures could work in the city's favour.

Graham Bell, spokesman for Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce, said: "If we accept the principle that the tram is a good thing for the city then we do have to accept there will be the consequent disruption while they build it.

"The good thing about a sustained closure like this is that TIE can get in and complete the work faster and the city can return to normal quicker.

"It is inevitable that there will be some increase in costs. I think TIE are doing their best to limit these and the contingency funding was built into this project for the unforeseen events like currency fluctuations."

The Evening News revealed last year that tram chiefs were considering closing Princes Street and diverting traffic on to neighbouring George Street. However, it was thought then that works would only be for two months.

TIE had previously stated that tram works would be carried out in stages, with a maximum of seven roadworks taking place at any one time, with each one no more than 200 metres long.

But it is thought a different strategy, which would see the firm close sections of streets to get quicker results, is now the preferred option.

Bill Campbell, Lothian Buses operations director, said: "With the majority of our bus services using Princes Street a total closure is bound to cause some disruption. We are, however, confident that with careful diversion planning we can minimise these delays and keep buses moving."

The entire programme of trams roadworks will take more than three years to complete and involve digging up the streets twice – to move water mains and gas pipes then build the tram lines, stops and overhead wires.

Bruce Young, Lothian and Borders co-ordinator of the Association of British Drivers, said: "There is no doubt that all this work is going to be very painful for motorists and I think we are now beginning to feel the full effects of this tram scheme.

"I don't know how they are going to justify the costs and the disruption against what we will be left with in the end."

A TIE spokesman said: "TIE cannot comment on speculation. We will be announcing the full construction programme for the remainder of the tram project on Friday."


Shortfall caused by exchange rates limited to £6m

TRAM bosses have limited the project's exposure to euro currency fluctuations to between £5 million and £6m, it emerged today.

The News revealed on Tuesday that plans to extend the city's tram line towards Granton were facing a shortfall of up to £30m.

Record low exchange rates between the Euro and pound in recent months have hampered TIE's attempts to complete deals with the German and Spanish firms it wants to supply the trams, tracks and other infrastructure needed for the project.

This has forced transport chiefs to dip into the scheme's £96m "contingency" reserves.

However, tram officials today said they've managed to keep their exposure to the currency fluctuations, which have hit most firms operating in the eurozone, down.

The currency changes, combined with tram chiefs plumping for higher specification trams, has seen the price of line 1A increase by £10m to £508m.

And it is thought at least another £20m will be needed to meet the shortfall for the 1B spur, which is relying on the contingency funds being left over.

TIE's executive chairman Willie Gallagher said: "We moved to start hedging the exposure to the euro as soon as we had the specification sorted out, but we were unable to do this until the specification was sorted out."

Both tram and council chiefs are currently investigating ways of paying for line 1B, which was always expected to have some shortfall in funding.

Among the options being considered are selling off council assets, pressing for more developer contributions and borrowing from either public or private sources.

The 1B link was originally put on hold when the tram scheme was scaled back in 2006. However, TIE has secured a fixed price of £87m to build the line – if it can commit to the project before next spring.

www.tramsforedinburgh.com





The full article contains 1090 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Randan,

24/04/2008 12:10:12
Doomed, we're aw doomed!
2

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:17:17
Another £10m ! Is this on top of the £30m due to Euro fluctuations ? So much for the robust financial case and start date.
3

Pond Hall,

24/04/2008 12:18:56
Shandwick Place is set to re-open to traffic by the end of this year....noticed how they slipped this one in.
4

Hmm ...,

24/04/2008 12:18:57
... how is it that NOT ONE PERSON that I have spoken to actually thinks that these trams are a good thing, rather than a vanity project of the late Labour administration. Truly a telling epitaph!
5

20something,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:21:36
#4, these trams are a good thing. A very good thing in fact. I look forward to them they will make transport around edinburgh much easier and you will change your mind when they're finished just like everyone else.
6

Mikey,

24/04/2008 12:26:38
Can't we flog off the statues? There's bound to be some sycophant somewhere who'd like them and the money gained could be set off against the trams?
7

Pond Hall,

24/04/2008 12:27:58
the old push bike is looking a better bet eveyday.

but don't worry the works will stop for the festival so that they don't upset the Tourists

does anyone remember that TIE told us that only 200m of TRAMworks would be on the go at a time, now it's nearly a mile.

even the price of the Tramline, TIE keep giving us different prices for each part of the line.

£500m was the promise for line 1a and £93m for 1b if I remember rightly.

This has forced transport chiefs to dip into the scheme's £96m "contingency" reserves.

How can you have reserves of £96m when was a shorfall of £43 odd million.

TIE seem to be using a bit of spin and being creative with there financial figures.

if they've got reserves of £96m, whats happening to the interest on this sitting in the Bank, or is it going towards the bonus the chair will get if the line is completed on time.
But they are now talking about a 2 month delay already, before the first tracks are even laid.

The whole thing is a farce, like the Scottish Parliment building, We will probably never know the true cost

8

Hmm ...,

24/04/2008 12:28:23
20something (5) said "they will make transport around edinburgh much easier". How can they possibly make travel around Edinburgh much easier when they go only between Newhaven and the airport?

Tie seems to be responsible for a myth that they will revolutionise "travel around Edinburgh" despite the limited number of destinations that they will cover.

Even if you can hop from bus to tram to bus, how is that an improvement on a bus which is more likely to go to where you want to be?

Sure you don't work for CEC or tie?
9

20something,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:32:50
#8 isn't that going from one end of edinburgh to the other right through the city centre? "Revolutionise" is your way of putting it. I said they would make travelling easier. Which they will.

And if the bus goes where you want it to - don't get off in the first place.

You will change your mind when the trams are finished, just like the rest of the moaners. Everyone with common sense knows it.
10

Liz,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:36:16
#5
Yes they will be fantastic for anyone who wants to go from Ocean Terminal to the Gyle.

What about the hundreds of thousands of us who will not need use this route/tram but who will find their usual buses are curtailed/removed as part of their route is being duplicated by the tram? The majority of the people who will use it will already be regular bus users. What about the rest of the City and the areas of REAL congestion like the Bypass or the routes into Edinburgh from Midlothian? For this amount of money we could have had 'proper' European style buses across the whole City and its surrounds (Edinburgh's buses are slow, and the stupid system we have of passengers queuing up whilst the bus empties then all filing one by one past the driver to get on is a farce and results in the queues of busses we see around the City).

Trams are very nice and shiny but I do not belive they are truely the answer to Edinburgh's transport problems.
11

Some guy,

24/04/2008 12:37:59
Read the articles people before posting comments about the funding. The £96m was a contingency for 1a on top of the £498m cost in case of any errors. If there was money left over they were going to use it to pay for 1b. The £10m overspend on 1a is what the £96m was originally there for, in other words THEY DID PLAN FOR IT. They are now saying there is still £20m worth of funds left to find for 1b which they have been saying all along they would have to do which of course leads to the £30m extra, well within the £96m cotingency.
As far as closing princes street goes it's about time. Finally stopping catering to all those lazy folks that dont want to walk down from George Street. Its the way it is in all successful city centre shopping streets these days and in my view it sould be made permanent with only the trams on princes street hence therefore further encouraging their use.
12

Liz,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:38:05
9#
But the point is that some of the routes that are going to be partially duplicated in the tram route are going to be removed/curtailed and therefore will not longer be going to their original destinations.
13

My opinions count for more than yours,

24/04/2008 12:38:08
If I put certain words in UPPER CASE will you believe that I am TELLING THE TRUTH, as opposed to using lower case and lying?

PEOPLE WILL DIE AS A RESULT OF THE TRAMS.
14

Tam Weea,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:39:35
Graham Bell, spokesman for Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce, said: "If we accept the principle that the tram is a good thing for the city then we do have to accept there will be the consequent disruption while they build it.

That's the problem though, no-one asked us if it's a good thing and not many do.

Ignoring the tramworks for a nano-second, would anyone like to estimate how many holes and road cones there are in Edinburgh today?

No wonder the city is nearly bankrupt - they've blown all the cooncil tax on cones!

While I'm at it, have a look at Princes St. these days. What should be one of Europe's premier streets, full of designer shops is a sea of tat, tourist shops and to-let signs.

Did any of these cooncillor's study town planning?
15

20something,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:41:11
10. Edinburgh's buses are very good already but progression is always beneficial. This one tram line is hopefully going to be the beginning of a network of lines across the city that will benefit everyone. But you can't have change without some disruption.

This is positive change and people should be happy about it.
16

thehitmaster,

Penicuik 24/04/2008 12:42:34
Why don't the planners just work aim to work through the festival period as well and let the visitors see what Edinburgh is really like ?
17

Dragonlord,

24/04/2008 12:42:35
9# how will travelling around Edinburgh be easier when the tram stops are so far apart?They were crowing in this paper, that it will come in on TIME and on BUDGET. Neither now looks likley and we have been LIED to again.
18

Linmal,

Livingston 24/04/2008 12:46:02
Well I don't live in Edinburgh (although I still work and was brought up there). I have not spoken to one person yet who thinks that trams are a good thing or wanted. The disruption to our beautiful capital city is dreadful and Shandwick Place is like a ghost town. I haven't ventured along Princes Street for months as it, too, is a nightmare. Edinburgh already has a good bus service. If you don't think so, try using First Bus from Livingston. You will soon see who has the best bus service! What a waste of money! Doesn't it make you think - it was a Labour administration who botched up Holyrood too and sent the cost spiralling by more than ten times the original estimates - now there's a surprise! To the SNP - you should have cancelled this stupid debaucle of the trams. NEXT!!
19

eric,

Lothian 24/04/2008 12:47:07
They will reach 8% population,Awful and the cost is hilarious.Edinburgh is a joke.
20

Some guy,

24/04/2008 12:48:40
#19

If a tram breaks down, the next one behind it pushes it back to the depot, they're designed to do that.

The services are being moved to a location where the builders can get to them safely without disrupting the trams. This is a major project which is taking time now to prevent disruption in the future.

Where do you propose we'd put a light rail system in edinburgh city centre following the route the trams are going on?
21

scotsol,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:50:36
People who say that trams are not the answer are avoiding the issue. Fossil fuel is running out, and governments are rightly turning against biofuels. So what happens to a Fuelhead (High Octane or otherwise) when there isn't any fuel? Answer - he grinds to a spluttering halt, unless he renames himself Electrichead and hops on a tram. Trams are the transport of the future, and there'll be more and more of them. It's buses that are doomed.
22

20something,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:51:11
#19 Don't get too upset. Do you think noone has thought of this?

And we'll just build a tram line up the pavement, that'll solve it all.

Yes it's a big change but try not to overwork the narrow minds by moaning non-stop about it.
23

foz,

24/04/2008 12:54:25
I'm leaving Edinburgh next year after 12years so I'm not really bothered about the trams....but they have ruined what was once a pleasent, beautiful different place to live in the UK. Edinburghs not changing for the better.
24

Some guy,

24/04/2008 12:55:29
#22
There is a huge development going on in Leith and Granton just now with something like 50,000 extra homes being built in the two areas. considering a large amount are more than 1 bed and will have 2 or more people in them must be approaching an extra 100,000 people added to the population already in these areas. Now do you see the huge amount of people this will benefit. If there is better links to the city from these areas it will encourage more people to move into them and therefore getting all the shop owners moaning just a much larger customer base in the future.
25

20something,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 12:55:58
#26, if(when) this tramline is a success, funds will become available to expand it, magically or otherwise. That's the way things work. And YOU know it.
26

Rosie,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:00:15
hurray..... and don't let the traffic back again
27

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:00:22
Drip - Drip - Drip - This and the other wee releases TIE have been slipping to Mr Picken over the last week are straws in the wind for this shambolic project starting to slip. Slippage in timetables, 'extra' costs, 'different strategy - now the preferred option'; aka 'making it up as we go along' and
'protracted contract negotiations' (hard-headed business professionals V municipal amateurs - go figure!). And as for 'TIE today refused to be drawn on a future schedule of works' - who the hell do TIE think they are - and what the hell have our Idiot Councillors voted for? Not a Penny More!
28

Boy Wonder,

24/04/2008 13:00:40
Hands up who DIDNAE see this coming!!!
29

JT,

24/04/2008 13:02:41
Just when I thought it couldnt get any worse? Why arent the council hearing us we dont want the bloody things!!!
Why arent the tourists putting up with the delays that us residents and workers are putting up with??
30

Some guy,

24/04/2008 13:03:02
Ok fresian, im a defender of the trams but i have to agree about the south sub. Also yeah Trolley buses might have been an idea in that regard i think they went the grander idea for the sake of the future tourist image of the city, i only picked up on the light rail because i thought you were advocating that after the Dubai comment, sorry.

At the end of the day the trams are getting built now. With better links for the hugely expanding north city population and what should be less vehicular traffic on princes street they will benefit the city even the cost is hugely daft.
31

Some guy,

24/04/2008 13:03:05
Ok fresian, im a defender of the trams but i have to agree about the south sub. Also yeah Trolley buses might have been an idea in that regard i think they went the grander idea for the sake of the future tourist image of the city, i only picked up on the light rail because i thought you were advocating that after the Dubai comment, sorry.

At the end of the day the trams are getting built now. With better links for the hugely expanding north city population and what should be less vehicular traffic on princes street they will benefit the city even if the cost is hugely daft.
32

PaulB,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:06:11
#16 - yes I think the concillors have studied town planning. It is otherwise known as social egineering and is mainly respionsible for the mess Princes Street is in retail wise. Just as well all the good shops and bars etc are on George Street now - the only good thing about Princes Street these days is the view of the castle and gardens. Can't wait for the trams and I am positive the disruption will be worth it in the long term. Agree with the comments about the ridiculous queuing system for the buses through - everyone should have to pay in advance and they should introduce the London Oyster card scheme - it is much quicker then Ridacard. And bring back buses with front and back doors! Right. I am finished!
33

Tam Weea,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:07:53
25# - The tram system will reach 8% of the population and replace 20 of the 650 buses in operation at any one time.

It's all very well having shiny trams but I am struggling to see the benefit here.

Airlink to the airport and re-opening at least some of the suburban lines would serve the public better in my opinion.

The problem with central Edinburgh is private cars and despite a great bus service and park and rides people will not leave their cars at home, trams are not going to change that - even if the system was substantially extended.

An ego trip for the incumbent cooncillors I think.
34

Some guy,

24/04/2008 13:10:56
Fresian, do you live in those flats?? I can tell you there is a lot of families there, the back courtyards can get busy with kids playing. There are quite a few people get the bus from my building to the city centre. This would be a higher percentage with better links.
35

Dragonlord,

24/04/2008 13:15:00
23# You really don't know anything. The tram displayed in town did not have the ability to shove another tram. Do you honestly think that health and safety, would allow a five carrage tram to shove another five carrage tram, from one end to the line to the other? The stupidity of some tram supporters is so obvious, it's no wonder the council got this passed.
36

Some guy,

24/04/2008 13:15:05
#40

If you look at the planned expansion for the north of the city you could end up looking at 20% being served by the trams. Dont know about you but i think 1/5 is a pretty big amount, although i have to agree i think 200-300 million might have been a more reasonable figure.
37

Pond Hall,

24/04/2008 13:15:19
No11 if you have followed previous articles and there have been a few with various figures, £593m was the budget for 1a+1b,

The council planned to raise £40m+ from developers and find the other £40m+.

£500m came from the Taxpayer via the Scottish Government.

The spin doctors at TIE must be making a good project.

Edinburgh already has an integrated Public transport network, in fact it award winning, and offer one of the cheapest fares in the country.

But with plans to remove bus services, the travelling public on some routes will no longer have a through journey and will be expected to get
on a bus
off the bus
on a tram
off a tram
on a bus
off a bus
to make a single journey.

We will have to wait and see what effect the Trams have on public transport in Edinburgh, They’ll be great if you want to Travel from Ocean Terminal to The Gyle, but for the rest the Jury is out.
38

Some guy,

24/04/2008 13:21:18
#43

"Edinburgh trams in the past were prone to breaking down, which caused huge delays for passengers.

However, the modern trams will have shunt equipment so that if a tram in front breaks down, the rear tram can push it easily to the depot for repair."

Please take 2 secs to some research a quick google search got that one.
39

Liz,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:22:55
#24
Why do think that anyone who is against the trams is somehow pro-car and anti-public transport.

I own a car yet regulary take the bus (and cycle) around town, only a complete wally refuses to see the very obvious problems with this tram idea (the fact that it serves a small portion of the city, its vast expense, its lack of flexibility, the fact that it is almost a duplication of a prexisting route, among others). For a fraction of the cost we could have upgraded to electric/trolley buses - this could have benefited the entire City and into Midlothian.

40

Louis Catorze,

24/04/2008 13:23:58
Edinburh's getting trams?

That's fantastic news.
41

Some guy,

24/04/2008 13:24:35
cool to know fresian, maybe it has changed or might just be the development i'm in that has appealed more to the families.
42

Goat Boy,

24/04/2008 13:28:50
I suspect that the tram has been sponsored by a conglomeration of Glasgow businesses and the Almond Vale/Mcarther Glenn retail groups to get folk to stop shopping in Edinburgh.
43

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:29:48
Scallywag (14) - thanks for coming back.

There is very little that I disagree with in what you say but I suspect that many people believed the tram scheme would never happen and could not, therefore, be bothered tackling the mountains of paperwork and information which they would need to do to understand the implications. I also think that many people still believe that that is what public servants are there to do on their behalf and that they would have been informed of any negative impacts before decisions were made. However, the implications were not made clear and, you are right, there is a big lesson here for us all - that we should not simply accept what we are being told but examine the evidence ourselves to form a view.

Having said that, because people were not told the impacts before, it is basic human nature that they are going to react to them as they emerge so as lesson is there for politicians and promoters of schemes to be more honest at the outset.

Where I disagree with you slightly is that I can understand why some posters'information is inaccurate when the newspaper articles seem so confusing. Take the one on Monday (£30m shortfall for Phase 1B) and today's (£10m extra for Phase 1A).

The business case put the cost of Phase 1A at £498m (including contingency) and Phase 1B at £87m. Total funding available of £545m, left a shortfall (as stated in the business case) of £40m for Phase 1B.

However, today's story suggests that Phase 1A is now priced at £510m (so it has used up its contingency and now needs £10m more) and Phase 1B still £87m. That gives a total of £597m and, with total funding available of £545m, that leaves a shortfall of £52m.

I am also confused about the repeated reference to £96m of contingency reserves. This implies that, of the £545m funding available, anticipated costs were £447m. We know that Phase 1B is supposed to be fixed at £87m, giving a total of £534m of predicted costs. So I don't understand how t
44

Dragonlord,

24/04/2008 13:31:15
49# You may well have googled but supply a link. You still don't see, that they would not permit such an action. Tram lines are very shallow and derailment a distinct possablity. THEN where would we be? The breakdown is only a minor point ( not one I raised) and there are may, much more important problems, too many to mention ( they have already been cover before). This tram LINE is a carrot to developers on the waterfront and is not wanted or required, by the MAJORITY of Edinburgh residents.
45

Disgruntled Black cab customer,

24/04/2008 13:31:18
Tie knew Princes street was going to be completely closed for this long, I spoke to 2 Planners in January who had requested the complete closure of Princes.

2 Foreign planners may I add as we do not have competent british planners.

As usual local government bull.
46

Sarah B,

24/04/2008 13:31:28
... there ever was a contingency of £96m.

I am not at all surprised when people get exasperated as stories emerge when the information does not seem to tie up and the journalists seem unable to be accurate as well.
47

The Judge,

24/04/2008 13:31:28
Why don't we all agree that the tramLINE is going to be built and get on with it, 24/7, 52 weeks of the year until its finished. Why must everything stop for the tourists who visit the city for a few days/weeks?

Lets push for further tramLINEs that can cover the whole city and beyond, for the reopening of the South Sub and introduce a congestion charge for single occupancy cars to pay for it.

If we are going to build a tramLINE lets do it right and stop all the messing about with the odd 200mtrs, why don't we think big for once. Lets build the biggest and best tram system in Europe, hang the costs.

48

Hashimoto,

edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:36:33
When the first fatal accident occurs (and it will), it won't matter if the trams are 'designed' to shunt each other about. The police investigating the accident will not allow it, as all evidence will need to be gathered at the time.
A fatal road accident can involve initial enquiries lasting up to - and sometimes exceeding - several hours.
At present, diversions can be put on to reroute vehicular traffic. Dunno how the police will be able to reroute the trams.....
49

Tam Weea,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:37:17
#48 - Scallywag:

I did not say 3% would be affected perambulation wise - I said buses on the road would reduce from 650 to 630, but then you knew that you Scallywag!
50

Dragonlord,

24/04/2008 13:37:19
58# Put your money wher your mouth is and help pay for the trams, as I don't want or need them, and don't see why ,when money runs out ,I should pay. Too many on here mouth off but when it comes to puting money on the line they chicken out. It's so easy to spend other people's money just ask the council.
51

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:42:36
#5, > #4, these trams are a good thing. A very good thing in fact. I look forward to them they will make transport around edinburgh much easier <

No, they won't. They don't go "round Edinburgh". They go from Leith to Gogar, which is easily done by public transport now!

52

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:44:13
Some guy (20) - there was an article in the Observer on Sunday re the Waterfront (sorry, I can't provide a link but if you go onto their website and google "Waterfront", you will find it).

It suggests that the Waterfront developers are struggling to find buyers already and the concern is that the tram scheme is predicated almost entirely upon that development. This is where the importance of choosing a route where the patronage is already well established at the outset becomes apparent and, as things stand, I can see very little justification for Phase 1B at all. Pity they didn't go for Tram Line 3 first.
53

The Judge,

24/04/2008 13:45:06
#61 I am paying some of the highest taxes in Europe, the highest council tax in Scotland & more stealth taxes than ever before, so I think I'm already "putting my money where my mouth is".

It is obvious that a single line is no good, a system would be a fantastic asset for the city, if car drivers won't give up their cars then a bit of stick along with a carrot might make the difference.

Unfortunately that's not what we're getting, instead the single line will end up costing more than its worth to keep it going and in a couple of decades(if that)it'll be dismantled and we'll be back to square one.

54

Ron D,

Enybru 24/04/2008 13:46:59
Excellent news. They should ban cars permanently from the entire city centre.
55

Some guy,

24/04/2008 13:48:43
Sarah is Line 3 the proposed link to the RIE? If so i'd agree with you 100% on that one. Just have to hope i do end up with a lot more neighbours and the tram line gets the usage to encourage them to expand as far as that in the future now.
56

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 13:50:06
#65, do you work for the Glasgow Chamber of Commerce? Or for Fort Kinnaird or the Gyle?
57

,

24/04/2008 13:52:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
58

R_K_C,

24/04/2008 14:00:00
#19 Fresian, as it happens I am also in Dubai, looking out my office window at the light rail construction below. In order to build adjacent to the road, they have had to install the railway on a concrete track on pillars 10 metres above the ground, so what works here isn't really viable in Edinburgh. Having said that, I agree with your comment that reusing the old suburban rail lines would have been far preferable.
59

,

24/04/2008 14:03:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
60

Dragonlord,

24/04/2008 14:04:13
64# Paying taxes is not what I meant, as I am also paying taxes. I mean will you subsidise the trams with high fares and still use it( will you use it at all )Will you buy shares to help pay for it? This is where most pro trammies get it wrong, spend anyones money but their own.
61

,

24/04/2008 14:07:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
62

Dragonlord,

24/04/2008 14:07:27
70# Who is the chimp. A report was made BECAUSE a tram derailed Proving my point that it can happen)and I was reffering to the possiblity of derailment, due to one five carrage tram shoving another of the same length.Perhaps if you read all the posts you would be able to follow what is being said. Now go back to the start and try again.
63

Dan.D.Nong,

24/04/2008 14:16:04
I wonder how embro will look with poles (not people poles) and electric tram wires hanging all over the place are set up. Naffing awful no doubt.
64

Dragonlord,

24/04/2008 14:19:58
75# This is another contentious point. Nowhere in the artists impressions do you see streets festooned with wires.
65

,

24/04/2008 14:24:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
66

,

24/04/2008 14:29:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
67

Some guy,

24/04/2008 14:31:07
Good point Dragonlord, i didnt pick up on the derailment issue, just the break down which i thought had been acounted for. It will be interesting to see how they've planned if a derailment happens here. Losing the trams for 2 whole days would be a major thing considering how much the council plans for them to be used.
68

,

24/04/2008 14:32:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
69

R_K_C,

24/04/2008 14:32:22
LOL @ 78!
70

,

24/04/2008 14:33:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
71

Some guy,

24/04/2008 14:36:53
#80, those links have f all to do with derailment. As the report into the nottingham incident show mistakes are made and can result in problems. The big test will be how well these problems are dealt with *when* they occur.

On a side note, it's extreme biased opinions like that, that get folk worked up. I'm pro-tram but i like to think i argue reasonably and listen to both sides of the argument. I can see the points of the anti-tram folks in regards to cost, current population coverage and cheaper alternatives. It's just that in my opinion they're a good thing and will benefit Edinburgh in the long run. Whether im right or not will be shown in the years to come.
72

R Corbett,

edinburgh 24/04/2008 14:36:56
Anyone remember the EEN headline form last year: "FORGET YOUR TRAMS", as if anyone had wanted them in the first place. Ha. No chance.


I've been on trams in other european cities, and what i'd say is this

1. they don't make a profit, they are over priced, and they aren't used by the majority. All that 'people more likely to leave car at home' - dubious in the extreme. £1.30 a ticket - I'll believe that when I see it. Which I won't..

2. Trams aren't as environmentally friendly as other types of transport e.g.trolley bus.

3. Trams cause poverty and rickets, this link haqs been proven by the statistic that last time edinburgh had trams, it also had poverty and rickets.

4. Do yourselfs a favour people get organised AND DEMONSTRATE.

73

,

24/04/2008 14:37:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
74

Dragonlord,

24/04/2008 14:39:53
82# You really are thick. You post links that prove your earlier statements a crap. Quote:a person may be hit by a tram, a tram can collide with another vehicle, or drive over a person. See post 73. LOL
75

R Corbett,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 14:40:31
#85

that's where you're wrong, matey - they aren't particularly reliable.

As for "scotch faced" - you bleedin wot, guvnah?

76

,

24/04/2008 14:41:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
77

Some guy,

24/04/2008 14:42:25
yeah and khant, if you'd read my posts in full i say i support the trams. I'm not moaning. I'm trying to defend the things. I'm just saying this de-railment thing is one thing i haven't seen accounted for and im just hoping they have good contingency plans in place for it.
78

R Corbett,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 14:43:38

Samither - it's Robert Corbett, so just give your keyboard a break now, eh
79

,

24/04/2008 14:44:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
80

R Corbett,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 14:45:55
-
Samither - I hope a laRGe eared mammal with a long memory and a trunk falls your way soon, you ill informed hopeless tram monger
81

R Corbett,

Embra 24/04/2008 14:49:47
-

Saminther Khant is an anagram of Tram Simpathiser
82

Jamie Regan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 14:49:47
Am I the only person that's excited about the trams? I can't wait for them to get here, I think they're going to be brilliant. It doesn't really matter what they cost, really. Council money will only be spent on something else anyway.

Trams in other cities have worked and the ones in Nottingham (my home town)have been an absolute revelation. They're brilliant!
83

,

24/04/2008 14:51:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
84

R Corbett,

Embra 24/04/2008 14:52:29
-
#94 - this thread is not an appropriate outlet for such wholesome cheeriness. If you want to support the trams, please do so in the comfort of your own mental ward
85

Scotish Exile,

24/04/2008 15:12:47
7 months to stick a couple of bits of metal in the ground, you are having a laugh, the gyppo's would do it in 7 weeks, and take cash in hand too, so nice of them
86

Jamie Regan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 15:14:48
there was a little resistance in Nottingham, but only from, literally, a handful of folk.

I'm amazed at the negativity of people in Edinburgh. Everytime someone tries to improve something or come up with a new idea - the trams, the hovercraft crossing, sea-plane flights to the Hebrides etc, the doom and gloom merchants just come out and latch on to the slightest bit of a potential problem.

Of course this is going to cost money. Of course it's not perfect to start with, but it's going to be brilliant, it's a guaranteed winner. i don't see how anyone can honestly think any different.
87

Jamie Regan,

24/04/2008 15:16:36
#98. Of course I know it could have been spent on other stuff. I'm not being flipant with that comment. But, I can't think of anything better than improving the transport links in this great city.

The buses are good, but there are too many of them. There are also too many cars.

The trams will improve everything about the city, and that can only bring more money in and therefore be money well spent.
88

Andrew,

24/04/2008 15:47:01
With Lothian Buses and just about everyone else running out of fuel, Princes Street may well be be "traffic free" a lot sooner than January!!!!
89

Niadh,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 16:19:05
#30 And if you believe that I have a plot on the moon you should really be as it'll be worth something one day.

As for your other comments a tram which goes down one line from the Gyle to the Shore (airport link is apparently canned due to costs, no-ones covered that yet have they) covering 8% of the population DOES NOT CONSTITUTE as going around the city.

I can only assume from your naive and blinkered comments that you have either been brainwashed or 20something is actually an indication of your I.Q.

Additionally the SNP did try to kybosh this whole pile of s**t but got overruled by the Lib-dems, tories and labour ganging up on them.

Anyone want to guess how many die/how much damage is done by people(kids) daring each other to touch something off the power lines.
90

Jamie Regan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 16:25:01
#105 Niadh. I think it's you that is, perhaps, blinkered.

Where do you get 8% of the population from? The Edinburgh Evening News, I assume.

I suspect that the percentage of population that live in any area is not representative of the percentage that actually go there. For example, there are not many people that live on the Gyle Industrial Estate, but I know how chocked the bypass is every day trying to get there.

No tram route or bus route will go round any city completely. It's absurd to expect it to. And by definition it can only travel on specific paths.

The trams in Nottingham travel in one direction, from the south of the city into the middle, and they pretty much follow an existing rail route into the city - sharing stations at some points. They are well used by sections of the whole population and people find it easier to drive from their home to catch a tram, then they ever would getting a bus or driving into the city.

Take your blinkers off and enjoy life, trams are great!
91

Goat Boy,

24/04/2008 16:46:18
Jamie Regan: The tram was originally proposed as part of a package that included congestion charging. This would have helped to fund the tram and quite a few other actions that would have improved the transport situation in the city. But it didn’t happen and instead of the commuter having to pay to come into the city, the residents have to pay to keep them out of their streets. Ironic isn’t it. But we now have a tram has been built to enable developers to over develop the north side of the city, where the infrastructure simply doesn’t exist to support such a massive increase in population. It has been claimed that it will improve the air quality – that is rubbish, it will make it worse in some areas. It will hardly touch the commuter problem and ignores the majority of the traffic entering the city. Only a small % of the population (8% is probably right) will benefit when it is up and running and even then it doesn’t go anywhere – unlike the bus network. It’s not replacing any of the bus routes. There is NO quick fix solution. Our modern car dependent way of life has evolved over years and there is no sign of a reversal. We are seeing more out of town retail parks, more supermarkets, more luxury developments in the neighbouring areas and there is even a proposal for a nice new bridge to get even more folk up and moving.
92

DT is a JT,

24/04/2008 16:48:59
I hope you are all watching this as it seems to be another Parliament in the making, how can anyone give a quote for a job and that quote is false should not be allowed to happen remember its our money and we will have to bare the brunt of it when they ask you to pay a fare on this white elephant, smell the coffee. Sack the bloody lot of them along with these SMP's as they are just as big a waste of our money
93

,

24/04/2008 16:51:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
94

NoGuns,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 16:58:26
It's so depressing to read so many negative comments.

The tram line is an investment in the future.

Edinburgh has to move with the times. Trams are quicker, cleaner (environmentally), and have a greater capacity, to name just a few benefits. We're experiencing a couple of years of roadworks and disruptions so that 10, 20, 30 years from now Edinburgh's public transport system is up-to-date and can cope with the demands placed on it.

Short term pain for long term gain.
95

Gorgie_Tony,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 17:13:25
While the buses are forced onto George Street, I take it cars will be banned from George Street, so bus passengers will suffer less inconvenience?
96

Charles MN,

24/04/2008 17:17:26
#113
Given the chaos buses cause on Princes St I think car drivers will be avoiding George St for the duration of these works.
97

BusOff,

West Linton 24/04/2008 17:41:49
Re#112.

Correct!

If(if) the trams had connected with the Hospitals of Edinburgh and ran through residential areas then yes they would have been a success.

Re #45.

Correct you will be on/off/on/off for any journey to these hospitals.

Nil Desperandum
98

Goat Boy,

24/04/2008 17:44:06
Noguns: "Trams are quicker, cleaner environmentally.."

Yes and no. "Yes" in that have no emissions at source (this is how it was sold to the politicians), but "no" the traffic they will displace along narrow residential streets will simply shift the problem of noise and air pollution from one place to another. Then add the 35,000 homes in the north and 30,000 more cars - instant nightmare. 112 sums it up nicely.
99

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 24/04/2008 18:08:43
A little known fact is that house prices along tram lines go up by between 10 and 20%. All these greetin face anti-tram folks will soon change their tune when the tram system is up and running.
Its only some doom and gloom type Edinburgh residents who can claim that the trams are a failure before they have even laid a bit of track.
Can't wait for the first tram to run !
100

Euan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 18:15:13
I am quite frankly sickened by the ENORMOUS sums of valuable taxpayers money that is being squandered on this ridiculous project before our very eyes on a daily basis.

Now we are being told that Princes Street is going to be closed for 7 MONTHS.

Couple this to the huge cost to the local economy due to unprecedented and unnecessary traffic congestion caused by the construction of this monstrosity and the overall costs rise exponentially.

Trams are not required here in Edinburgh and the entire project should be halted with immediate effect.

#119

Yet more total garbage spills from your mouth.




101

Gorgie_Tony,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 18:31:35
#120 - trams are needed to support the very well used bus service. Bus passengers are increasing every year. Unfortunately road capacity in Edinburgh is not happening, so to increase buses on the roads is going to cause massive congestion. Take a look at Princes Street during rush hour - it cannot cope with anymore buses. The tram is the ideal solution - very large vehicles able to carry a lot more passengers then a single bus - resulting in less congestion for all road users.
102

Euan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 18:43:00
#121

Sorry, but I just cannot agree with you.

The tram LINE sticks to one route only, not serving in any way thousands upon thousands of citizens who use the buses you mention whose routes MAY use Princess Street as a very small part of their route but which then move away from the city centre and on to their destinations.

If you HONESTLY think that the trams are going to reduce congestion here in Edinburgh then you need to think again.

103

Gorgie_Tony,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 18:59:29
#122 - you speak utter rubbish - I have quoted facts that bus passengers are increasing and if you take a look at Princes Street at rush hour - it can't take anymore buses - so the tram will reduce buses on the route it takes, which eases Princes Street congestion. In turn it allows those reduced buses to be used on other routes to help with the increased passengers. Grow up Euan and see reality - not some other person's assumption, which you seem to reflect - typical of a youngster of today.
104

Euan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 19:06:48
#123 - What drivel, what complete and utter drivel.

I think you're the one who needs to wake up and see reality.

Grow up Tony, you seem to reflect the typical pensioner of today.
105

Gorgie_Tony,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 19:26:30
#124 - what don't you understand from my posting whippersnapper? What do you disagree with, please back up with facts. My posting is not drivel - passenger numbers are increasing every year, and Princes Street is at a standstill at rush hour - what do you disagree with?
106

Euan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 19:41:28
Already said what I disagree with Tony, see again post #122
107

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 24/04/2008 20:16:51
#126 Princes Street is NOT closing, it is closing to TRAFFIC, which is a completely different thing.
Just like much of central Glasgow (the shoppers mecca) and central Amsterdam, etc.
Your lack of knowledge on such issues is certainly shining through !
You don't want trams. I do, and so does most of Edinburgh (contrary to what the small but vocal anti tram lot scream at you).
The trams are happening and there is nothing you can do, that is the best bit !
108

rs,

in ma house 24/04/2008 21:04:48
simpler solution as we have all said, like the advert on the Telly,

why haven't TIE moved the Utilities and laid the track at the same time.
We know is saves time and money.

And TIE want cause as much congestion as possible to ensure that the Trams will be a breath of fresh air to the 22 users.

109

Euan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 21:51:24
#127

I KNOW Princes Street is closing to traffic, not sure what you were thinking in implying I was saying otherwise.

Also, I'm not sure what lack of knowledge you are talking about, bacause I tell you what, thats RICH coming from the likes of you.

In fact you even saying that 'most of Edinburgh' wants trams highlights this very point!

From what I can recall, for a man who uses the No.23 bus to get to work, the closure of Princes Street to traffic and the introduction of trams isn't going to serve you very well - is it?




110

Euan,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 21:52:23
#127

I KNOW Princes Street is closing to traffic, not sure what you were thinking in implying I was saying otherwise.

Also, I'm not sure what lack of knowledge you are talking about, because I tell you what, thats RICH coming from the likes of you.

In fact you even saying that 'most of Edinburgh' wants trams highlights this very point!

From what I can recall, for a man who uses the No.23 bus to get to work, the closure of Princes Street and the introduction of trams isn't going to serve you very well - is it?


111

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 22:51:35
#111 - Interesting to read you waxing lyrical about Embra's Transport 'in 10, 20, 30 years time' - did you know the 'old' trams the Tramoraks dribble about (and a REAL 'Network')lasted slightly over 30 years; between 1919 and 1924 at reconstruction/electrification to final closure in 1956. Some lines, built as late as 1937, barely made 15 years before they were ripped up. Wonder if history will repeat itself?
112

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 23:04:44
Scallywag (115) - oooh, you do ask a girl some funny questions and it's a while since I studied the papers, but seeing as it's you ...

If my memory serves me, shortly prior to lodging the Parliamentary Bills, the Green Book uplifts had been revised (as a result of Prof Flyvbjergs report for the DfT).

Figures were quoted at 2003 prices and, from what I remember, TIE had applied a 25% OB uplift which would have been OK under the old uplifts. However, Arups, who carried out the peer review, (and it seems some of the objectors!) argued that the new uplifts should be applied and that figure was too low for the project being at such an early stage. Depending on the level of certainty desired, Arups recommended the new DfT uplifts, eg, 50% certainty - 44%, 80% certainty - 57% uplift.

My own view is that, as the public had been told by Andrew Burns that there would be no chance of cost overruns, an absolute minimum of 57% uplift would have been appropriate.

Arups and TIE argued back and forth over the correct level and it is difficult to ascertain what conclusion the Committees came to. However, during the consideration stage of the Bill, the Tram Line 1 Committee asked a TIE consultant to put the prices from the previously quoted 2003 figures into up-to-date ones and that is when the new figure of £714m emerged for Lines 1 and 2 in their entirety.

The final business case was so vague on figures (and to add to the confusion, they were at 2002 prices) that it is hard to make out what level of OB was being applied and what was included in the capital cost figure of £390m for Phase 1A. Oh, for a detailed breakdown of costs!

113

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 24/04/2008 23:09:55
Gorgie Tony (123) your views on the buses is very interesting but I have a copy of a letter from Lothian Buses in which they confirm that, not only could have have coped with the anticipated increase in population but they could have done it without increasing buses on Princes Street.

They do say that this would require significant financial investment and changes in traffic management but, sadly, Lothian Buses' view does not seem to coincide with yours. If you are interested, you could ask them for a copy of the letter.
114

Julian,

EDINBURGH 25/04/2008 00:50:52
Euan,

So you are sickened by this terrible waste of taxpayers money. Yet you care so much about that taxpayers money that you would like this scheme to fall flat on it's face by running out of money, even if it's a few million short and 99% complete. Bit inconsistent isn't it?

As I've said before, the failure of this scheme is more important to you than the waste of money.

Also, could you quote your source of evidence which proves that most people are against trams (apart from your mythical group of friends who are 100% anti-tram)
115

Julian,

EDINBURGH 25/04/2008 00:55:41
Thomas the Tank,

History will not necesarily repeat itself. All we need are a few people in power with common sense (I know that's not necessarily a given).

Try visiting cities like Prague, Budapest and Amsterdam and you'll see tram networks that have been running for 100 years.
116

John Knox furr First Meenister,

High St, Embra 25/04/2008 00:59:53
C'mon the trams!
117

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 07:59:28
Scallywag (137) - they did have to put something in, although it is interesting that the figure of £473m they were quoting for years did not include optimism bias and was, therefore, quite misleading.
118

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 08:53:24
#137 - While you focus on the capital cost side, the revenue and operating cost aspects of the business plan quite simply does not stack up. Review this and you will see how little incremental revenue the tram line generates (£4m pa in 2011 - or 0.6% of cost), that the substantial negative impacts on journey times for many people are completely ignored, that there is no allowance for depreciation or ongoing renewal of the system and no financing cost considered.

For the ridiculous amount of money this tramline is costing the benefits should be clear. They are not and TIE is lying to the public when it says the tram line is necessary.
119

Bob 2,

25/04/2008 12:30:46
what are these ramblings about.
120

Bob 2,

25/04/2008 12:36:06
the truth will come in 2011 when the tram line opens up.

A strange point to help speed things up, the trams stops are spaced well apart and given priority at lights/junctions.

Now hows about doing the same with the buses.
Must send my consultants bill to TIE, £500k sounds about right.

With all the capital paid up front, The trams will surely be raking in millions.
its a pity the government didn;t give Capital Money to buy new buses every year, thenm fares could be kept low and encourage people to use the bus!!
121

,

25/04/2008 13:20:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
122

Geekazoid,

Willowbrae 25/05/2008 17:45:56
These trams won't change a bloody thing. We have the no 22 every 5 minutes. What difference will the trams make? None. In fact they'll probably add more to the yearly cost of my bus pass even though I will NEVER use them. I just cannot believe that people are still arguing the point that these will be of some good to the city- they won't! From a financial and practical point of view these trams have cost me dearly. And extra half an hour a day is spent on the buses in my case. Where will people park in the city centre while george street is being dug up? And inevitably the diversion routes will have to be resurfaced becasue they were never designed to take the weight of frequent bus routes.

That said, there is no going back now. I just hope that those who pushed this through will be able to answer when in 10 years' time we have no new schools and firther hospital closures.
This city has got its priorities all wrong.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Is the £100,000 expenses bill racked up by trams chiefs justifiable?
Yes, most of the claims look reasonable
No, they’ve got their noses in the trough
No, the whole project should be scrapped

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.