Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008

Haggis Hunt is now on!

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.

Long road ahead for efforts to boost public transport use



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: 01 September 2008
IF you are reading this on a crowded bus or train then you will need no reminding that public transport is in the midst of a renaissance right now.
Rail passenger numbers are at their highest levels since the Second World War and buses have never been more popular.

Dotted around Edinburgh are the ring of park-and-ride sites that now take some 6000 cars off the city streets every day.

Desp
ite all this, the Lothians' roads have never been busier, according to the latest Scottish Government statistics.

Admittedly, the figures were compiled before the recent leap in fuel prices but there is no getting away from the fact that Edinburgh still has a love affair with the car.

The number of car owners in the Capital has remained steady since the turn of the decade, despite the shift in focus to public transport.

According to latest Government statistics, 44 per cent of households had one car in 2005-06, compared to 43 per cent in 1999-2000.

This is against a backdrop of the city's growing population but it does illustrate that there is no real danger of people letting go of their cars.

It's a point highlighted in a survey by cycling lobby group Spokes earlier this year which found three out of four motorists on Lothian Road at rush hour were travelling alone.

Neil Greig, head of policy in Scotland for the Institute of Advanced Motorists, said people needed realistic alternatives to give up the convenience of their cars.

He said: "The car is still very much the mode of transport of choice for people getting to and from work and that is likely to remain the case for some time.

"Through the park-and-ride scheme, Lothian Buses and the council have done very well to offer a viable alternative for drivers.

"And the bus lanes, no matter what your opinion on them, definitely offer advantages in terms of getting buses through rush hour on time.

"But I think we are seeing this drip feed over to public transport now, and I think it will remain that way because Lothian Buses or ScotRail simply could not cope with a huge modal shift."

He added: "We can't get away from the two hard core groups of drivers who will struggle to move on to public transport.

"The first is those who have a guaranteed free parking space in the city centre. The second is those who travel across the Lothians and into the big places of work, because they don't have a public transport alternative."

One of the big reasons people drive is because they have no viable public transport alternative.

A point best illustrated in the south of the city where a commuter trying to get from Cameron Toll to Edinburgh Park by public transport would need to go into the city centre and out again.

This makes Sestran's plans for a £54 million bus service around the south of the city very interesting.

The Bus Rapid Transit system would run from Queen Margaret University in the east of the city to the ERI and on to Edinburgh Park and Gogarburn.

New bus lanes would be created alongside some of the city's busiest roads, including the City Bypass, and stops would be built next to tram, railway and park-and-ride sites.

This would join up areas which are not currently adequately connected by public transport and the real boon would be to link it in with the park-and-ride sites.

So far the network provides over 6000 parking spaces and this will need to grow if city leaders are to persuade more people out of their cars.

Councillor Phil Wheeler, the city's transport leader, said: "It's great that across the country journeys by bus and train are increasing and I hope these figures will be encouraging to our local bus companies.

"As the city continues to grow we want to ensure travellers have a range of transport options and have invested in park-and-ride schemes, Greenways and Bustracker to encourage bus usage.

"Of course, in just a few short years we'll have trams running on Edinburgh's streets and I am confident that we will see public transport use grow further."

The city's £512m tram scheme has divided opinion in the city but there is no doubt it will impact the way we travel from 2011.

Trams will cannibalise some of the existing bus services but tram firm TIE is confident that it can attract drivers on to trams who would not have previously travelled on public transport.

However, the arrival of the trams will not magic congestion, or air pollution, away from the city centre.

It is estimated that there will be an annual reduction of around 1.5 million car and van trips by 2026 thanks to the trams, which will not make much of a dent on the existing and projected traffic numbers.

Those who continue to drive will certainly be hit by the raft of changes to give priority to the trams.

The benefits of public transport have now arguably pricked the consciousness of even the biggest car lovers but getting them to use it is another matter.

The introduction of trams in a few years' time will be the next big catalyst for those pushing the benefits of public transport.

But you will never get the big shift until all the pieces of the puzzle are in place.

And it is likely that the rising fuel prices will have more of an effect on transportation choices in coming years than the green arguments.





The full article contains 945 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Andy Pandy,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 12:01:38
What a lovely advert for public transport.

I went on the bus last year once and it wasnt as nice as this advert. Junkies, Prams with triplets in them and people who didnt wash.

I suppose its like seeing the picture of your lunch at Macdonalds and then getting some feeble excuse for cheap food.

I'll stick to my air conditioned luxurious sports car and sit in the jams next to the buses thanks - everyone has personal choice and the taxation to go with it.
2

Lianachan,

Highlands 01/09/2008 12:03:04
Public transport? I can choose from two buses a week.
3

allknowing,

01/09/2008 12:09:46
"The benefits of public transport have now arguably pricked the consciousness of even the biggest car lovers but getting them to use it is another matter"

benefits, what exactly!!!

Total commute currently in my car per day =40mins
Same commute by bus = 90mins, plus getting wet, buses gettign cancelled, being late, the general riff raff and grumpy drivers, nevermind stoping every 10 meters!!
4

Grumpy,

01/09/2008 12:11:09
(2) You're lucky - we have First Bus (or rather First Cattle Truck)
5

Dunaskin,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 12:27:27
Cameron Toll to Edinbugh Park? Reopen the South Sub, and change trains (or to tram/bus) at Haymarket. You know it makes sense, and at £38m would be a lot cheaper than a £54m busway. See www.reopenthesouthsub.org.uk
6

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 12:28:12
#1:

Exactly. We pay extortionate fuels taxes, insurance and road tax---and when we want to park we have to succumb to yet more extortion, enforced by mindless jobsworths.

I say we have a right to use our cars when we wish to do so.
7

Liz,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 12:32:18
#5
Reopening the South Sub seems like a no brainer to me. I fail to see a proper reason for not doing it - £38million is nothing especially when compared to the cost and disrpution we are getting for what is in effect replacing the number 22 bus through the middle of town.
8

Dileas,

01/09/2008 12:40:42
Hear, hear, Alternative (6).

The present LibDem controlled council is too fond of "slipstreaming" the old failed Labour policies to actually think about what is best for Edinburgh's economy.
What driver, having got used to the timesaving benefits of car or van use, would want to go back to humping his tools on and off a bus or tram - or both in the course of a single journey?
Interesting that "Neil Greig, head of policy in Scotland for the Institute of Advanced Motorists, said people needed realistic alternatives to give up the convenience of their cars." There really is no alternative to the car that gives a tailor-made journey at the time of the traveller's choosing - except a taxi which being diesel, emits particulates which petrol engines do not, and needs a driver to provide the same journey at even greater cost than a car or van!
Those who think that a bus or tram is competitive are just plain deluded.
We need more able local government, not control freaks pushing tired dogma.
9

Howard Moon,

01/09/2008 12:43:55
Of course the South Sub is a no-brainer. Unless you have an interest in building something new and shiny (the 'Bus Rapid Transit system'), in which case simply utilising better the resources you already have becomes somewhat less attractive. All the council groups have verbally supported the Sub (which you would think may help), but when push comes to shove they are too spineless to stand up to the flashy presentations, baseless projections and 'world class' rhetoric of the transport lobby groups and 'initiatives'.
10

Goat Boy,

01/09/2008 12:49:30
It is estimated that there will be an annual reduction of around 1.5 million car and van trips by 2026 thanks to the trams, WHICH WILL NOT MAKE MUCH OF A DENT ON THE EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC NUMBERS.

Confirming that the tram is more to do with development in the north of the city rather than providing the city with an integrated transport system for the future.
11

WGH Doctor,

edinburgh 01/09/2008 12:50:23
reopen the South Sub! It's so obvious
12

familymanwith2jobsandawifeworkingfulltime,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 12:57:35
They seem to have forgotten about the weather in Edinburgh. Many people have to look presentable at work. You cant expect women (and some men) to get themselves all showered and blow dried in the morning and then walk to the bus stop, when its tipping it down.
13

Active Sassenach,

Luton, England 01/09/2008 12:59:55
If we are to invest in much needed public transport all we have to do is find a means of paying for it. When Christian Philip was President of SYTRAL, he championed a new two-line tramway for Lyon. He drew on resources from employers, who paid a transport tax per head for people working in Lyon, levies on the district councils of the Lyon area and ticket prices. Since it only cost a traveller EUR 1.25 each way to get to and from work, ticket prices were not his main revenue and he was obliged to give concessions even on that to the disabled, pensioners and benefit claimants.

However, one Lyon transport ticket works on any bus, underground train or tramcar in Lyon. No buses race each other to the stop and refuse each other's tickets. No queue to pay fares when you change from tram to underground at Grange Blanche. When you get out at Perrache you go up to the SNCF and hop on a train for the suburban area, although that cost a bit more than EUR 1.25.

The tramway maintenance workshops were specifically located on the tram route in a part of Lyon that was short of skilled jobs. The trams run automatically with no drivers like the Docklands Light Railway and all the tram stations and tram cars are monitored by CCTV to prevent and detect crime.

It is clean, it works and Christian Philip had no compunction in ripping up car lanes to put his tram lines down. I do not recall excessive whingeing about inconvenience during the works which also provided good local jobs. Its target is not trade business travellers with equipment that needs a van (albeit one of the new electric type). It cleared up the hand-baggage passengers travelling alone in a dozen cars and put them on public transport.

In the face of protests about the transport tax from employers, he stood on the Pont Louis Pasteur and smelt the traffic pollution on hot dry days. Then he introduced a restricted traffic rule that only allowed odd and even numbered registrations to drive on certain days of the we
14

David Harrington,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 13:02:57
#8 The bicycle seems to fit your criteria quite well and will generally get you around faster than a car at peak times.
While I support reopening the South Sub, I am amazed that there are still some claiming quite wrongly that the tram system is a waste of money. When you ignore all the hype stirred up by the EN and just look at the cold hard facts, the tram has a benefit-cost ratio of 1.63 compared to 1.42 for the South Sub.
15

The Judge,

01/09/2008 13:04:17
The reason the South Sub isn't being reopened is because it will take passengers away from the buses, the council need the dividend from their stake in Lothian Buses more than ever so will block the South Sub at every turn.

16

thehitmaster,

Penicuik 01/09/2008 13:04:38
For effective public transport you need to make journey times as quick as possible, achieved by Express buses from places such as Penicuik, Dalkeith, Balerno etc into Edinburgh. At one time Lothian ran a timesaver service and it was just that, then they done away with it so that they could serve more stops on route - result extended journey times.
17

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 01/09/2008 13:07:47
I couldn't care less how much the people of Edinburgh suffer from the chaos of tram construction. They stuffed the rest of us to get their hands on all the cash so now they can reap what they sowed.
18

David Harrington,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 13:08:41
#15 Rubbish - Lothian Buses are in favour of reopening the South Sub.
19

David Harrington,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 13:10:54
#17 Down here I don't see a lot of chaos - the reported "30 minute delays" are more like 10 minute max
20

Howard Moon,

01/09/2008 13:12:37
#14

'Cold hard facts'? Come on now. You know better than that.
21

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 01/09/2008 13:14:21
#19 Glad you didn't argue with my substantive point.
22

Ron D,

Enybru 01/09/2008 13:15:08
Nothing short of some sort of ban will stop people from driving.
23

David Harrington,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 13:20:18
#20 What else would you use to base your decisions on? The EN comments board? Don't make me laugh!
24

FrankGallagher,

01/09/2008 13:24:22
Buses are for people with too much time on their hands

I just picked up my brand new beamer this morning....nice
25

Epicuras,

01/09/2008 13:33:18
"The city's £512m tram scheme has divided opinion in the city but there is no doubt it will impact the way we travel from 2011." The city isn't divided on the trams - everybody hates them and knows they will be a waste of money as nobody bar the odd tourist will ever use them.
Also as so many bus routes will go to introduce them, cars will be the only way to get about the ever growing congestion - well down edinburgh coucil - hope you all pat yerselves on the back in your spanish/florida villas bought with all the back-handers when they eventaully rumble into life
26

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 01/09/2008 13:39:46
#25 WELL SAID!

#24 Yeah, I picked up my new Aston Martin last Saturday but haven't been bothered to try it yet.
27

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 14:12:14
#24 Frank

And is that adequate compensation for your small member?
28

Another Ernie,

Leith 01/09/2008 14:23:43
Cameron Toll to Edinburgh Park? A 38 will get you to the west of Edinburgh where you can change for another out of town service. The research that has gone into this article is zilch, other than reading some publicity handouts. Public transport use is going up, but Lothian Buses is axing the 13 and 20 and cutting other services in the evenings and at weekends. Not joined up thinking. And worthy of a comment by the "journalist".
29

Forthtag,

South Queensferry 01/09/2008 14:24:31
I am confused with Andrew Pickens figure. If you take the growth of 2.5% in commuters using the Forth Bridge per year as an example of the growth in traffic into Edinburgh. There are currently over 100,000 vehicle approaching Edinburgh each day, this will grow to 150,000 vehicle.

Is the 1.5 million a year which equates to 4000 vehicle per day a saving on the current figure of on the 2026 figure. Either way the cost of the trams to save 4000 vehicle per day at a cost of £512 million is far too high a price.

The trams will not save any vehicle, ther are at least 5 to 6000 passengers arriving at the airport each hour in the rush hours. The trams only carry 2500 passengers per hour therfore they will be full of passenger not Edinburgh commuter!!!
30

thehitmaster,

Penicuik 01/09/2008 14:30:10
#29 The purpose of any Evening News story relating to transport in and around Edinburgh is to make it as negative as possible.
31

Howard Moon,

01/09/2008 14:33:58
#23

Projected benefit-cost ratios (provided by the companies who have an interest in the success of the proposals) are not cold hard facts, as you know. OK, it is a fact that this is the ratio proposed, but it's not a fact of any more worth than that.

If TIE were behind the South Sub scheme, would it be going ahead?
32

Grumpy,

01/09/2008 14:41:42
i would get a bus to work if I could do it in just double the time it takes by car. By car - 25 minutes - by bus 2hours 10 minutes. Distance 20 miles.

If only the bus timetables were integrated, or if only there was a bus service from Sherrifhall to Hermiston.........
33

JT,

01/09/2008 15:30:19
Its all about choice, something we didnt get about the trams. I cant see me using it as it only goes from the airport to town and ocean terminal. I live in Gorgie, work Ferry Road, and my journey has increased by at least 15 mins due to the road works for the trams. I dont go via town as the delays would be longer at haymarket. Has anyone seen anyone work on these roadworks as I havent.
34

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 01/09/2008 15:34:50
#33 ever thought about moving closer to your work, or a bus route ?

Lame excuse for using the car to work. Besides the majority of people in Edinburgh and surround live within 10 minute walk of a bus route or station.

As for claiming people can't expect to take tools etc on the bus, fair point but most cars in the City are carrying office workers, the only thing they need to carry is their piece box !
35

Brad,

Glasgow 01/09/2008 15:37:19
#35, couldn't you cycle? There's an excellent traffic-free route from Gorgie to Ferry Road. It wouldn't even take 15 mins total.
36

Incandescent,

01/09/2008 15:58:36
#35 Road Raga - "#33 ever thought about moving closer to your work, or a bus route ?... Lame excuse for using the car to work."

Have you ever thought about keeping your sickening brand of eco-evangelism to yourself and giving us all a break from your lentil-munching pontification? Judging by the amount of time you seem to spend prowling these boards, I doubt you're qualified to advise anyone on how to travel to work.
37

Mr Fuzzy,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 16:01:00
#7
Less revenue to the treasury through petrol taxation.
38

Vlad Tepes,

Snagov 01/09/2008 16:33:11
#37 Incoherent
So you posted to air your stereotype infested prejudices and berate other posters for…posting? Absolute plum.
39

Incandescent,

01/09/2008 16:37:57
#39 Vlad Tepid

Actually, I was defending #33 from #35's oh-so-familiar, holier-than-thou rhetoric. Oh, and the web is not considered to be "air" in broadcasting circles, so best not say that: it makes you appear foolish.
40

Euan,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 17:48:03
I think one thing that is never really mentioned in articles about transport in the Lothians is that Edinburgh really isn't that big a city.

Edinburgh's current traffic woes are artificially created, not only by the tram works and other glut of roadworks but also by very badly managed and completely unnecessary road 'improvement' schemes in the past.

We would not really have any serious traffic problems were it not for all the roadworks and constant meddling of the city's traffic systems.

There is no doubt at all that the car or van is by far the quickest, easiest, most comfortable and most convenient way to get around Edinburgh - if you know the proper routes that is.

As #1 correctly says, people are paying through the nose for their cars and they have every right to use them as they see fit.

The article hits the spot when it says 'However, the arrival of the trams will not magic congestion, or air pollution, away from the city centre' and they 'will not make much of a dent on the existing and projected traffic numbers'.

How very true indeed, clearly worth wasting what will almost certainly end up being nearly £1 billion quid on then?


41

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 18:08:41
Howard Moon (32) - Did you know that your comment is actually confirmed by Department for Transport guidance ("Procedures for Dealing with Optimism Bias in Transport Planning") which has found that consultants "often focus more on the benefits side of a project than the cost side" (p47) and that local authorities "have had a clear perception that it would be advantageous "not focus too much on the likelihood of unforeseen costs and to emphasise the benefits" (p50)?

In the case of the Edinburgh tram, the entire "benefits" are comprised of journey time savings to all road users, whether public transport, private, freight, etc, and yet, at the time of approving the business case, there was no traffic management plan to demonstrate precisely how these journey time savings would be made. I don't think that details of any such traffic management scheme has been published yet.

Likewise, on the "costs" side, no allowance has been made in the business case for increased journey times during the construction period (and possibly after as well), increased journey times arising from changing modes of transport to complete journeys, changes to the detailed design, compensation to business, etc.

In short, I don't trust the figures either.




42

Howard Moon,

01/09/2008 18:22:53
# 43

Err... well I do now. Thanks.

I was already aware though that many, if not all, of the councillors who voted on the final plans either didn't know or didn't care about the details. New councillors in particular were told in no uncertain terms that the scheme must be approved without delay. The councillor from Almond's treatment, having refused to play the game, should have come as no surprise.
43

gus1940,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 18:54:57
#12

And what do you think people did 50 years ago before car ownership became near universal?

Yes - they walked or got the bus.
44

john z,

edinburgh 01/09/2008 19:55:09
Remove all the road closures, bus lanes, cycle lanes, chicanes, road narrowings, lane reductions concrete bollards, and open the roads of Edinburgh up to what they were just fifteen years ago, and the congestion will be solved.

Most of the so called congestion (which normally only happens for an hour in the morning and at nights), is due to all the unnecessary road closures, lane narrowing, bollards, pavement widenings etc...

I've known Edinburgh more than long enough to remember what the roads were like before the loonies took over, and destroyed them, with artificial narrowings and closures.

Oh, and if cyclists want cycle lanes, let them pay for them, and make adherence to road safety laws compulsory for ALL cyclists in Edinburgh. From my experience, all cyclists in Edinburgh suffer from a very severe form of red-green colour blindness, and won't stop at a red light even if pensioners and children are crossing - take a walk along nicolson street and you'll see what I mean.
45

charliecha cha,

01/09/2008 21:40:26
These selfish,lazy,fat @rsed car drivers will have to be dragged kicking and screaming from there cars,roll on ten quid a gallon.
46

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

01/09/2008 21:51:58
reduce the fares, that's the way to increase public usage
47

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

01/09/2008 21:53:17
mind you, the last thing this city needs is more buses. they are the major congestion source throughout the city
48

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

01/09/2008 21:56:40
#27 - I have a large plane & it's plain to see that it's plane sailing for me. Yes, its a sea plane, sea ?
49

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

01/09/2008 21:58:07
#50 - You are just pure brilliant & I bow to your superior intelligence, oh master.
50

dancing ship,

01/09/2008 22:15:30
Anyways FINALLY there improving the bus links around the south side, have you seen the amount of cars at RBS or Edinburgh park?

this can only be good.

51

Julian.,

edinburgh 01/09/2008 23:14:27
EUAN AND JOHNZ,

Guys, pull your heads out the sand. Your conspiracy theories about Edinburgh Council manufacturing the road layouts to create congestion are just a less exciting version of the ones which said that Prince Philip assassinated Princess Di.

OK, I agree that measures to stop rat runs may have caused some increase in congestion but the major factor by far is the fact that we have double the number of vehicles on the roads compared to 20 years ago. So take off those rose tinted spectacles and see the light please.
52

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 01/09/2008 23:39:05
Julian (53) - Precisely. So, could we not have come up with a more effective way to spend £512m than a tramline which "will not make much of a dent on the existing and projected traffic numbers"?
53

tumshie heid,

02/09/2008 00:36:34
#53
We now have half the road space available than we used to due to the empty bus lanes. Work it out, the queues would be shorter if cars were allowed to use both lanes again.
The road policies over the last few years have become increasingly crazy. Speed humps and chicanes that mean more pollution and noise because vehicles have to accelerate then slow down again and in the case of chicanes we now have queues of stationary traffic for no good reason (Mountcastle Drive North) for one example.
Cars driving around in circles just to get from one end of Princes Street to the other, closures at George Street ... The list is endless.
54

Julian.,

edinburgh 02/09/2008 01:06:37
Turnshie,

The bus lanes only operate 2 hours in the morning and evening. I do agree that the couple which operate all day should be cut back. But the others are well used during those 4 hours by taxis and buses. And remember a fully laden bus carries 20 times more people than a fully laden car. You miss the point of the bus lanes. Because of them we now have 50% more people travelling by bus. Without them we'd just have thousands more cars on the road clogging up both lanes all day.

As for speed humps, I agree they are totally unnecessary on some streets. But for most streets they save lives and stop people rat-running.
55

Julian.,

edinburgh 02/09/2008 01:12:29
SarahB,

We possibly could have spent the £512m better. You're right. But as well as encouraging 10% of people out of their cars trams will be less polluting amongst other things.

I had a much better idea. An underground line from ocean terminal to haymarket which would then go overground out to the airport. The only problem is that in this penny-pinching country people are not prepared to stump up the cash for projects of that scale. The very same reason why our only high speed rail line opened last year and is all of 20 miles long.

EUAN, what do you think of that if you're out there?
56

Jozef Goj,

Colo Heights 02/09/2008 07:00:49
No more stuck in traffic ever!

Add all the minutes in a day just sitting there hardly moving is quite a bit after a week of it.
And that's being conservative when you take into account the time lost as you crawl along at some abysmal slow speed.
Now imagine that you were the only motorist on the road and you had a clear run with no restrictive speed limits and you drove faster but safer across town.
How long would your journey take then?

That's how long it would take in peak traffic with Liquid Flow Traffic Intersections.

With variable speeds on main arterial roads and Liquid Flow Traffic Intersections traffic jams, gridlock and congestion cannot happen.
They are based on moving as many vehicle down any roadway as safe as possible as fast as possible. There is no upper limit as to how fast this could be, it depends on how fast the roadway can be traversed safely.

When placed into the mosaic of a roads network around any city then as traffic is diverted around an accident scene speeds are increased to maintain flow and no more gridlock when a single incident in a strategic location can cause jams or gridlock.
These intersections at www.ubtsc.com.au when placed into the road mosaic will allow all motorists to cross town in peak traffic, faster, safer, without stopping at a single intersection while reducing fuel costs and pollution.
You just have to build them.
But none of this will happen without the help of people who want to give the country a roads infrastructure that works.
Today's road system" is broke and it needs fixing" but not with outdated road intersections up to 140 years(traffic lights) old that stop and slow traffic flow and adding extra lanes that just makes the mobile car park bigger.
To fix the problem needs investment and if that's the kind of investment it will take, that's the kind of investment that must be made.
Then you can build a traffic system that finally and completely eliminates all jams gridlock and co
57

Jozef Goj,

Colo Heights 02/09/2008 07:10:48
OOOPS some was lost in transit


No more stuck in traffic ever!
The lost bit!!!
Then you can build a traffic system that finally and completely eliminates all jams gridlock and congestion. Explore the benefits to all with a roads infrastructure that cannot fail and gives all vehicles the opportunity to cross town in peak traffic without ever stopping at a single intersection.
What saving would the economy get from this infrastructure?
How quickly would you get home if you didn't have to stop?
How much money would you save?
How would productivity improve and would that need more people employed?
What effect would this have on pollution levels in the cities when engines are working at their most efficient? How much time would be saved by emergency vehicles going to the scene of an accident when seconds mean the difference between life and death?
Just a few questions that deserve answers.
58

Bertie The Bat,

02/09/2008 07:44:03
Let the train take the strain.
59

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 02/09/2008 08:24:00
Julian (57) - The 10% figure and an improvement in air quality of under 1% is based on the Waterfront being developed to its full extent. Even if the Waterfront were to be built, congestion citywide is estimated to reduce by around only 1%.

If we seriously want to reduce congestion and encourage people onto public transport and if the investment is to be substantial, then I would have thought the first priority would be to ensure that there would be sufficient passengers to justify the scheme from Day 1. I have a serious problem with the prioritising of speculative development over public need and, therefore, with the routing of this tramline. If we had to have trams at all, I would have preferred Tramline 3.

I do agree that insufficient monies are spent on transport in the UK but that is the result of the current funding system and, unless alternatives can be found to raise these substantial sums for investment, then we must do what we can within the budget available.
60

D Fiasco,

Borders 02/09/2008 09:29:06
#1 - After reading that piece of tosh you have just written - I have one question for you: "Do you know where your Wife is?"
61

Galaman,

Galashiels 02/09/2008 11:23:10
One reason to be pro-car, which never gets mentioned, is the fact that petrol prices can go down as well as up, whereas bus and train fares just keep on rising and rising. I can see the day coming when the only passengers on many bus routes will be those who don't have to pay.
62

Brad,

Glasgow 02/09/2008 12:33:44
#63, and when will that day be? After a long-term decline, bus patronage is finally rising again. Rail passenger numbers are at a record high.
63

Bob 2,

02/09/2008 12:42:26
liz comment 7

the track is already there.

Reinstatement of the stations is the main piece of work required.

No roads need to get dug up, no delays to public transport.
64

Bob 2,

02/09/2008 12:47:48
62 Galaman

think you'll find theres more to running a car than just filling it up with fuel

Insurance/Road Tax/MOT/Servicing/Repairs/Parking Charges

Using a bus in Edinburgh for someone is still the cheapest way to travel.

Unlimited travel for £420 a year (thats £1.15 a day, you could hardly start your car for that)
65

Ian down under,

Musselburgh 04/09/2008 21:08:28
#13 I like your comments. Our tramway is a START but it's only a small start.
East Lothian's the place to be. Drem with a population of 93 has a train every hour to Edinburgh and takes 25 minutes [18 miles], room for a few houses maybe?
66

scott the selfish evil car driver,

edinburgh 27/09/2008 14:20:20
I have a family hatchback diesel and it doesnt emit particulates as it has a FAP filter, I run it on 30% biodiesel from morrisons and got 72mpg over 700 miles last week.(it has lower emissions than a toyota aygo despite being nearly 3.5 times more powerful and twice the size) but despite this I am made to feel guilty for using a car! even though everyday I take three people to work and home again.
Public transport would add over 50 hours to my commute each month... until I cant afford a car I wont be using the so called alternative, oh and public transport use increasing does not mean people are using it through choice that goes with car use too, live outside the city boundaries and public transport is expensive, unreliable or non existent.
67

scott the selfish evil car driver,

edinburgh 27/09/2008 15:33:49
@bob 2

You're right their is more costs than fuel, When the new parking zones came in a while ago I did spread sheet to work out the cost of my commute to see if the bus/ train would make more sense, I do 30000 miles a year in my car and the average cost per mile (all annual costs, tyres, brakes, servicex2, mot, insurance, road tax and diesel) for my car came in at 2 pence less than the bus &train (I would need to use both)and as I stated would add 50hours per month to my commute, this figure does not include the cost to my employer for the added time between site meetings that using public transport would incur.
68

Big bob 79,

21/11/2008 10:05:41
After I stopped using the bus I am home around 30 mins earlier each night. Thats around 2 1/2 hours each week extra in my house, not only that I am not paying for a buspass
I do not know why people use the bus these days the service is awful no fault of Lothian but who wants to sit in jams

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

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.