What a nonsense! the upheaval caused by something that the people of Edinburgh don't even want is preposterous. The council seem to have learned from their predecessors though who tried to push through congestion charging - just ride roughshod over public opinion because they know best. Who says that we live in a democracy?

here's a story for you - just been speaking to a friend in Adelaide, South Australia yesterday. They had trams fitted way back in the early 1990's and there was a huge amount of negative coments and " why do we need them?" which is what Edinburgh is saying now... within 10 months of them going into operation they are Adelaide's biggest success story and they are constantly full which led to further tram lines being built - just wait till they are finished and you'll see how popular they are.... I am in the middle on this one - I am self employed and keep well away from Tram Construction as much as possible ....if you think about it, Edinburgh is dealing with the problem and getting on with business...think of Adelaide and maybe it'll be a success, maybe?

#1 - nice of you to be the spokesperson for all of Edinburgh. But I'm afraid some of us do want trams. Take note of #2 and look at Dublin too, they stopped complaining as soon as they used them and I suspect 'the people of Edinburgh' will do the same.

Working in Heidelberg in Germany - Trams are fab!

Get over it!

#2, #3 yup, agree entirely. Closer to home in Manchester the trams have been right at the centre of the massive urban renewal there - 15 years of absolute success. So much so that 30,000 of them took to the streets when Alistair Darling threatened to stop a planned expansion.

Meanwhile up here we have ludicrous nimby stories in our local rag. For starters the roads are actually quieter at the moment (goodness knows how mind you!). But more importantly we're allowing the debate to be set by vested business interests that are cynically trying to grab more compensation. How many more times will we see certain Leith Walk restaurant owners bleating about supposed losses in January? "People stop spending money on eating out in January" Yeah? No s!*t sherlock!!

#2 #3 #4 #5 - TIE

Bruce's Spider doesn't speak for me . I want the Trams.

#6 Best you can do? Still in denail?
No, sorry, not TIE. Just got a brain.

I'm actually a rabid Nat.. that supports Trams... how rare am I?!

Adopt the usual positions people!

Can I just point out Edinburgh is not Manchester, Adelaide, Heildeberg or Dublin. We had one of the best bus services in Europe we didn't need to spend half a billion quid on a single tramLINE.

#5 So much so that 30,000 of them took to the streets when Alistair Darling threatened to stop a planned expansion.

Wow a whole 30,000. Remind me what is the population of Manchester?

#9 Sorry but if you think that volume of people taking to the streets in this day and age is not significant you really are truly blinkered.

Now as the trams are happening - what about moving on the debate and addressing the fact that certain businesses are trying to use the situation to make hay and grab hold of taxpayers cash...?

CHAOS!!!! again. If you type the word "chaos" into the search box on this website you get 2136 occurrences in Scottish news stories. With that amount of chaos about I'm surprised that the entire country hasn't disintegrated and sunk beneath the waves.

How typical of those against the tram system that they claim that anyone in favour of them must be a plant. Also, talk of legal action from the PTEs which lost their chance to get a tram system is significant too. Nobody is under any illusions that this will solve all Edinburgh's transport problems, but those against really need to come up with a credible alternative if they are really serious about what they say rather than just carping.

If we were building a tram network that was integrated with the South Sub and various transport hubs around Edinburgh I'd back the trams to the hilt. Instead what we are getting for our half a billion is a single line that will only serve a tiny proportion of Edinburgh's subjects.

#13 When its public money everybody tries to get rich quick, it was the same with the New Holyrood Place. Only this time the Scottish Government have passed the final bill onto Edinburgh.

#13 - Yup agree with you totally re the South Sub: I'm perplexed why this easy and cheap decision has yet to be taken. What's more, i would contend that it would have interface points with the tram at Waverley (short walk from Princes Street) and Haymarket (tram stop just next door). As it's still well used by freight there isn't much chance of actually integrating into the network - like the Manchester tram - but it would be easy to make it part of a single cross-Edinburgh travel ticketing scheme. There has been some resistance from railtrack regarding pathing at Waverley, but I've seen some creative proposals that could extend the existing Newcraighall service onto the south sub and so get use of those paths.
Easy!

Trams, 20th Century technology in the 21st Century , wow what a step forward. Roads are for cars ,full stop, end of story.

Where is the evidence that "the people of Edinburgh don't even want" trams? Most of us voted for parties that support them - if we felt that strongly, we would have voted otherwise Specific anti-tram candidates got nowhere... just because those who oppose them spend so much time posting on here does not mean the majority are against. I barely know anyone who doesnt want them.

Can't wait for them to start. Guaranteed that they will be a massive success and there will be demands for them to be extended. And as for the current "chaos", I have never got home quicker by bus than in this past week. It is fantastic. For the first time ever, it was pleasant to walk (and shop) on North Bridge. Shame the shops were still as dire.

Personally I can't wait for the trams to be a complete failure.

A referendum should have been held but I am convinced that the then controlling Labour Council knew full well that the majority of people in Edinburgh would vote against it as they had with congestion charging and the transferal of council housing to private housing associations. Labour just couldn't stand 3 major rejections in a row and pushed ahead regardless. They will rue the day but unfortunately many small businesses will go bust and residents will be greatly inconvenienced by this hairbrained project.

It's been said before, the trams are an expensive and wasteful replacement for the #22 bus.

The council ought to stop spending tax payers money on (predominantly) unwanted projects - altough in doing, they would in turn themselves out of a job.

How long.. how long can you sing this song..

I wager that the evening news are the ones making the most out of the trams. Theres a story every day about.. well nothing really. Maybe in three years it will just be a list of road closures but for now expect ben fogle type chaos and imminent death every day.

Dont you get tired complaining ??

roll on the TRAM NETWORK

"A high-quality, modern and efficient tram network is being created for Edinburgh and is scheduled to be running on the Capital’s streets by 2011.
This integrated transport system will offer a reliable and frequent transport choice to Edinburgh’s growing population and business community, boosting the city’s standing as an international destination for tourism and business.

Edinburgh’s tram network will help to reduce car journeys and ease congestion, providing environmental benefits through improved air quality."

Trams will reduce congestion by 1% ( TIE) That is to say on car in every hundred off the road. How will that help? People continue to quote Diblin when it is an entirly different situation.
This is a tram LINE not an intigrated network. Therefore it has a evry limited use.
The council went ahead after useing trams as a sweetner for the dockland development.
Looking at the above picture, What if the van had parked a little further from the curb? How would the tram get past?

A referendum should have been called, only then would the people of Edinburgh would get what they really want.

"There has been little evidence of the predicted roads chaos in [the West End]". Yeah, predicted by the Evening News. And now they admit that there's no chaos elsewhere, but go on to insist that nonetheless there will be chaos in Leith. Give us a break!

#21 - air quality can be greatly improved by people getting off their backsides and walking to work. I walk further to work than many of those people that I see waiting on a bus/using their cars.

As for Edinburghs growing population; if the city planners thought about how an increase in bodies correlates to the increase in car nunmbers/usage there would be fewer new builds further adding to an already overpopulated, over congested city.

Trams are not the answer to the problems facing Edinburgh.

Grow up 22. You voted for these people do you understand Parlimentary Procedure ?

Perhaps we should have a vote on whether that car should be parked in a funny positino or not (it would get towed away and the owner heavily fined / thats what would happen but youd have to be pretty stupid to park on atram line).

#15 - are you sure? You sound like your probably too young to drive anyway.

#17 Peter - you will be even more disappointed when the tram line is a success.

26 Keep going we will scunner them eventually.

5- the big difference here is Manchester is a metropolis, Edinburgh just a wee pimple on its backside in comparison.

The old rail routes could've served us well in Edinburgh - in fact the old routes would've served a hell of a lot more of Edinburgh's population than the Tram routes.

This is boring.
The trams are happening because the politicians want it so get over it. They cannot claim public support as they were scared to go for a referendum so we will never know the answer. Of all the people who want the trams, I have only meet about half a dozen and two of them were Labour Cllr's. Not great evidence I know but what else have we to go on.
It may be great, it may be rubbish, If it is rubbish then I will move to Adelaide and all the Evening News trammies can post all they like from their Government / tax payer funded PC's.

No 16, how simplistic is that?? The council elections were decided on far more issues than the trams, there were issues such as education, care for the elderly etc.etc. The only way to decide if Edinburgh wants trams is to hold a referendum. The last time that happened, most people voted against the Council's preferred strategy, they did not, however,have the opportunity to vote against the base strategy. It was interesting to note that 3 x as many voted in that referendum, than actuall turned out to vote at the previous council elections. As No 8 stated, his is a nat who supports the trams,and I know of a number of labour voters who are against them.

#26 20something

"you will be even more disappointed when the tram line is a success"

20Something, I'm quietly confident that it will fail (and damned good ridence).

I envy Glasgows Subway system,And proposed expansion through disused tunnels etc,They have got right idea.

I favour all sorts of expansion

#6 - ASS

#32 - Not quiet enough.

#20Something

Can't you stand critism? Perhaps you are both a Labour AND tram supporter?

#38 - what is it about change that scares you so much? What is so terrible about a tram line that you hate it so much? Are they building it through your kitchen or something?

And so it goes on.. TRAMS ! NAE TRAMS ! TRAMS ! where will it end ?

In quiet aquiescence no doubt.

Well, no tramline is being built through MY kitchen. But I would be rather upset if one was.

I dare say someone will argue that its no use to them because it doesnt go through their kitchen. And if it did it might knock over their crockery. But you could hang your cloths on the wires.

Hi 20Something

I am certainly not afraid of change. If I thought that this scheme would be successful and have any real effect on our transport problems I'd be yelling its praises.

Unforunately it is only going to cost a huge amount of money which I (and many others) feel would have been better spent elsewhere in our society.

Also because of the huge cost, both in terms of money for the project itself and in terms of cash lost to many businesses I think the project should have been made the subject of a referendum - I( and again many others) resent the fact that it wasn't.

On the political front where this issue was concerned, the 'ganging up' against the SNP by the other main parties was just a disgusting political stunt (please note I am not particularly SNP myself). Rest assured I won't be supporting Labour, Greens or Lib Dems again.

Cheers,

Peter

are we getting trams?

It wasn't the fact that trams were to be brought back to the streets of Edinburgh - It was the COST!!!!

This money should have been spent on bringing the roads of Edinburgh and surrounding areas up to scratch.

Could have even built another bridge by the time all the necessary infrastructure is in place.

Will we ever get to know the FINAL FIGURE!!!!

Nil Desperandum

Dont hang damp cloths on the wires, just Ladels and Pasta Strainers but plastic ones.

Where's Edinburgh's entry in Wiki when you look up the expression, 'Throwing good money after bad'?

The trams are the very definition!

Only relevant part of the article refers to the closure of Shandwick Place

"While city centre traffic chaos appears not to have materialised"

The rest is the usual anti tram drivel.

See you all on Monday

http://cyclingedinburgh.info/2008/03/03/not-good-enough

Why care? We've got it.

TIE CONTRACTORS CRACK TENEMENT FOUNDATIONS @ 113 LEITH WALK

53 GOOD

Trams? First I've heard of them; whatever next ?

12 David Harrington,

" those against really need to come up with a credible alternative if they are really serious about what they say rather than just carping."

Firstly the argument against is down to return on capital investment -£600 m to provide a system which will serve 6/8% of Edinburgh's population .
Is that good business are you happy with that ?
Be honest !!
Secondly the topography of Edinburgh is different to that of any major city that operates trams and is completely unsuitable for this purpose.
I have visited , on official business, eight towns through UK/Europe with a tram network .
As a road transport engineer I did not see one which could be compared operationally with Edinburgh.

As an Edinburgh Councillor recently said , behind his
hand, "At worst it will be a great tourist attraction "
Says it all does it not ?
Ah michty me another "Holyrood" looming , methinks.

not sure if this changes #2's argument but adelaide only has 1 tram line running from the city to the beachside town of glenelg. and this line was introduced well and truly before the early 1990s, more like 50 or 60 years beforehand easily.

this is actually seen as tourist attraction for the city now.

what adelaide did have introduced, which is what is probably being talked about, was an "auto-bahn" which is a train track for buses. the buses can use normal roads and a specially designed track system for the buses only.

it sounds daft but it is actually a fantastic system.

BUT not sure if it can be a straight comparison to a tram network because the track only starts on the edge of the city, runs north to the adelaide hills (20km from city centre) and there was no ripping up of the city centre to install and therefore doesn't interfere with the city traffic.

Was working in Dublin last month and I found their Luas-tram system to be most excellent.Roll on the Edinburgh tram!

Wouldn't it have made more sense for the Executive to devote the £500m to the development of the Borders railway so that all those who have to commute into Edinburgh from there for work, because they can't afford to live in Edinburgh and there's no work in their area, would have a viable public transport alternative to their cars?

Or to the development and maintenance of rural roads coming into Glasgow for the same purpose?

Nah, that makes too much sense.

Dooyaknow MoragtheToerag, I've been wondering the same thing. Why is it okay to spend £600m on a tram that benefits few and goes nowhere, but there appears to be a lot of reluctance to spend £200m on a line that could help to rejuvenate the Scottish Borders. ( I know, it's not the best line ever - but hey, what could they have done with £600m?)

Congestion and disruption in Leith!. If you think it’s bad now, wait until they drop another 40,000 folk into Leith - with no new infrastructure.

#60. I think the trams ARE the new infrastructure. Whether people will actually use them or just continue to use their cars is another matter.

Plodjfriss, Hammer of the Numpties: You're talking about a population that is roughly equivalent to Glenrothes, Livingstone or Perth.

The city's infrastructure will have evolved as it grew over a period of hundreds of years - not ten. The roads are already full - and now they want to reduce the capacity of the main arterial link that joins the centre of Edinburgh to Leith. And then, just to make things really interesting for the locals, they going to add another 40,000 folk. Brilliant.

And where is all the work going to be? In the west of the city (according to TIE). And is everyone going to use the tram, or will they prefer the comfort offered by their Audi A4s and VW Golfs?

How surprising that locals down Leith way have not even been informed of route changes by TIE. The only way they are finding out is last-minute - and completely ill-thought changes they are too.

We are seeing here is what will almost certainly total at least £1 Billion of valuable public money squandered before our very eyes, and for what? - a 'service' which will inconvenience tens of thousands of people while serving hardly anyone.

These are sad times for Edinburgh and it's residents.

A public enquiry shold be launched with immediate effect about the handling of this shambolic tram project.

The citizens of Edinburgh should have had the right to a referendum on this matter.

HEADS SHOULD ROLL - STARTING WITH YOU, MR GALLAGHER.

Well said #61

I feel the idiots who have pushed this silly, siily project through actually think that when the tram LINE is up and running, all of the other traffic that uses the roads in this town will, as if by magic, simply disappear.

Not only this, but the 'green' credentials the tram line is supposed to have is nonsense, complete and utter nonsense.

I would love to see how much more coal has to be poured into the burners at Cockenzie to supply all the electricity needed for these monsterous abominations? Not only this, but how much energy will be wasted during the construction phase? - it does not bear thinking about.

Environmentally-friendly my left a*se.

Spin, spin, propaganda, lies, spin, spin, LIES.

Sorry, that was well said #65.

#62

several times. i quite like the trams in melbourne. good for the city. amsterdam trams were quite good also.

one system that didn't work was the monorail in sydney. it had a stigma to it and was unsightly at best.

to me its like having two cars when you only need one i know two i dont use iam nuts

Here's the biggest problem for the anti-tram lobby.

Despite literally YEARS of requests (and no doubt significant research on their part), they cannot find a SINGLE EXAMPLE of a tram scheme ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD that isn't widely regarded as being hugely positive.

Literally ANYWHERE ON PLANET EARTH.

Yet the staggering arrogance of these small minded individuals results in statements like

"but Edinburgh is different"

"we have hills"

"we have buses"

This negative "little country/city" mentality has been seen in many of the examples of tram cities from across the globe- before the first tram line opens. Then it's success all the way and approval ratings go through the roof.

The anti-tram lobby really should realise they're backing a 3 legged horse.

I think that the problem for a lot of people is that the Edinburgh Pram scheme is a NuLabour propaganda exercise.

In my lifetime, we have had a Pram Network that managed to get all the way to Granton and all the way to Fairmilehead and a whole lot of points to the east and west (on relatively level ground) as well.

The scheme that has been foisted on Edinburgh takes Civil Servants from Leith to the Airport (almost - don't get pedantic on me, SNP trolls) if you want to look at it from a NuLabour, Westminster researchers' point of view.

The stories I could tell about visitors to John Smith's Cluny home after his death! In those days they walked or took the bus.

but number 70, you are forgetting that Edinburgh car drivers have a God-given right to drive and park wherever and whenever they want, for free.

Any pedestrian, bus passenger or even worse cyclist who has the temerity to want to get in the way must be shot.

All politicians are evil as they point blank refuse to spend even more money on car drivers.

And of course each anti-tram person is completely in the majority, despite all the evidence to the contrary, such as opinion polls, election results, surveys, consultations etc etc.

These are the same people who reckon that bus lanes cause congestion. They forget entirely that without bus lanes and buses there would be even more traffic and congestion! And they all reckon that we don't need the tram to replace the 22, despite the fact that at the Gyle you have to wait for 2 or 3 22s to go past chock full before you can get one.

But no amount of facts will ever change their minds, they cant even spot the inconsistencies in their own arguments - just read some of them above.

Anid it is quite amusing to read people blaming it all on Labour, forgetting that every party except the SNP (and even some of them) were all 100% in favour, even the Tories. But again, let's not allow facts to get in the way.

Think Tank (70). Trams can, indeed, be very effective at moving large numbers of people but I don't think that is what is in dispute. The question is whether trams are likely to be the best solution for Edinburgh for the amount of money which is being spent.

I have no doubt that many people will use the tramline (the cynic in me says that every measure is likely to be taken to ensure that they do). However, with a similar amount of investment in other solutions, such as rapid bus transit, better bus services to outlying areas, park and rides, school bus services, cheaper bus fares, etc, is it not possible that a greater benefit could have been achieved for many more people than those who happen to live close to the tramline? To my knowledge, no other solutions (carried out by independent consultants) has been assessed for Edinburgh to show that it could not.

Yes, tram systems are well used all over the world but other countries are prepared to raise capital finance from other sources as well as general taxation and do not expect those schemes to cover their costs from the ticket price alone, as is the case in the UK. As far as England and Wales is concerned, the National Audit Office, concluded that UK trams schemes in general had failed to achieve anticipated patronage and to justify their initial capital cost.

It is not about being "anti" anything. It is about achieving the best result with the money available. If we want to have more sexy solutions, such as a proper tram system, then let's have a debate about whether, for instance, our taxes should be increased to cover this, or whether payroll taxes on businesses/congestion charging, etc, should be introduced, etc.

You miss the point of developing a light rail system.

Look at key arterial routes in the city NOW and our excellent bus services. Look at the long line of buses queueing on Princes' street to get access to each bus stop. Now think about 10 years time with your solution of "more buses".

Trams are about rapid transit on key arterial routes. Your solution of buying more buses will simply gridlock our streets with buses rather than moving more people. We've hit bus saturation NOW, and our city is rapidly growing. The only viable solution is an integrated system of buses, trams and (in my opinion) ferries.

And that's the biggest problem arguably with the anti-tram lobby. They look at NOW and think the buses are doing okay so why do anything? Why bother planning for future development and increase in the Edinburgh population? The problem is that in 10 years time they definitely will be the first people moaning about terrible congestion and lack of forward thinking a decade ago.

Also the continued emphasis on TramLINE is tiresome...every network begins with a line, but time and time again across the globe you see the expansion plans within months of the first line opening and the public opinion shift. Hence why Nottingham and Dublin are both looking to expand their systems.

I'm afraid that in the global world of light rail public transport solutions, arguments that "Edinburgh is different" simply don't wash.

#74 - To paraphrase you Think Tank:

Despite literally YEARS of requests (and no doubt significant research on their part), they cannot find a SINGLE EXAMPLE of a tram scheme ANYWHERE IN THE UK that isn't an economic FAILURE.

Yet still they want their trainset for Edinburgh.

Oh, Lothian Buses also said it could easily cope with forecast population growth for Edinburgh. A few basic things like not routing every single service along Princes Street, more circular routes, etc would solve many of the problems, but without the massive cost and significant downsides that the tramline gives.

#74
Look at the buses on Princes Street.They are EMPTY!
This is the reason for congestion .Far too many empty buses are channelled along this road.If these resources were better deployed then things would improve.
The reversal of most of the "traffic management" schemes of recent time would also help, e.g cars not allowed into George Street at St Andrew's Square.
In the city we now have lines of cars,buses etc sitting idling where they used to flow freely.This can be attributed to a myriad of pointless bus lanes,lane closures and speed limit reductions.
If we now narrow our roads even further to introduce yet an other vehicle form on the road then increased gridlock can be the only outcome.Wake up and stop the SHAMS!

76 GraemeH
"Despite literally YEARS of requests (and no doubt significant research on their part), they cannot find a SINGLE EXAMPLE of a tram scheme ANYWHERE IN THE UK that isn't an economic FAILURE."

Absolutely correct ! To go further most of the European systems I have visited officially are in the same boat.

74
"I'm afraid that in the global world of light rail public transport solutions, arguments that "Edinburgh is different" simply don't wash."

Whole concept is fatally flawed as even the topography of Edinburgh doesn't lend itself to a tram system .
Suggest you do some research from the journals of the professional bodies , both here and abroad , involved in the setting up of tramway schemes before you try to defend the indefensible,


Perhaps "Think Tank" doesn't consider the financial implications as being important
Believe me it won't be long before RIE et al will have to admit we are looking down the barrel of another "Holyrood"
A system at cost of £600m, and rising, which will only serve the needs of 6/8% of Edinburgh citizens.
Still like the ferries it will make for a "great tourist attraction " !!!!!!!!

Ah michty me " none so blind as those who cannot see etc "





74

Think Tank/GraemeH. I have seen documentation which does, indeed, confirm that Lothian Buses believe they could have coped with the anticipated population increases and that they could have done this without increasing the number of buses on Princes Street. This would have involved a considerable rethink on bus routes and traffic management, just as the trams will require, and possibly exploring other options, such as trolleybuses.

Unfortunately, nobody thought to ask Lothian Buses and that is what I find most perplexing. We were presented with only the case for trams and best value or best solution for the city does not seem to have been assessed to any extent and, most notably, not to the extent that should have been required by Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance.

I think that most people do want to see an efficient public transport system throughout the whole of the city and are not too bothered about how that is comprised, so long as it is cheap, reliable and reasonably fast. Simply to raise questions about what the tramline is likely to achieve does not make a person "anti-tram".

Sarah B. - all very well said.

Let's just see exactly how many people will use the tram LINE with only two stops on Leith Walk and ONE on Princes Street.

How many - not many.

Even if this tram LINE ever gets completed(which I sincerely hope it doesn't), there are hardly any other routes around Edinburgh that the 'network'(!)could even be expanded to without completely closing vital, everyday road links in and out of the City to other vehicles.

Scrap this silly project now, stop trying to make Edinburgh into something it's not and give our roads and other transport systems the proper investment they deserve.

Oh, 'Think Tank' - no-one really cares what you 'think' as it's all total horse manure anyway.

Just to asee if this one makes it. My other two comments haven't.

Technology is great - when it works.

I am not anti tram, but I am a great believer in that there has to be a better way, but the tram in the north of the city is not the answer. TIE (in its wee video clip) proudly announces that the tram will link the new residential areas in the north with the work areas in the west. So we are spending £600m on a tram line so that developers can make a fortune building 1000s of new homes in the north. jdships points out that it will only benefit 6-8% of the city's population. What about the other 92-94%?

What about the growing commuter problem? It will not help to address the increasing traffic that is coming from East Lothian, Midlothian, the Scottish Borders or West Lothian. It MIGHT make a small dent in the traffic from the west, but that depends on where they need to go. The route is very limited.

The environmental claims are, to put it politely, misleading.

Livingston and Glenrothes (each with a pollution of roughly 40,000) have transport infrastructure that was designed for a specific purpose and to suit the demands of a modern world. Edinburgh was designed hundreds of years ago, with no idea of what was to come. And now they want to squeeze the same number of people into the north of the city - an area where the road infrastructure is already full of cars, lorries, buses, vans etc. But I’m sure they will argue, “don’t worry, all 40,000 will use the tram”. I don’t think so, it’s well documented that you will find the highest numbers of cars in an affluent area: so we can expect at least 20,000 more cars in the area when it’s all finished. Love or hate them, cars are going to be around for a long time.

And at the same time, they are going to reduce the capacity of the main route that connects Leith with the city centre.

Here's a nice tram ride in Amsterdam to whet your appetites - paste the link into your browser:-)

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4595075825536710152&q=southern+train&total=3907&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=6

N0 82......Good points Goat Boy

Lets see build th houses at one end of Edinburgh, but have all the jobs on the other side....Totally Illogical.

Common Sense would say build the houses on the west.

But even better for Public Transport Users on the East Side...remember all months that it took to replace the roundabouts on Milton Road....A Summer of sitting in queues .

Well if its get the Thumbs up this week....The Roundabout at Portobello will be getting replaced from may/june.

So 26 users , get your sleeping bag..remember one morning on the bus were it took some 30/40 mins to get from The east end of Porty Prom to the Town Hall.

No82

must correct you

Livingston was designed with the car owner in mind, try getting about by Bus and its a nightmare.

Getting the train, unless you live next door to the stations or you've got a car to get there, your snookered.

Euan 64-65-66 I totally agree the project is being totally mismanaged.

I have just found out (and not from the pitiful tramtime website either) that all northbound traffic from Leith Walk will be diverted 'through my kitchen' from March until September.

There is more distress behind a diversion than 'just' a traffic jam. I was about to put my flat on the market, so this news is devastating to me, and I find out from the Evening news not the council?
Affected streets should have been written to months ago. So much for keeping disruption to a minimum for locals.

I was actually looking forwards to the trams, but the fiasco that is Leith Walk at present is fast changing my mind. And now they are expanding their mess even further and starting on Constitution St??? What a joke. If the contractors ever FINISHED a stretch of road, filling in the holes so everything was returned to normal for 200 yards, then I might have more faith in the future.